Mount Joy Borough Council Meeting Agenda 7:00 PM Monday, April 7, 2025 1. Call to Order - President Hall 2. Roll Call-Councilors, Crider, Eichler, Fahndrich, Greineder, Ginder, Hall, Haigh, Kark, Youngerman, and Mayor Bradley 3. Invocation- Mayor Bradley 4. Pledge of Allegiance 5. Announcement of Executive Sessions = There were no Borough Council Executive Sessions held by Council between March 3, 2025, and April 7, 2025. 6. Motion to approve April 7, 2025, Borough Council Meeting Agenda. 7. Public Input Period - Comments of Any Borough Resident or Borough Property Owner. Time limit of three minutes per individual. 8. Presentation a. Final Bonds for construction of new Municipal Services Building. PFM b. Harold Billows Memorial in Memorial Park. Rotary Club (pending approval of PW Committee) i. Discussion w/possible motion. C. Proclamation naming April as Sexual Assault Awareness Month. 9. Reports a. Mayor b. Police Chief C. Fire Department Mount Joy d. PSH Life Lion LLC. e. EMA f. Library g. Zoning, Code, & Stormwater Administrator h. Community & Economic Development Coordinator i. Public Works Department j. Borough Authority Manager k. Assistant Borough Manager/Finance Officer I. Borough Manager 10. Approval of Minutes a. Approval of the Regular Borough Council Meeting held on March 3, 2025. 11. Building Ad Hoc Committee a. Updates b. Change Orders i. Manager Approved = Change Order #1, removal of a tree in the amount of $1,752 and a credit of $800.00 for removal of the softball backstop and moving of shed. Ifyou are a person requiring accommodations to participate, please contact Borough staff to discuss how we may best accommodate your needs. 21 East Main Street, Mount Joy, PA 17552 . (717) 653-2300 Fax (717) 653-6680 - Borughomouniopaog e wmouno,top.gncon ii. Council = No Change Orders for Council to review. 12. Administration and Finance Committee a. PLGIT Report b. As recommended by Committee, motion to approve the 2025 Memorandum of Understanding with the Lancaster County Conservation District and to authorize the Borough Manager to sign and return the MOU to the Conservation District. C. Acknowledge receipt of the GSAB 75 Information Report for the fiscal year ending December 31, 2024. d. As recommended by Committee, motion to authorize the Council President Hall & Assistant Borough Manager Frey to attend the PSAB Annual Conference & Exhibition in Hershey, PA from June 1 -4, 2025, and to pay for or reimburse expenses as provided by Section 701 of the Borough Code. e. As recommended by Committee, motion to grant access easement to Cornerstone Lot W4 to KCI/Kinsley Properties. f. As recommended by Committee, authorize the Manager and Council President to meet with VistaBlock developers to discuss an agreement with regards to the Chiques Crossing project for the benefit of Mount Joy Borough. g. As recommended by Committee, motion to have the solicitor draw up an amendment to the Land Development Agreement that the recreation fees be collected 25% of total when the first building permit is applied for and the balance when the 25th building permit is applied for. h. As recommended by Committee, motion to authorize staff to begin the process of rezoning a portion of Wood Street from Light Industrial to Medium Density Residential. 13. Public Safety Committee a. As recommended by Committee, motion that the Borough sponsor the following event and carry appropriate liability for said events. i. Car Show and Cuisine ii. National Night Out iii. Fall Fest/Spooktacular Event iv. Winter Fest. 14. Public Works Committee a. Discussion with Possible motion regarding the placement of Pickleball Courts in Borough Park by Kunkle Field along North Market Street. b. As recommended by Committee, motion to approve the request from Saint Luke's Episcopal Church for the use of Memorial Park on June 29th from 10:00 am until noon. C. As recommended by Committee, motion to award the base bid for the 2025 Roadway Project, Contract #2, Walnut Street paving to Pennsy Supply, Inc. in the amount of $130,760.72. (Note that this is for base bid only.) d. Discussion with possible motion regarding RETTEW's proposal for stormwater management for the Compost Site at 200 S. Jacob Street. 15. Public Input Period - Comments of Any Borough Resident or Borough Property Owner. Time limit of three minutes per individual 16. Any other matter proper to come before Council 17. Acknowledge the payment of bills for the month of December. 18. Meetings and dates of importance, see attached calendar. 2 19. Executive Session to discuss two pending legal matters. 20. Adjournment The next full Council Meeting is scheduled for 7 PM. on Monday. May 5. 2025. 3 - Mount Joy Borough BOND SALE DOCUMENT General Obligation Bonds, Series of 2025 Results of Negotiated Pricing $10,680,000 March 18, 2025 (Parameters Ordinance Adopted on August 5, 2024) Prepared by: Zach Williard, Managing Director Garrett Moore, Senior Managing Consultant Erica Schmidt, Senior Analyst pfm PFM Financial Advisors LLC 100 Market Street 5 - Harrisburg, PA 17101 717.231.6265 (P) 1975-2025 www.pfm.com MUNICIPAL MARKET UPDATE March 17, 2025 HISTORICAL BVAL CURVE ILLUSTRATION- SINCE JANUARY 1, 1993/1) 8.00 7.00 6.00 Range Average Current 5.00 % 4.00 3.00 2.00 1.00 0.00 - Maturity Year SPOTA ANALYSIS- . 10 YEAR BVAL SINCE JANUARY 1, 1993/ [1) 6.50 Since 1/1/1993 Amount Date 6.00 Min 0.543 8/10/2020 5.50 Max 6.150 11/17/1994 5.00 Average 3.250 Current 3.060 4.50 3/17/2025 4.00 & 3.50 - 3.00 2.50 Since 1/1/1993 Rate % Greater %L Less 2.00 Current 3.060 53.06% 46.94% 1.50 Current-50bps 3.560 45.14% 54.86% 1.00 Current+1 100bps 4.060 30.17% 69.83% 0.50 a 8 8 0 8 3 5 5 8 a 8 - - - SPOT ANALYSIS 10) YEAR BVAL -S SINCE JANUARY 1, 2024 3.500 3.250 3.000 & 2.750 g - 2.500 Since 1/1/2024 Amount Date Min 2.251 12/29/2023 Max 3.280 1/14/2025 2.250 Average 2.759 Current 3.060 3/17/2025 2.000 8 - - 4 N E a € a % à 1 1 $ 1 [1] Datapoints priort to. January 4, 2010 are provided by! MMD, datapoints after. January 4, 2010 are provided by BVAL: PFMI Financial Advisors LLC 2 MOUNT JOY BOROUGH SUMMARY OF NEW MONEY FINANCING PLAN Description: Current costs for the various Borough projects are $10.95 million, for the municipal building project and $2.04 million to fund the Borough's infrastructure projects. Currently the sources of funding for the projects consists of $1 million of Borough cash that has already been contributed to date fort the municipal building project, $1 million that is pledged by the Borough Authority, $3 million of RACP funds reimbursable), and the balance financed via a bond issuance. Note: If additonal grant money is recieved in the future, the Borough and its financing team can discuss the! best application towards the municipal building project. SERIES OF 2025 FINANCING Bond Issue $10,680,000 Borough Cash $1,000,000 Authority Cash Contribution $1,000,000 Less: (RACP Funding) $0 ($3,000,000) Remaining Balance $10,680,000 $7,6 680,000 Extraordinary Redemption Yes Term 25 Years 21 Years Timing April 01, 2025 December, 2025 Arbitrage Yield 4.29% 1 2 Fiscal Gross Net Annual Year Annual Debt Debt Service Ending Service After RACP [11 12/31/2024 12/31/2025 297,904 297,904 12/31/2026 551,900 420,650 12/31/2027 728,525 597,275 12/31/2028 730,150 598,900 12/31/2029 731,025 599,775 12/31/2030 731,150 599,900 12/31/2031 730,525 599,275 12/31/2032 729,150 597,900 12/31/2033 731,900 600,650 12/31/2034 728,775 597,525 12/31/2035 734,650 603,400 12/31/2036 734,400 603,150 12/31/2037 730,425 599,175 12/31/2038 732,825 601,575 12/31/2039 729,234 597,984 12/31/2040 734,538 603,288 12/31/2041 733,913 602,663 12/31/2042 732,463 601,213 12/31/2043 729,844 598,594 12/31/2044 730,938 599,688 12/31/2045 730,594 291,234 12/31/2046 733,688 12/31/2047 730,578 12/31/2048 731,266 12/31/2049 730,641 12/31/2050 TOTAL 17,670,998 11,811,717 Note: Per Borough. Administration, the Borough's 2025 budget has $650,000 available for debt service. [1] Estimated net of RACP reimbursement. Timing of RACP reimbursement is estimated, further conversations with RACP consultant needed. RACP reimbursement will be used to defease a portion of the bonds related to the municipal building project. 3 PFM Financial Advisors LLC MOUNTJOYI BOROUGH Summary of Estimated Construction Draws 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 USES SOURCES Municipal Infrastructure Cost of Borough Interest Beginning Building! [2] Projects [2] Issuance Total Bond Issue Authority Cash Eamings! [1) Total Ending Month Date Balancel $10,755,893 $2,040,000 $227,600 Draws_ Proceeds Contribution Contribution 3.50% Sources! Balance 1 1/1/2025 2 2/1/2025 3 3/1/2025 4 4/1/2025 (215,118) (1,060,000) (227,600) (1,502,718) 10,766,340 1,000,000 1,000,000 12,766,340 11,263,623 5 5/1/2025 11,263,623 (322,677) (322,677) 32,402 32,402 10,973,348 6 6/1/2025 10,973,348 (645,354) (645,354) 32,619 32,619 10,360,613 7 7/1/2025 10,360,613 (860,472) (860,472) 29,805 29,805 9,529,946 8 8/1/2025 9,529,946 (968,030) (968,030) 28,329 28,329 8,590,245 9 9/1/2025 8,590,245 (968,030) (968,030) 25,535 25,535 7,647,750 10 10/1/2025 7,647,750 (968,030) (968,030) 22,000 22,000 6,701,720 11 11/1/2025 6,701,720 (968,030) (968,030) 19,922 19,922 5,753,612 12 12/1/2025 5,753,612 (968,030) (968,030) 16,551 16,551 4,802,133 13 1/1/2026 4,802,133 (968,030) (968,030) 14,275 14,275 3,848,378 14 2/1/2026 3,848,378 (860,472) (860,472) 11,440 11,440 2,999,346 15 3/1/2026 2,999,346 (860,472) (860,472) 8,053 8,053 2,146,927 16 4/1/2026 2,146,927 (645,354) (645,354) 6,382 6,382 1,507,955 17 5/1/2026 1,507,955 (322,677) (322,677) 4,338 4,338 1,189,616 18 6/1/2026 1,189,616 (215,118) (245,000) (460,118) 3,536 3,536 733,035 19 7/1/2026 733,035 (245,000) (245,000) 2,109 2,109 490,143 20 8/1/2026 490,143 (245,000) (245,000) 1.457 1,457 246,600 21 9/1/2026 246,600 (245,000) (245,000) 733 733 2,334 22 10/1/2026 2,334 7 7 2,340 23 11/1/2026 2,340 7 7 2,347 24 12/1/2026 2,347 7 7 2,354j TOTALS (10,755,893) (2,040,000) (227,600) (13,023,493) 10,766,340 1,000,000 1,000,000 259,507 13,025,847 1Investment rates are estimated., Actual investment rates may vary. [2] Draws schedule provided by CRA: as of January 14, 2025. PFMI Financial Advisors LLC MOUNT JOY BOROUGH Series of 2025 Settle 4/1/2025 New Money Dated 4/1/2025 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Semi-Annual Fiscal Year Date Principal Coupon Yield Interest Debt Service Debt Service 11/15/2025 297,904.44 297,904.44 297,904.44 5/15/2026 75,000 5.000 2.930 239,387.50 314,387.50 11/15/2026 237,512.50 237,512.50 551,900.00 5/15/2027 260,000 5.000 2.970 237,512.50 497,512.50 11/15/2027 231,012.50 231,012.50 728,525.00 5/15/2028 275,000 5.000 3.000 231,012.50 506,012.50 11/15/2028 224,137.50 224,137.50 730,150.00 5/15/2029 290,000 5.000 3.060 224,137.50 514,137.50 11/15/2029 216,887.50 216,887.50 731,025.00 5/15/2030 305,000 5.000 3.150 216,887.50 521,887.50 11/15/2030 209,262.50 209,262.50 731,150.00 5/15/2031 320,000 5.000 3.200 209,262.50 529,262.50 11/15/2031 201,262.50 201,262.50 730,525.00 5/15/2032 335,000 5.000 3.270 201,262,50 536,262.50 11/15/2032 192,887.50 192,887.50 729,150.00 5/15/2033 355,000 5.000 3.360 * 192,887.50 547,887.50 11/15/2033 184,012.50 184,012.50 731,900.00 5/15/2034 370,000 5.000 3.480 * 184,012.50 554,012.50 11/15/2034 174,762.50 174,762.50 728,775.00 5/15/2035 395,000 5.000 3.560 ** 174,762.50 569,762.50 11/15/2035 164,887.50 164,887.50 734,650.00 5/15/2036 415,000 5.000 3.640 ** 164,887.50 579,887.50 11/15/2036 154,512.50 154,512.50 734,400.00 5/15/2037 430,000 4.000 4.100 154,512.50 584,512.50 11/15/2037 145,912.50 145,912.50 730,425.00 5/15/2038 450,000 4.000 4.100 145,912.50 595,912.50 11/15/2038 136,912.50 136,912.50 732,825.00 5/15/2039 465,000 4.125 4.400 136,912.50 601,912.50 11/15/2039 127,321.88 127,321.88 729,234.38 5/15/2040 490,000 4.125 4.400 127,321.88 617,321.88 11/15/2040 117,215.63 117,215.63 734,537.50 5/15/2041 510,000 4.125 4.400 117,215.63 627,215.63 11/15/2041 106,696.88 106,696.88 733,912,50 5/15/2042 530,000 4.125 4.400 106,696.88 636,696.88 11/15/2042 95,765.63 95,765.63 732,462.50 5/15/2043 550,000 4.250 4.450 95,765.63 645,765.63 11/15/2043 84,078.13 84,078.13 729,843.75 5/15/2044 575,000 4.250 4.450 84,078.13 659,078.13 11/15/2044 71,859.38 71,859.38 730,937.50 5/15/2045 600,000 4.375 4.580 71,859.38 671,859.38 11/15/2045 58,734.38 58,734.38 730,593.75 5/15/2046 630,000 4.375 4.580 58,734.38 688,734.38 11/15/2046 44,953.13 44,953.13 733,687.50 5/15/2047 655,000 4.375 4.580 44,953.13 699,953.13 11/15/2047 30,625.00 30,625.00 730,578.13 5/15/2048 685,000 4.375 4.580 30,625.00 715,625.00 11/15/2048 15,640.63 15,640.63 731,265.63 5/15/2049 715,000 4.375 4.580 15,640.63 730,640.63 11/15/2049 730,640.63 TOTALS 10,680,000 6,990,998.19 17,670,998.19 17,670,998.19 *Optional redemption date of May 15, 2032 **Priced to an optional redemption date ofl May 15, 2032 Note: The bonds maturing on May 15, 2045, through May 15, 2049, are subject to an extraordinary optional redemption provision. PFM Financial Advisors LLC 5 MOUNT JOY BOROUGH Series of 2025 Sources & Uses of Funds SOURCES: Principal 10,680,000.00 Net Original Issue Premium 86,340.35 Accrued Interest 0.00 Total 10,766,340.35 USES: Available for Projects 10,538,740.35 Bond Insurance Obps 0.00 Underwniters Discount $7.50 80,100.00 Financial Advisor 57,500.00 Legal Fees & Expenses 45,000.00 Credit Rating (S&P: AA-) 23,000.00 Formatting & Printing POSIOS 12,500.00 Misc. Sale Day Expenses 3,500.00 Paying Agent (Fulton) 1,000.00 Miscellaneous Expenses/Rounding 5,000.00 Total 10,766,340.35 Pricing Date 3/18/2025 Dated Date 4/1/2025 Settlement Date 4/1/2025 Yield of the Issue 4.294844 OIP/(OID) Calculation Date Price OIP/(OID) 5/15/2026 102.265% 1,698.75 5/15/2027 104.141% 10,766.60 5/15/2028 105.915% 16,266.25 5/15/2029 107.456% 21,622.40 5/15/2030 108.684% 26,486.20 5/15/2031 109.932% 31,782.40 5/15/2032 110.909% 36,545.15 5/15/2033 110.307% 36,589.85 5/15/2034 109.511% 35,190.70 5/15/2035 108.984% 35,486.80 5/15/2036 108.461% 35,113.15 5/15/2037 98.989% (4,347.30) 5/15/2038 98.989% (4,549.50) 5/15/2039 96.712% (15,289.20) 5/15/2040 96.712% (16,111.20) 5/15/2041 96.712% (16,768.80) 5/15/2042 96.712% (17,426.40) 5/15/2043 97.438% (14,091.00) 5/15/2044 97.438% (14,731.50) 5/15/2045 97.020% (17,880.00) 5/15/2046 97.020% (18,774.00) 5/15/2047 97.020% (19,519.00) 5/15/2048 97.020% (20,413.00) 5/15/2049 97.020% (21,307.00) TOTAL 86,340.35 PFM Financial Advisors LLC 6 MOUNT JOY BOROUGH GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS SERIES OF 2025 SUMMARY OF FINANCING 2025 Bonds Principal: $10,680,000 Parameters Date: August 05, 2024 Pricing Date: March 18, 2025 Settlement Date: April 01, 2025 Credit Rating: S&P Global Ratings "AA- (Stable Outlook)" Method of Sale: Negotiated Arbitrage Yield 4.294844% Est. Construction Fund Deposit: $10,538,740 Proceeds of the Series of 2025 Bonds will be used to fund (i) the planning, design and construction of a new facility on Borough owned property to be used as a municipal services complex for the Borough, including the Borough's administrative offices, the police department of the Borough and the Use of Proceeds: administrative offices of1 the Mount Joy Borough Authority, including the acquisition and installation of related equipment, machinery and furnishings related thereto; (ii) certain road improvement projects within the Borough; (ii) other capital projects of the Borough and (iv) payment of the costs ofissuance relating to the Series of 2025 Bonds. FINANCING TEAM MEMBERS Issuer Mount Joy Borough Solicitor Morgan, Hallgren, Crosswell & Kane, P.C. Bond Counsel Barley Snyder, LLP Financial Advisor PFM Financial Advisors LLC Underwriter Stifel, Nicolaus & Company, Incorporated Paying Agent Fulton Bank, N.A. Rating Agency S&P Global Ratings PFM Financial Advisors LLC 7 S&P Global Ratings RatingsDirect Summary: Mount Joy Borough, Pennsylvania; General Obligation Primary Credit Analyst: Alex Tomczuk, Hartford 1-617-530-8314;: alex.tomczuk@spglobal.com Secondary Contact: Matthew TI Martin, New York + 1 (212) 438 8227; MathMtarin@pahaircon Table Of Contents Credit Highlights Outlook PFM Finançial Advisors LLC 8 Summary: Mount Joy Borough, Pennsylvania; General Obligation Credit Profile US$10.765 mil GO bnds ser 2025 due 05/15/2049 Long Term Rating AA-/Stable New Mount Joy Borough Authority, Pennsylvania Mount Joy Boro, Pennsylvania Mount Joy Borough Authority, Pennsylvania Mount Joy Boro Auth (Mount Joy Boro) gtd wtr rev bnds Long Term Rating AA-/Stable Affirmed Credit Highlights S&P Global Ratings assigned its 'AA-' rating on Mount Joy Borough, Pa.'s roughly $10.765 million series 2025 general obligation (GO) bonds. S&P Global Ratings also affirmed its 'AA-' rating on Mount Joy Borough Authority, Pa.'s series 2016 guaranteed water-revenue bonds double-barrel debt), backed by Mount Joy Borough's GO pledge. The outlook is stable. The rating reflects the application of its criteria, Methodology For Rating U.S. Governments," published Sept. 9, 2024, on RatingsDirect. Security Mount Joy's l-atlhcredt-ancaxing power, with ad valorem property taxes levied on all taxable properties and not subject to rate limitations, secures the series 2025 GOI bonds. Officials intend to use series 2025 bond proceeds to finance the construction of a new municipal building for the borough's administrative, public-safety, and water-sewer employees and fund road and stormwater improvements during the next several years. It is unclear whether the borough will repurpose or sell its existing municipal building. Water system net revenue and thel borough's l-fallhgredirand-axing power secure the series 2016 bonds; however, officials indicate this debt is self-supporting, which means the authority has not historically needed the borough's GO pledge to cover debt-service costs. The series 2016 bond rating reflects our view of the borough's general creditworthiness, which we consider the stronger pledge. Credit overview The rating reflects our view oft the borough's: Stable economy with a relatively small property tax base and limited taxpayer concentration; WWWSPGOPALCOMPAINGS PFM Financial Advisors LLC 9 Summary: Mount Joy Borough, Pennsylvania; General Obligation Historical maintenance of healthy available reserves as a share of expenditures, albeit comparatively thin on a dollar basis; Generally average risk-mitigating policies and practices; and Affordable debt, pension, and other postemployment benefit (OPEB) costs despite expectations for a material increase after issuing series 2025 bonds. The: rating also reflects our view of Mount Joy's: Location about halfway between Harrisburg and Lancaster with per capita gross county product, per capita personal income, and effective buying income stronger than national medians for similar-rated counties and municipalities; Operations, primarily funded by property (47%) and other taxes (32%): in fiscal 2023, with the latter mostly reflecting earned-income taxes--The borough typically transfers money into its capital-reserve fund from the general fund, but fiscal 2023 transfers out were. significantly higher than normal due to the earmarking of COVID-19-related stimulus and a U.S. Department of Justice grant for capital outlays; officials report positive budget variances in fiscal 2024 due largely to strong income-tax collections, and the adopted fiscal 2025 budget shows balance; Maintenance of available reserves generally between 30% and 55% of general fund revenue during the past decade, aligning with the borough's formal reserve policy of maintaining 25% of expenditures-We, however, expect the fiscal 2024 audit will likely show a decrease in available reserves to roughly $1.3 million, or 25% of expenditures, because officials report using about $600,000 of fund balance to cash-flow projects funded by series 2025 bonds; Expectation for series 2025 bonds to increase current costs (debt, pension, and OPEB) to approximately 12% of governmental revenue in fiscal 2025, then between 15% and 19% in fiscal years 2026 and 2027, respectively, which is manageable because officials do not have any additional debt plans and the property mill rate increased in fiscal years 2024 and 2025 in preparation for added debt-service costs; and Budgeting based on historical analysis, annual compensation studies, police-officers-union agreement, vendor quotes, capital needs, and commonwealth grants--The borough council receives monthly budget-to-actual and investment performance reports, and officials maintain rolling five- and 20-year plans for general capital outlays and road-improvement projects, respectively. It does not currently maintain financial projections or planning documents, but officials are aware of the trends. While the borough lacks its own investmen-management policy, it adheres to commonwealth restrictions. For more information on our institutional framework assessment for Pennsylvania municipalnties, see 'Institutional. Framework Assessment: Pennsylvania Local Governments," published Sept. 9, 2024. Environmental, social, and governance We view environmental, social, and governance factors neutral within our credit-rating analysis. Outlook The stable two-year outlook reflects S&P Global Ratings' expectation for budgetary balance and the maintenance of healthy reserves that generally comply with the borough's minimum policy of maintaining 25% ofl budgeted expenditures. WWWSPGOBALCOWPATNGS PFM Financial Advisors LLC 10 Summary: Mount Joy Borough, Pennsylvania; General Obligation Downside scenario We could lower the rating if available reserves were to decrease materially beyond our expectations with management lacking a credible plan of replenishment or if: reserves were generally maintained at levels inconsistent with the borough's policy, whether due to budgetary pressure or planned draws for capital expenditures. Upside scenario We could raise the rating if economic growth were to improve wealth and income, coupled with the borough's maintenance of higher available reserves and management's adoption of more-robust or formal policies and practices. Table 1 Mount Joy Borough, Pennsylvania-credit summary Institutional framework 2 Individual credit] profile 2.58 Economy 3.0 Financial performance 2 Reserves and liquidity 2 Management 2.65 Debt and liabilities 3.25 Table 2 Mount Joy Borough, Pennsylvania-key credit metrics Most recent 2023 2022 2021 Economy Real GCP per capita as a' % ofUS. 83.0 83.0 County PCPI as a % ofU.S. 97.0 95.0 Market value ($000s) 599,132 594,131 565,199 Market value per capita ($) 71,240 72,103 69,726 Top 101 taxpayers as a % of taxable value 9.3 9.4 County unemployment rate (%) - 2.7 3.5 4.7 Local median! household EBI as a' % of US. 97.0 96.0 108.0 Local per capita EBI as a % ofU.S. - 97.0 101.0 104.0 Local population 8,410 8,240 8,106 Financial performance Operating fund revenue (S000s) 5,186 5,119 4,536 Operating fund expenditures ($000s) 4,610 4,859 4,264 Net transfers and other adjustments ($000s) (1,000) (316) 22 Operating result ($000s) (424) (56) 294 Operating result as a % of revenue (8.2) (1.1) 6.5 Operating result three-year average (%) (0.9) 3.8 4.5 Reserves and liquidity Available: reserves as a' % of operating revenue 36.4 45.2 52.8 Available: reserves ($000s) 1,890 2,314 2,395 Debt and liabilities Debt service cost as a % of revenue WWWSPAOBALCONPATNGS PFM Financial Advisors LLC 11 Summary: Mount Joy Borough, Pennsylvania; General Obligation Table 2 Mount Joy Borough, Pennsylvania-key credit metrics (cont.) Most recent 2023 2022 2021 Net direct debt per capita ($) 1,280 - Net direct debt ($000s) 10,765 Direct debt 10-year amortization (%) 25.0 Pension and OPEB cost as a' % of revenue 5.0 5.0 6.0 NPLs per capita ($) - 119 181 21 Combined NPLS ($000s) 1,002 1,492 167 Note: Financial data may reflect analytical adjustments and is sourced from issuer audit reports or other annual disclosures. Economic data is generally sourced from S&P Global Market Intelligence, the Bureau ofl Labor Statistics, Claritas, and issuer audits and other disclosures. GCP-Gross county product. PCPI--Per capita personal income. EBI--Effective buying income. OPEB--Other) postemployment benefits. NPLS--Net pension liabilities. Certain terms usedi in this report, particularly certain adjectives used to express our view on: rating relevant factors, have specific meanings ascribed to them in our criteria, and should therefore be read in conjunction with such criteria. Please see. Ratings Criteria at wwwsglobalcom/rating: for further information. Complete ratingsi information: is available to RatingsDirect subscribers at www.capitalig.com. All ratings affected by this rating action can be: found on S&P Global Ratings' public website at wwwspglohalcom/ating: WWWSPGOBALCOMPAINGS PFM Financial Advisors LLC 12 pfm Appendix: Borough Municipal Service Complex Cost Estimates PFM Financial Advisors LLC 13 Borough of Mount Joy Municipal Service Complex Cost Estimates Column 1 Construction Costs Re-bid Results General Construction $ 5,796,800.00 HVAC $ 975,000.00 Plumbing $ 667,950.00 Electrical $ 1,387,660.00 Total Construction $ 8,827,410.00 Construction Soft Costs $ 600,388.00 Contingency, Inspections, Tapping Fees, etc.) Additional Soft Costs $ 1,529,349.00 (Technology, Financing, Furniture, insurance, etc.) Total Construction Costs 10,957,147.00 Infrastructor & Projects 2024/2025/2026 Updated Costs Building Inspections $ 141,000.00 Highway Projects $ 1,400,000.00 Stormwater $ 90,000.00 Locust Lane SW Project $ 209,000.00 Little Chiques Park implementation: phase 1 & 2 $ 200,000.00 Total Infrastructor Debt $ 2,040,000.00 TOTAL PROJECT & INFRASTRUCTOR $ 12,997,147.00 COSTS Approximate Expenditures To Date ( agn. 0e290 Authority ( 0o0 eegae TOTAL BOND/LOAN $ 10,997,147.00 Revenue RACP (Approved) $ 3,000,000.00 Authority(Approved) $ 1,000,000.00 Local Share Grant (Pending) $ 1,000,000.00 Sale of Current Buildings Pending/Discussion) $ 750,000.00 Total Revenue for Project $ 5,750,000.00 3/4/2025 MGPI PFM Financial Advisors LLC 14 CR Proiect Estimate / Bid Result Comparison 6/25/2024 11/14/2024 CRA CD Estimate Bid Results Rebid Results Construction Costs: General Construction estimate $5,095,271 actual $6,211,220.00 $5,685,500.00 Alt GC-1 Unclassified Construction $32,000.00 Alt GC-3 MVRA Concrete $13,300.00 Alt GC-5 Authority HD Stor $21,192.00 $18,000.00 Alt GC-6. Borough HD Stor $39,300.00 Alt GC-12. Precast Window Sills $0.00 Alt GC-13 - Exterior Signage $8.700.00 Subtotal GC Construction $6,232,412.00 $5,796,800.00 HVAC Construction estimate $1,032,726 actual $948,000.00 $975,000.00 Plumbing Construction estimate $439,208 actual $780,000.00 $679,500.00 Alt PC-1 Unclassified Construction $0.00 Alt PC-3. MPVC Storm Piping -$11.550.00 Subtotal PC Construction $780,000.00 $667,950.00 Electrical Construction estimate $666,408 actual $1,414,570.00 $1,363,950.00 Alt EC-2 Lighting Protection $23,710.00 Alt EC-3 Bi-Directional Amplifier $101,842.00 Alt EC-4 - Distr Amplifier System $105,877.00 Subtotal EC Construction $1,622,289.00 $1,387,660.00 Total Construction Cost: $7,233,612 $9,582,701 $8,827,410 Construction Soft Costs: Construction Contingency 5% $360,000 5% $479,135 $441,371 Testing and Inspection (QA+) estimate $161,902 actual $144,587 $144,587 Regulatory Agency Fees estimate $107,935 actual $0 $0 Utility Tap Fees estimate $107,935 actual $9,599 $9,599 Reserve Capacity Fees estimate $107,935 actual $0 $0 Web Based Construction Admin estimate $9,000 actual $4,831 $4,831 Subtotal: $854,707 $638,152 $600,388 Additional Soft Costs: Arch/Engineering: Fees actual $491,948 actual $491,948 $491,948 Site Design actual $179,916 actual $179,916 $179,916 Additional Site Survey ASA actual $7,980 actual $7,980 $7,980 Flow' Test actual $950 actual $950 $950 Flow Test (secondary location) actual $950 actual $950 $950 Zoning Hearing Board actual $5,690 actual $5,690 $5,690 Code Review Allowance actual $5,000 actual $13,000 $13,000 Builders Risk Insurance estimate $40,000 estimate $40,000 $40,000 ReimbursementPrinting estimate $24,150 actual $24,150 $24,150 Financing estimate $201,254 estimate $201,254 $201,254 Technology Equipment (FFE) $241,505 $241,505 $241,505 Furniture (FFE) $322,006 $322,006 $322,006 Subtotal: $1,521,349 $1,529,349 $1,529,349 Total Project Cost: $9,609,669 $11,750,202 $10,957,146 PFM Financial Advisors LLC 15 2024 $ 600,000.00 2024 Road Projects IN BUDGET $ 30,000.00 2024 SW Infrastructure IN BUDGET $ 630,000.00 TOTAL 2024 2025 $ 141,000.00 BuldingPoPectinspection IN BUDGET $ 400,000.00 2025 RoadProjects IN BUDGET $ 30,000.00 2025 SW Infrastructure INI BUDGET $ 209,000.00 2025LocustLn INI BUDGET $ 100,000.00 C2P2 mpPhaselstreambamneso. NOTI IN BUDGET;ON 5YR PLAN $ 880,000.00 TOTAL: 2025 2026 $ 400,000.00 2026 RoadProjects ON 5YR PLAN $ 30,000.00 2026 SW Infrastructure ON 5YR PLAN $ 100,000.00 C2P2 mphaseistrambaneeso. ON 5YR PLAN $ 530,000.00 TOTAL 2026 $ 2,040,000.00 GRAND TOTAL PFM Financial Advisors LLC 16 Mount Joy Borough Municipal Complex 1 General Construction * $ 5,796,800.00 2 HVAC Construtrion $ 975,000.00 3 Plumbing Construction 667,950.00 4 Electrical Construction* 1,387,660.00 5 Total Bids $ 8,827,410.00 5 Soft Costs (Construction Contingency, Fees, QAA, etc.) 600,388.00 7 Additional Soft Costs (Engineering, Site Survey, Code Review, Etc.) 1,529,349.00 8 Total Cost of Building** 10,957,147.00 9 Current/Projected General Fund 1,000,000.00 10 e$ 9,957,147.00 11 Authority 1,000,000.00 12 d$ 8,957,147.00 13 3-yr Capital Improvements 4 2,040,000.00 14 Borrow Amount*** $ 10,997,147.00 15 16 $ 10,997,147.00 3/3/2024 JMF PFM Financial Advisors LLC 17 pfm Disclosures: PFM is the marketing name for a group of affiliated companies providing a range of services. All services are provided through separate agreements with each company. This material is for general information purposes only and is not intended to provide or give a specific recommendation. Financial advisory services are provided by PFM Financial Advisors LLC which is a registered municipal advisor with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) and the Municipal Securities Rulemaking Board (MSRB) under the Dodd-Frank Act of 2010. Swap advisory services are provided by PFM Swap Advisors LLC which is registered as a municipal advisor with both the MSRB and SEC, a commodity trading advisor with the Commodity Futures Trading Commission, and a member of the National Futures Association. Consulting services are provided through PFM Group Consulting LLC. PFM financial modeling platform for strategic forecasting is provided through PFM Solutions LLC. For more information regarding PFM's services or entities, please visit www.pfm.com. The information and any analyses contained in this presentation are taken from, or based upon, information obtained from the recipient or from publicly available sources, the completeness and accuracy of which has not been independently verified, and cannot be assured by PFM. The information and any analyses in these materials reflect prevailing conditions and PFM's views as of this date, all of which are subject to change. To the extent projections and financial analyses are set forth herein, they may be based on estimated financial performance prepared by or in consultation with the recipient and are intended only to suggest reasonable ranges of results. Opinions, results, and data presented are not indicative off future performance. Actualrates may vary based upon market conditions at the time of pricing. The printed presentation is incomplete without reference to the oral presentation or other written materials that supplement it. To the extent permitted by applicable law, no employee or officer of PFM's financial advisory business, nor any of PFM's affiliated companies, accept any liability whatsoever for any direct or consequential loss arising from negligence or from any use of this presentation or its contents. Any municipal financial product or financial strategy referenced may involve significant risks, including, but not limited to: market, interest rate, or credit risk, and may not be suitable for all clients. The ultimate decision to proceed with any transaction rest solely with the client. PFM Financial Advisors LLC 18 8b Motdo: AILsh RaCarpe Sleryboel ( - - .Darclep balpart voff cehmoke Pemats 2.Got pemisen gom Borvoyt - 3 honze Mavr Bragr Plzues 3.Get 2 Harll suphor Joel ebS Joue Gerer 2uah EE Hmak 21.7 Kwl nelks D9ury 5.Get W v1 Ao. Legien : - PATET Joanne/ - t CONCEPT RRAD / * MeNekTree Sar Homer CBelg Red, Gole d Blc conuels a Waintsu Fhe t Rhy Pooude Cib A e Joy Coprts Corbe Bry) (. Mounert wl Bronee HarcliBlLss Dayu Sc Coeratnn 2. Hhatne Clonboart t Molmecty Seoseerc e G uBy 3. Mcta Slaa a1 - Aenes 8195 06 uEl 4Tay wth roele bepch. Ceumuar wol 0 Meyvondl Flowrrin - - E 51 ize Oronee - ocoletiny a - - A - h a X a E 2 - - - - - 3 MTRESTIS PeDigs, 5. - - - - - - - - - $S38d Odvo Va ATAL GROSSROADS DANNY S. PARKER EU UNTOLD STORY OF THE MALMÉDY MASSACRE AT THE BATTLE OF THE BULGE * Newspapers LNP Always Lancaster (Lancaster, Pennsylvania) Fri, May 27, 2022 Bancestry Page A1 PAeasaianespomsmMmgPANSSiSe Downloaded on Jan 23, 2025 MITTE HAROLD BILLOW IIITHTT HERO LAID TO REST ( elebcited Worlawaril veter an Harold Billowwis buried Thursday following - funeralprocession that passed through Mount Joy. Billow, of Mount. Joy. died May 17 atage 99, He wast believed tob be the last sur- vivor oft the Malmedy Massacre. The processton passedunder a large American fag suspended from twol ladder trucks on Or- chard Road on itsy wayt to Billow's intermentat Indiantown Gap National Cemetery, Thet fu- nerals service for Billow wasl held Wednesday at Florin Church of the Brethren. Billow ist thel last known survivor ofther massacre of American pris- oners outside Maimedy, Beigium. duringt theE Battle ofthe! Bulge in December 1944. Waffen-ss sol- dierst machine-gunned U.S. Army soldiers whol hads surrendered.At ieast 84died; Biliow was one of about 40who survived by feeing into the woods orp pretending tob be dead. According tol his obituary, Billow at Arst fell andl lay still. but as the Germans moved among thet fallen LA IVE MA) ar -OTOGRADHER to fnish offt the survivors. her ran. From top, theA American flagi is folded over the casket of Haroid Bil- escapingu under Are untill he found tow at the interment heid at the! Indiantown Gap National Cemetery US.troops. Formore photos. got to on Thursday.. Interment visitors listen duringt the ceremony. The LancasterOaline.com. funeral procession passes under a flagi in Mount. Joy. Copyright @ 2025 Newspapers.com. All Rights Reserved. o Newspapers LNP Always Lancaster (Lancaster, Pennsylvania)- Fri, Sep 23, 2022: Dancestry Page A5 htpsi/lancasteronlineewspaperscom/mage/881721322 Downloaded on Jan 23, 2025 LNP 1 LANCASTER, PA LOCAL FRIDAY. SEPTEMBER: 23. 2022 AS MMMNMMNNNww..wwwT..NN.N EDOte rtoaro Harold Bilowg 87U.5. yava Nov. 5, 2019. Each fagr one ofthe A+96y yearso old, wwil veteran Harold Billow enters Mount. Joy Borough Hallo on. Jan. 6, 2020, where American Gisk phess duringt thei PANEESR Mairsy Mssatre. which Bllows survived EPEESS "playing dead." her receiveda a Presidential Letter ofA Appreciation from President Donald Trump. Billow: Bipartisan bill would rename Mount Joy post office after veteran Continueds fomn Al bourg. Bllow was mong ing shot by the German 5S one of 10 from Lancaster ofE Hopeland: Sylvester Her- killed or wounded. Massacre, by dispiaying 87 120 American soldiers who troops. Billows said he heard County assigned to the chelroth and James Mat- Smucker's Pennsylvania American fags in his front werec captured nearth the Bel- another soldier yell, "Let's 28Sth Field Artilery Obser- tera. of Marietta: Robert us. House colleagues yard. He was truly: a patriot village of Malmedy on the hello louto cofhere"Bil- vation Battalion, which was "Sketch" Mearig of Lititz: nine Democrats and eight anda ane exceptional member BE 1944. Insteado ofbe- Eovt ran and ultimately eS- part of the Allied invasion andE BilE Reem, of Elizabeth- Republicans signedonas ofthec Greatest Generation." ing transferred to a POW capedtoA Americanl lines. force that landed in Nor towm. co-sponsors. Local officials. Smuckers saidi ini introducing camp. Bdlow and theo others In 2019. Billow told LNP mandy. France More than 20 soldiers including county Commis- ther measure. were lined up. andt the Ger- reporter Earle Cornelius Others included Luke managedto escapet then mas- sioner. Josh Parsons. Mount During the Battle of the mans opened fire: over 80 that he lways paused on Swartz and Erest Bechtel. sacre at Malmedy. But five JoyMayor TimE Bradley and Bulge. Germanys! last-ditch died. but Billow fell down Dec. 17tor rememberk his fall- of Reinholds: Charles from Lancaster County state Sen. Ryan Aument, is- attack against allied forces andlaidstill. and comrades. Haines,o ofColumbia; George Frey. Haines. Herchelroth. sued statements in support in Belgium and Luxem- As survivors were be- Drafted in 1943, he was Steffy. ofStevens: Carl Frey. Steffy and Swartz were ofSmucker'sbill Copyright @ 2025 Newspapers.com. All Rights Reserved. 87 - Arteke 5015 gleys I BRONZE SCULPTPE 0 (2 ARTIST MATT GLENN Passionate Sculptor, Father, and Husband. o CS ere Jot - a Lakerek Kye joest kwoa - - Arport EA - 74 Jl plaf Qek Text us 77 CUSTOM QUOTE START HERE HOME COMMUNITY GALLERY ABOUT BLOG PROCESS (801) 358-9739 nfo@bigstatues.com - Big Stacues : ghr osere Prouciy designos suproci argicroased a ne USA I4 nya Aifan Mil Hghrh Get A Free Project Quote Today Custom - Museum Quality Bronze Statues p Parls puad pA & Text us V s Pk bobn as bed les 15 por DOING TH B BRONZEMAN" Search EST. 1995 Home > Our Blog > How Much Does a Bronze Statue Cost in 2020? 25 How Much Does a Bronze Statue Cost in 2020? I - BRONZE MAN EST, 1995 puyng gurue But there's still one question that confuses buyers all the time: how much does a bronze statue actually cost? Well, most bronze statues cost anywhere between a few thousand dollars for smaller statues and well over tens of thousands for larger and more intricate statues. The main reason behind this wide price range is that pronze statues are complex and there are many factors that determine the price of an individual statue. In this guide, we'll take a look at some of these factors to help you understand how bronze statues are priced SO you can pick your first (or next) bronze statue more confidently. What Determines The Price of Bronze Statues? There are numerous factors that influence the price of a bronze statue. However, for this article, we'll focus on some of the factors that are most important to a first-time buyer. 1 (Size As the size of a bronze statue increases SO does the time, raw material, and labor required to create it. As a result, 18 (R 1 BRONZEMAN x a EST. 1995 2p29 R B commissioned or very intricate. You can easily find small bronz statues and figurines for under $1,000 and even for as ldw as $500. On the other side of the spectrum, 1:1 bronze statues of animals and life-size human replicas usually cost thousands of dollars, and the average ranges betweer $4,000 to $10,000 This range increases significantly as the design becomes more complicated. Speaking of which... 2. Design and Level of Detail Ifyou've ever looked at a high-quality bronze statue up close, you know the level of detail that master craftsmen can achieve. If you haven't, bronze foundries that use traditional casting techniques can replicate even the most complicated designs, such as patterns in clothes and birthmarks. However, all of this detail comes at a cost. Intricate bronze statues with a lot of detail average between $4,000 and $10,000 and will often cross the $15,000 mark. 3. Casting Technique Many foundries will often cut corners, especially in ready- made statues in order to bring the final price down. However, 19 a E BRONZE EMAN K n Q EST. 1995 7 voro ae The solution? Buy only fromreputed foyndries. Bronzeman for instance, works with some of theoldest and most reputed oronze foundries in the courtry. We use an ancient casting technique called the Lost Wàx Process" that results in life-like detail and beautiful patinas. & 1 ys It's also important to note that well-built bronze statues will - last you a lifetime others won't Piey powy hhovshe a and wew Some other factors that will also increase the price of a bronze statue including buying directly from a very famous foundry or buying replicas of famous designs. Commission or Buy Ready-made? The next biggest question for bronze statue buyers is whether to com/ission a new statue or buy ready-made. To commission a statue means to order a bronze statue that's built from the/ground up exactly to your specifications. There is just one major problem with commissioning - it costs a lot more than buying statues in stock. Commisfioning a bronze statue can cost anywhere between $10,000 to over $100,000 depending on your specifications 20 BRONZEMAN EST. 1995 Where to Find Quality Bronze Statues for Sale? Bronze statues can be found everywhere on the internet - from general marketplaces like eBay to niche Facebook groups. However, out of the hundred places you can find these statues, there's only a few you should actually buy them from. Your best bet would be to find a trusted foundry locally and pick out a statue to your liking in person. But you may be limited in terms of choice of designs and prices this way. Alternatively, you may not have any reputed foundries in your area. In this case, you, can take a look at Bronzeman O's large collection of high-quality bronze statues. How to Get the Best Price on a Bronze Statue in 2020 Through this price guide, you should now have a good idea of what you need to pay for the bronze statue you want. But unfortunately, finding a fair price on bronze statues, especiallyon custom designs is not easy. So how can you ensure ypu're getting the best price? 21 COPE Goowny ULPICR * 22 a - - - à JDI 2 - 4 aa 23 24 LPAUITE Bocx W/ERATE RAGE 25 SGT GRESKG MEMORIAL GREEN - aE à oT 1 CENv 1917 2013 Anlur ides or 9 cwparlise Ose Rx Oe diesars & and rphabd Jrd bronz ork porke qk 2h Rax BECH (I Kle Jak bench Ce I Q 5b 27 D onetler bench for tarcl. A Je knou what Ehg Cost, olhwt cuo net renenloer. Dohan Bck-laal, Joell Fooshee 15 with Joi Shearer Garner and 2 others at Rotary Park. October 23 at 12:53 AM Mount Joy, PAs @ You could work your whole life at a job that will hire your replacement as soon as or even before you retire without blinking. You can live in a community without ever really getting to know its people. You can even shut out the world and have very few personal relationships, My dad was not that guy. The hole he left behind in his community, his business, and, of course, his family and friends is not a hole that can be easily flled in, replaced, or forgotten. My Dad" S legacy continues to remain steadfast in the Mount Joy community. My family is honored that the Rotary Club has dedicated a tree and bench in Dad's name to the Rotary Park in Mount Joy. Both read "Service above self". I've been thinking a lot about that statement and how it truly defines my dad' S life. He loved his community and devoted a lot of his time and work to its betterment. He always had a hand one way or another in anything Mount Joy was doing or in need of. His love language was 100% acts of service. Makes a lot of sense. How cool is it that not only do we have a place to go to honor my dad, but that anycr ne who comes across his spot will read his name and remember him, forever. Now a sale 6 Y Mount Joy Rotary N LMNG MEMORY oF ROTARIAN JACK GARNER. IR. WHO EMBRACED THE SPRITOE ROTARY SERVICE ABNE SaF 28 00 e David Christian, Linda Hollick Gower and 230 others 29 comments Like Comment Share Most relevant - Wendi Weaver Amold Keith andiwent to see where it was today! It's a very nice tribute Like Reply 2w Dawn Kelley Beautifully said! It is a beautiful tribute to your dad a Like Reply 2w Ellen Arce A life with intention. A beautiful way to honor your dad and the wonderful things he has done for the community Like Reply 2w Maureen Elaine This is awesomel 1 ived in mount joy for many years and loved that little amazing town Like Reply 2w Sherry Strugala Moderacki An AMAZING Tribute Jenna - - Like Repiy 23 Jennie Cooper Love this! Like Reply 2w Olivia Kuntz Beautiful and 50 special Like Reply 2w Karen Kinzie Reale What a beautifui tribute to your dad!! Like Reply 2w Kathy Dolan Frey An amazing tribute to a wonderful man! 29 Nancy Kraybill Sabb W/hat a beautifui tribute and honor to your Dad. Like Reply 2w Julie Hamilton Such a beautiful post ! Ves all you said was spot on. You giris are all Blessed to nave been raised by such a kind and giving "Girl Dad", and a sweet and loving mom! You are right, that hole can not be repiaced, but you can all carry on his legacy and hold on to your memories of a life taken too soon! Great job Rotary!! Like Reply 2w John Moderacki Wow! That's awesome! Like Reply 2w Moya Hanson Beautiful tribute to your Dad. 3 John Zeigler Jack was a good guy he vould go out of his way to help you if he couid : Like Reply 2w Linda Brant Hanson That is awesomel What an honor to your Dad. Like Reply 2w Janet Cressy Wow! That's awesome! What a beautiful tribute to Jack. Like Reply Zw Diane Snoopi Love this! - what an awesome tribute to an awesome guy! Like Reply 2w Lisa Gevurtz Levin Such a lovely tribute to a great man - - Like Reply 2w Amy Boettger White Well said! He was an amazing guy! Like Reply 2w Jana Hamilton Beautiful tribute to your Dad, - Everything said is spot on. Like Reply 2w Johanna Cressy Lovely sentiments, truly worthy man. Like Reply 2ws Edited 30 Jamie Boyer Couldn't have written any better! Missing Dad every day! 052 Like Reply 2w Marie Craddock Wow! That's really incredible! So specialll Like Reply 2w Steve-Kathy Wert What a great man n my friend sO happy for you all. We Lived in mt Joy 64 yrs till we moved to Kentucky. Blessings to you precious ladies. You have been blessed to have Him. & Like Reply 2w Jamie Madara Ober Beautiful.. he was a special man with a big heart Like Reply 2w Mount Joy Rotary We are glad you like it!! Jack definitely exhibited Service Above Self" all of the timeli Like Reply 2w Lindsey Edgeil This is 50 awesomel!! e Like Reply 1w Lois Hicks An awesome tribute to your wonderful Dad! Like Reply lw Debra Boozer Gingrich Wow! That's awesome! Love it Like Reply 1w 31 EST. FRONTIER Wave of Freedom: Wavy American Flag Steel Sign I Patriotic Décor = 16" X 9.25" Americana Metal Decor Wall Decoration Sign (Wavy American Flag) (Black) Visit the EST. FRONTIER Store 4.9 15 ratings Search this page $2499 Get Fast, Free Shipping with Amazon Prime FREE Retums Apply nOWS and get a $10 Amazon Gift Cardi upon approval of the Amazon Store Card, or see if you pre-qualify with por impact to your credit bureau score. Style: Wavy American Flag Wavy God Bless Home Of The American.. America Brave $24.99 $23.99 $24.99 Delivery Tuesday Delivery Tuesday Delivery Tuesday Symbolic Patriotism: Embrace the spirit of patriotism with our wavy American flag steel sign, a powerful symbol of freedom and pride in the USA. Sturdy Steel Construction: Crafted from high-quality steel, this sign embodies strength and resilience, echoing the enduring spirit of America.Sleek Finished with a sleek black powder-coated finish, the flag's design is enhanced, creating a timeless and elegant appearance. Optimal Size and Versatile Display: Measuring 16" X 9.25", this sign offers a substantial presence that's perfect for prominent display in any room. Hang it on walls, doors, or display it on shelves to infuse any space with patriotism and pride, seamlessly complementing various decor styles. Proudly Made in the USA: Support American craftsmanship with this steel sign proudly designed and handcrafted in the USA, showcasing your commitment to quality, authenticity, and love for your nation. Thoughtful Gift: Share the gift of patriotism with friends and family by gifting them this wavy American flag steel sign, serving as a meaningful present and constant reminder of the values and freedoms that make America great. Established Frontier: Quality goods made for Americans by Americans. We believe families are the heart of our Nation. Great families live in beautiful joyful homes, which a2 Herpea GyBoNpo SGURE Melmediy Mpsacre 33 - : E E a E - 3 - - - a - - - E - 6 E : P a : : E : I - - . I - 1 I 5 E E : : E - - # I I : E - 2 - 2 de a 21 Coos METAL FLMSSD E Metl Sa Farcork + Ba7s 35 9.25" 16" L 6t Eone mekal made- R Quy Worko - consolt GolSoi FE Aely loolks Sbrude ONBh A mety Sa $ - 87 Slays - avd otas hrol ad? Wo - - Nextinnovations Follow 2,168 sales 4.8 - * - * * (398 reviews) Metal Waving Flag Lawn and Garden Stake $31.00 Add ta ar Other people want this. 3 people have this in their carts right now. Arrives by Dec 8-12 if you order today. Nice choice! Enjoy free shipping to the US when you spend $35+ at this shop. Add both to cart Sign in to Etsy with Google See more items David Christian Highlights dave@ucalarch.com Handmade To create your account, Google will share your name, email address, and profile picture with Etsy. Materials: steel, metal See Etsy's privacy pollcy and terms of service. 37 38 Hil Signia Seil Watchlist My eBay Sign in to eBay with Google ebay a Search for anything tedi categoryi fora 93 de toant Dess Bcuints aTa Figudines David Christian tav-sçalar To create your account, Google Nil share your name. email address, and profile picture with eB See eBay's an vacy pclicy and enas a Service People who viewed this item aiso viewed American Flag Metal Wall Art Small Size 173 3/4" X 121 1/4 $42.98 Free shipping American Flag Metal Wall Art Smail Shop with confidence Size 17 3/4" x 121 1/4" eBay Money Back Guarar Condition New Get: thel item you ordersda your money back. Lemmmore Quantity: 1 3availabie / Lsgld Seller information hananigatamstaloris (21883 Price: US $44.98 99755. Postweteadhacs S2 Saveihiazeller Contactseller Viaitstore Saathettams 92 Add to Watchlist Ships from United Returns accepted States Shipping: FREE Expedited Shippingi Bgezetais Locatedin n; Payson. Anzona, United States Deliverys Estimated petween Thu, Dec 15 and Mon. Dec 191 to 17547 a Inciudes Dnus Siness says nancling: sime alter receiot of cieared payment. Have one to sell? Seil now Returns; 30 day returns Buyer pays for: return shipping! Sse detals Payments Soeciai inancinga available Sertermaad uRENng Earnup: to 5x; points when you usey your eBay Mastercard Leammore Related sponsored items Fasdoack on OME su 39 MOUNT JOV WAR MEMORIAL PARK - Veterans' Memorial Plaza O O HAROLD BILLOW M E M ORIAL O O EXISTING ALLEV Trash Existing Textured Receptacle Bench Concrete SCALE 10 20 EXISTING MEMORIAL WW TO BE REMOVED WW II SERVCE BRANCH MOTTO PLAQUE HAROLD BILLOW 6' Bench STORYBOARD SIGN 6' ADA Accessible MALMEDY MASACRE Bench 5 SERVICE FLAGS EXISTING AMERICAN FLAG KOREA, VETNAM, LEBANON, GRENADA, SALUTING HAROLD BILLOW STATUE PERSIAN GULF, PANAMA, IRAQ AND SCULPTURAL FLAG FIELD AFGHANISTAN 87 Comrade Flags MEMORIAL TREE RED, WHITE AND BLUE ANNUALS LFLAGSTONE PATH Maintained by the Rotary Club CONTEMPLATIVE VETNAM of Mount Joy CROSS AND MISSING MONUMENT PATHWAY TO SYMBOLIZE ROCK BENCH 5x1 Base THOSE WHO DID NOT RETURN LIMNG TRIBUTE TO THOSE WHO SERVED SIGNIFICANCE OF 87 W/ REDEDICATION FLAG TRADITION PLAQUE Borough of lount Jop Bennsplbania Sncorporateb 1851 Broclamation WHEREAS, the elected officials of the Borough of Mount Joy recognizes the Month of April as Sexual Assault Awareness Month; and WHEREAS, the elected officials ofthe Borough of Mount Joy recognizes the fact that sexual violence is widespread and impacts every person in the community, and WHEREAS, the elected officials of the Borough of Mount Joy aims to raise public awareness about sexual violence and educate communities about how to prevent it, and WHEREAS, the theme "Together WeAct, United We Change" embodies the power of collective action in addressing and preventing sexual abuse, assault, and harassment, and WHEREAS, the theme Together We. Act, United We Change" emphasizes that when we unite, we significantly increase our ability to make meaningful, positive changes, and WHEREAS, sexual harassment, assault, and abuse take many forms, and it can happen to anyone, and NOW THEREFORE, the elected officials of the Borough of Mount Joy proclaim the month of April as Sexual Assault Awareness Month, and each day of the year is an opportunity to create change for the future. In Witness Whereof, I, President of the Mount Joy Borough Council, have hereunto set my hand, and have caused the Official Seal of the Borough of Mount Joy to be affixed this 7th day of April, 2025. William A. Hall, President of Borough Council 9b - 6 1 S a s s s 2 2 2 a 4 4 4 3 8 - N S N 9 - er 4 a m 4 $ 2 o co 3 N - 4 N M 6 E 1 S N N N 3 2 un 4 i in in 6 2 a 4 N 6 6 2 in a 6 2 a e 3 2 6 o - a m 2 4 in 9 4 3 3 6 0 3 - w 1 2 6 E 3 E s 4 6 4 4 - 7 a 00 6 3 7 8 7 6 7 7 a 9) 2 2 5 2 2 5 2 8 2 3 - : 2 f 3 a 7 8 d 5 2 0 6 3 - 2 2 32 - < 2 1 o C p 2 6 5 MOUNT JOY POLICE DEPARTMENT 21 E MAIN ST, MOUNT JOY, PA 17552 Phone: 717-653-1650 Fax: 717-653-0062 Citation Output By Charge Starting Issue Date 2/1/2025 to Ending Issue Date 2/28/2025 Charge Total 1301 A- DR UNREGIST VEH 1 1301 A - Dr Unregist Veh 1 1371 A - Veh Reg Suspended 1 1501 A - Driving W/O A License 1 1543 A - Driv While Oper Priv Susp Or Revoked 1 1543 B1i - Drg Lic Sus/Rev Purs to Sec 3802/1547B1 2 3309 1 - Disregard Traffic Lane (Single) 1 3361 - Driving at Safe Speed 2 3362 A3-31 - Exceed Max Speed Lim Estb By 31 MPH 1 4703 A - Operat Veh W/O Valid Inspect 4 3111 A- - OBEDIENCE TO TRAFFIC-CONTROL DEVICES 5 4703 A - OPERAT VEH WIO VALID INSPECT 1 Total: 21 Printed By: NICOLE LEE SCORDO On 3/3/2025 12:39:37 PM Page 1 of 1 MOUNT JOY POLICE DEPARTMENT 21 E MAIN ST, MOUNT JOY, PA 17552 Phone: 717-653-1650 Fax: 717-653-0062 Criminal Charges by Charge Type Starting Issue Date 2/1/2025 to Ending Issue Date 2/28/2025 Charge Type: ARREST Charge Total 2701 A - SIMPLE ASSAULT 1 2701 A1 - SIMPLE ASSAULT - ATTEMPT 1 2706. A1 - TERRORISTIC THREATS WI INT TO TERRORIZE ANOTHER 1 2709 A1 - HARASSMENTISTRIKE, SHOVE, KICK, ETC. 2 3304 A5* - CRIMINAL MISCHIEF - DAMAGE PROPERTY - COURT CASE 1 3921 A - THEFT BY UNLAW TAKING-MOVABLE PROP 1 3929 A1 - RETAIL THEFT 1 5113 A - ARREST FOR VIOLATION OF ORDER 2 32.18 - ANIMALS - RUNNING AT LARGE 1 Total: 11 Charge Type: COMPLAINT Charge Total 2709 A1 - HARASSMENTSTRIKE, SHOVE, KICK, ETC. 1 32.18 - ANIMALS - RUNNING ATI LARGE 1 Total: 2 de Fire Department Mount Joy Incident Summary Report 02/01/2025 through 02/28/2025 Incidents Total Incidents: 44 Total First Due: 28 Total Mutual Aid: 16 Total Time In Service 29:45:56 Average Time to Respond 00:04:34 Average Time to Scene: 00:06:54 Personnel Response Total Personnel: 312 Avg. Personnel Per incident: 7.09 Total Personnel Hours: 170:28 Estimated Property Value / Loss / Saved Pre Incident Value $2,744,583.00 Loss: $34,283.00 Value Saved: $2,710,300.00 Apparatus Response Engine 75-1: 20 Engine 75-2: 15 Truck 75:22 Squad 75: 1 Duty Veh 75-1: 18 Duty Veh 75-2: 14 Traffic 75: 7 Municipal Responses - First Due Mount Joy Borough: 13 Rapho Township: 7 Mount Joy Township: 4 East Donegal Twp: 4 Municipalities - Mutual Aid East Hempfield Township 1 Elizabethtown Borough 2 Manheim Borough 1 Marietta Borough 2 Mount Joy Township 3 Rapho Township 1 West Donegal Township 2 West Hempfield Township 2 XX - Out of County 2 Page 1 of 4 Tuesday, March 11, 2025 - 17:11 Fire Department Mount Joy Incident Summary Report 02/01/2025 through 02/28/2025 Incident List 2025-02-24 03:16:15 2025-099 Manheim Borough N Hazel St Dispatched & canceled en route 2025-02-25 06:17:21 2025-100 West Donegal Township Industrial Rd Dispatched & canceled en route 2025-02-25 09:45:52 2025-101 Mount Joy Borough Berry St Gas leak (natural gas or LPG) 2025-02-27 21:06:20 2025-102 Rapho Township Milton Grove Rd Motor vehicle accident with injuries Page 4 of 4 Tuesday, March 11, 2025 - 17:11 Fire Department Mount Joy Incident Summary Report 02/01/2025 through 02/28/2025 Incident List 2025-02-01 04:21:42 2025-059 Mount Joy Borough Donegal Springs R Passenger vehicle fire 2025-02-02 15:38:08 2025-060 Elizabethtown Borough S Mount Joy St Building fire 2025-02-02 20:18:09 2025-061 Mount Joy Township Route 283 W Dispatched & canceled en route 2025-02-02 22:15:26 2025-062 Mount Joy Township W Main St Dispatched & canceled en route 2025-02-02 22:25:58 2025-063 Rapho Township Route 283 E Motor vehicle accident with injuries 2025-02-03 03:48:55 2025-064 Mount Joy Township Campus Rd Dispatched & canceled en route 2025-02-03 05:19:23 2025-065 Rapho Township E Main St Motor vehicle accident with injuries 2025-02-03 05:39:02 2025-066 Mount Joy Township Route 743 Failed to Respond 2025-02-03 07:37:33 2025-067 West Donegal Township Anchor Rd Assist police or other governmental agency 2025-02-03 08:10:03 2025-068 Mount Joy Township Rissermill Rd Motor vehicle accident with injuries 2025-02-04 07:56:46 2025-069 Mount Joy Borough Keinath St Water problem, other 2025-02-04 12:58:33 2025-070 East Donegal Township Donegal Springs R Dispatched & canceled en route 2025-02-04 17:00:50 2025-071 West Hempfield Townsh Lancaster Ave Brush or brush-and-grass mixture fire 2025-02-06 18:08:35 2025-072 Rapho Township Kinderhook Rd Assist police or other governmental agency 2025-02-07 07:54:04 2025-073 Elizabethtown Borough N Market St Dispatched & canceled en route 2025-02-07 18:37:28 2025-074 East Donegal Township Union School Rd False alarm or false call, other 2025-02-09 11:19:33 2025-075 Mount Joy Borough N Barbara St Smoke detector activation, no fire - unintentional 2025-02-10 06:28:29 2025-076 Marietta Borough E Market St Dispatched & canceled en route 2025-02-11 08:10:03 2025-077 Mount Joy Borough Merchant Ave Alarm system activation, no fire unintentional 2025-02-13 03:43:12 2025-078 Rapho Township Meadowfield Dr Passenger vehicle fire 2025-02-13 05:31:58 2025-079 West Hempfield Townsh Prospect Rd Dispatched & canceled en route 2025-02-13 10:20:01 2025-080 Marietta Borough River Rd Dispatched & canceled en route 2025-02-15 01:11:18 2025-081 Mount Joy Borough Lakeside Xing Alarm system sounded due to malfunction 2025-02-15 13:28:15 2025-082 East Donegal Township Anderson Ferry Rd Motor vehicle accident with no injuries. 2025-02-15 17:48:24 2025-083 East Hempfield Townshi Church St Fire, other 2025-02-16 19:07:52 2025-084 Rapho Township Lancaster Est Gas leak (natural gas or LPG) 2025-02-17 16:58:52 2025-085 Mount Joy Borough Boxwood Blvd Medical assist, assist EMS crew 2025-02-17 18:12:59 2025-086 Mount Joy Borough Ziegler St Fuel burner/boiler malfunction, fire confined 2025-02-18 08:18:58 2025-087 XX - Out of County Adelia St Cover assignment, standby, moveup 2025-02-18 11:19:02 2025-088 XX. - Out of County Rt 283 E Dispatched & canceled en route 2025-02-18 19:07:11 2025-089 East Donegal Township Musser Rd Chimney or flue fire, confined to chimney or flue 2025-02-19 02:20:57 2025-090 Rapho Township Orchard Rd Building fire 2025-02-19 12:11:13 2025-091 Mount Joy Borough Farmington Way Alarm system activation, no fire unintentional 2025-02-20 06:44:58 2025-092 Rapho Township Route 283 W No incident found on arrival at dispatch address 2025-02-20 17:52:54 2025-093 Mount Joy Borough Martin Ave False alarm or false call, other 2025-02-20 23:19:11 2025-094 Mount Joy Borough Delta St Electrical Wiringlequipment problem, other 2025-02-21 08:47:34 2025-095 Mount Joy Township Old Market St Alarm system activation, no fire - unintentional 2025-02-22 15:06:51 2025-096 Mount Joy Township Route 283 W Failed to Respond 2025-02-23 09:44:33 2025-097 Mount Joy Borough W Main St Alarm system sounded due to malfunction 2025-02-23 13:06:52 2025-098 Mount Joy Borough Harvestview North Arcing, shorted electrical equipment Page 3 of 4 Tuesday, March 11, 2025 - 17:11 Fire Department Mount Joy Incident Summary Report 02/01/2025 through 02/28/2025 Incident Type - First Due Alarm system activation, no fire - unintentional 3 Alarm system sounded due to malfunction 2 Arcing, shorted electrical equipment 1 Assist police or other governmental agency 1 Chimney or flue fire, confined to chimney or flue 1 Dispatched & canceled en route 3 Electrical wiring/equipment problem, other 1 False alarm or false call, other 2 Fuel burner/boiler malfunction, fire confined 1 Gas leak (natural gas or LPG) 2 Medical assist, assist EMS crew 1 Motor vehicle accident with injuries 4 Motor vehicle accident with no injuries. 1 No incident found on arrival at dispatch address 1 Passenger vehicle fire 2 Smoke detector activation, no fire - unintentional 1 Water problem, other 1 Incident Type - Mutual Aid Assist police or other governmental agency 1 Brush or brush-and-grass mixture fire 1 Building fire 2 Cover assignment, standby, moveup 1 Dispatched & canceled en route 8 Failed to Respond 2 Fire, other 1 Page 2 of 4 Tuesday, March 11, 2025 - 17:11 9d Life Lion LLCI Monthly Report Mount. Joy Borough February 2025 EMS call volume Total EMS activity Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Total Totall Life Lion LLC calis dispatched in Mount Joy Borough. 70 53 Totalr monthly calls Mount Joy Borough unit dispatched in other municipalities 133 100 Mount) Joy Boroughc calls handled by other Life Lion units 22 11 Total dispatched municipal responses by primary unit assigned ini Mount Joy Borough Count Pct Mount Joy Borough 42 29.6 Rapho Township 37 26.1 PSH Life Lion LLC: activity trends for Mount. Joy East Hempfield 17 12.0 Borough West Hempfield 13 9.2 Columbia Borough 13 9.2 West Donegal Township 4 2.8 East Donegal Township 3 2.1 Manor Township 3 2.1 Penn Township 2 1.4 Elizabethtown Borough 2 1.4 Manheim Borough 2 1.4 Mountville Borough 2 1.4 Mount Joy Township 1 0.7 York County 1 0.7 Total 142 Medical Call Type in MountJoyBorough Coune Pct Fall Injured 14 26.4 Sick Person 12 22.6 Chest Pains 7 13.2 JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP oCT NOV DEC Breathing Problem 6 11.3 Primaryu uniti inN Mount Joy Borough TotallLMount Joy Boroughe calls Hemorrhage 3 5.7 TotalN MutualA AidCalls Psychiatric- Emotional 2 3.8 Abdominal Pain 1 1.9 Others 8 15.1 Total 53 Response times primary unit assigned ton MountJ Joy Borough Responset timer median (Minutes) 9:16 %e Mount Joy Borough EMA Situation Report MJB = ICS 209 INCIDENT -JURISDICTION OPERATIONAL PERIOD REPORTING UNIT FORM Status Summary MJB EMA Dates: 2/21/25 to 3/19/25 MJB EMC ICS 209-Short The following reports on activities for the period shown: Current Situation: Nothing significant to report Critical Issues: Nothing to Report Accomplishments: Reviewed a draft of the Hazard Mitigation Plans and found most of the project that were submitted for Mount Joy Borough were not listed. made contact with the contractor and provided the worksheets with the projects, and they advised they will update the plan. No updates on the final plan yet. Attended a planning meeting for the Fresh Brews of Mount Joy event. The plan will be drafted shortly for review. Attended a Make-A-Wish planning meeting to review this year's event. Planned Activities: Update the Borough's Emergency Operations Plan. Hold a meeting with the Memorial Day organizers and support agencies to discuss the recommendations for next year's parade. Additional Information: Nothing to Report Name: Date: Time: Distribution: Philip Colvin 3/19/25 1500 Mount Joy Public Safety Committee 9 + MILANOF-SCHOCK LIBRARY 1184 Anderson Ferry Road, MountJoy, PA: 17552 Tel: 717.653.1510 Fax: 717.653.4030 www.mslibrary.org B Milanof-Schock Library is a community resource that enriches lives Be Connected through, education, information, exploration, and socialization. Serving East Donegal Township, Marietta Boro, Mount Joy Boro, Mount. Joy Township & Rapho Township March 2025 - Compiled by. Joseph Mcllhenney, Executive Director Contributors: Susan Craine, Jan Betty, Jazmynn Whitney & Kirstin Rhoads February 1-28, 2025 Statistics 2025 2024 2023 2022 2021 TOTAL CIRCULATION 13,339 14,268 14,293 13,412 14,587 YTD CIRCULATION 26,128 28,989 28,641 25,744 28,554 OVERDRIVE & E-formats 1081 1468 1359 1220 1359 NEW PATRONS 95 75 82 58 51 YTD NEW PATRONS 175 152 164 113 100 PATRON COUNT 4,980 5,536 5,252 4,365 3,549 YTD PATRON COUNT 9,773 11,119 10,348 8,595 6,862 PASSPORTS 196 170 168 106 62 YTD PASSPORTS 381 310 357 175 143 WIFI USERS 665 501 302* 308 249 PC USERS 223 307 288 258 242 *2 weeks of data available Hoopla! Feb'25 Jan' '25 Dec'24 Nov'24 Oct" 24 Sep'24 Aug' '24 Number of Hoopla items used 580 595 538 596 639 574 558 ITEMS SOLD IN LOBBY $731.75 YTD TOTAL $ $1,664.35 TOTAL $ADDED DONATIONS $0** TOTAL $ DONA TIONS as PRIZES $0 TOTAL $0 **ILS upgrade made it impossible for MSL to add donated items READING THE WORLD MTH MISS ALYSSA à 1 Thurs, eb2 27 @6p I Executive Summary MSL was closed for President's Day on Monday, Feb 17 MSL's Celebrate Dr. Seuss program was well attended and a lot offun! - Feb 28 PROGRAMMING & CLUBS ADULT Programs Programs Participants Programs YTD Participants YTD In-Library Programs 2 11 4 23 Club Meetings/Particlpants 8 61 16 122 YOUTH Programs Programs Participants Programs YTD Participants YTD In-Library Programs 21 421 47 935 Off-site Programs 10 411 21 913 Virtual Programs 0 0 0 0 Volunteer Month Total 2024 YTD Totals Volunteer Hours 72.75 153.25 Joseph Staffing took a great deal of time this month. Stephanie' s last day was Feb 13th but she gave notice in December. I began working on a post-Stephanie staffing solution in the new year. By February Jazmynn was getting trained for most of Stephanie's tasks. Talks with Laura Bear began in February too. Laura will work beside Jan and coordinate Children's Programs after Jan retires. Attended Mount Joy Borough Council meeting - Feb 3 Met with Lark and Barb Gallen about MSL 2025 Fundraising - Feb 4 Attended, and served as Chair, the LSLC Director's S Council meeting - Feb 7. Attended Friend Group Meeting - Feb 10 Led interviews for Circulation Desk Assistant position with Susan and Jazmynn Feb 18 and 19 Interviewed a Janus School student, Andrew, for a volunteer/nternship position at MSL along with Susan and Janus School program coordinator Dyane Stillman - Feb 20 Held a Core4 meeting - Feb 27 Attended LSLC District Advisory Council meeting with Joe - Feb 27 Participated in MSL's Celebrate Dr. Seuss program = Feb 28 Community/Service Point (Susan) Solicited and put together prizes for Seuss Program Put together prizes for Winter Reading Program Working on a new weekly staff schedule Attended interviews for new staff Interviewed with a staff member and student from Janus school Viewed the monthly STIG meeting Attended Core4 meeting New items needing complete processing = 48 Youth Services (Jan) The Winter Reading Bingo began February 1st. We started it later this year and bumped it into March to spread it out a bit. It was good to have families asking for it. Numbers will be reported in March. Seuss Was a great success and I am grateful for the many hands that reached out to help when we discovered that we were short staffed fori the evening. Builders Club, Key Club, Library Friends, Library Volunteers, some staff and 4 homeschool children stepped up and saved the night. We had about 70 go through and scored a nice article in LNP. I met with Alyssa and Laura individually, then the 3 of us met together to begin working on programs etc in the Youth area's future. Rachel has agreed to take over the book ordering. Have begun scheduling Summer events and will be interested to see how the reading program is affected by the budget cuts. LSLC has finally hired a Youth Director, sO things like communication should become better. Joseph has given me a nice budget to work with, sO we will manage. Public Relations/Promotions (Kirstin) CONSTANT CONTACT: o March Enews: sent to 3906 contacts; 1776 opens (46%), 63 clicks (1.6%), 3 unsubscribe SOCIAL MEDIA: Facebook - Total Page Followers 2,997 (23 new); 57.6K views; 55.3K reached; Content Interactions 907; 5 unfollows. Link clicks 220; Page Visits 3.4K; Stephanie's last day was highest view (1,839) with 59 interactions; Steph & Rachel Eagles Fans received 1,219 views with 35 interactions. Instagram - 1,307 followers (20 new); 17.8K views; 1.6K reach; 531 content interactions; 140 profile visits Created/posted Promos for special programs Post at least once a day on both platforms 3 Press Release - Distributed via news media, municipalities, and Chamber of Commerce. WEBSITE 4,285 total sessions 0 These are the highest view counts: 510 sessions of Passports; 134 visits to Employment Opportunity; 75 visits to Children & Family Received training by Richard from the system regarding editing our website after the new software migration. C Entered all programs to March online calendar. ADULT PROGRAMS o Inquired with Trolley Line Coffee in Salunga if they would have interest in doing a coffee program/tasting at the Library - they said yes. Reached out to Geri Krotow, local author, about coming here she said yes. Contacted Northern Appalachia School across the river for interest in doing a few programs - yes. Looking into having a program "Raising Chickens 101" Starting to look for program to celebrate the PA 250 initiative that will begin this summer and go into next July. GOOGLE 1062 website clicks made from our Business Profile 345 inquiries for directions 1676 Business Profile Interactions 269 calls were made from our Business Profile Added more photos to our Google page. PANGO O Sold 11 books in December $157.68 EBAY O Steph gave me brief tutorial before she left. Sent out 3 items after she left. Will figure out a way to include in my monthly schedule to keep up momentum. SEUSS O Updated/printed Seuss tickets. o Video of Jan to promote event. Updated/printed posters for inside Library, added to large street sign, shared to FB groups Took photos Helped Jan with set-up and tear-down. MISC Continued the emptying of the book donation shed 5 days a week and gathering books for sale in lobby, which made over $960+ in January. Core 4 meeting. Took a small basket of books to Trolley Line Café in Salunga for children to read while they are there. I was told that it's been a blessing, and that the kids read the books all the time. Updated March print calendar and calendar for Lobby/kids area. Printed and updated event coloring bookmarks. Volunteers/Programming/Fundraising Stephanie) Annual Appeal 2025 2025 Annual Appeal was sent out in February via letter to the same segments of our population as 2024, which included patrons and prior donors but did NOT include the larger mailing list of all residences which Engle would pull. Responses and donations are already coming in and are being entered into Giftworks Volunteers ) Total hours in December: 72.75 hours Anne's Circle , One individual has continued donating for Anne's Circle, with a donation of $25/month with donor's employer matching donation amount Programs Understanding Alzheimer's S and Dementia, 7 attendees. Stephanie ran this program, but believe it was well received. - kept the presenter's information for potential future programs College Planning Strategies, 4 attendees. This had to be rescheduled due to conflict with Donegal's calendar. think this would have been more popular ift there had been more advertising time Upcoming Programs in March Petroglyphs of Safe Harbor Sign-ups maxed out, waitlist filling up Jigsaw Puzzle Team Showdown - Registration full Make-lt Monday: Sun Catchers Registration filling up Clubs o 8 clubs met in January, with total attendance of 61. Transition of staffing Stephanie worked with current staff to identify opportunities to transition duties as she prepared to leave; ordering supplies and volunteer onboarding were delegated out My training was focused on immediate/urgent tasks - Stephanie and will met Wednesday, March 5th to go over some questions; will continue to meet on an as-needed basis Completed Tasks Much oft these first few weeks has been getting acclimated with Sharepoint, Giftworks and the general daily tasks associated with the position Assisted with job interviews Set up my google and MJY calendars Planned and prepped for some March and April programs (Make it Monday, Bicycle maintenance, movie matinee) Created and printed holiday closure signs for the rest of 2025 Been in contact with multiple potential program presenters Discussed plan of action with Kirsten about planning adult programs 16 Mount Joy Borough Codes Department 21 E Main St, Mount Joy, PA 17552 3/25/2025 MountJoy Borough Borough Manager Mark G. Pugliese RE: Monthly Report, March 2025 Zoning, Codes & Stormwater Administrator Mr. Borough Manager, The following is a summary of the department's activity since the last monthly report, 2/25/2025. Zoning & Building As of this report date, 19 permits for 11 projects have been issued. A permit by dates issued report for 2/25/25 - 3/25/25 is attached. Rental Permit & Inspection Program 16 - Rental Inspections completed 123 - Rental Permits issued. Complaints & Violations 3 - Notice of Violation letter issued for Disruptive Tenant violation. 3 - Notice of Violation letters issued for Property Maintenance/UCC violations. 6-Complaints / Violations closed since the last report dated 2/25/2025. 3 - Open Complaints / Violations pending follow-up and/or closure. Planning Commission The Planning Commission met on 3/12/2025. Reviewed SALDO application for 1002 Cornerstone Dr. / Lot 6A. PCrecommend approval. Zoning Hearing Board The Zoning Hearing Board meeting scheduled for 3/26/2025 was cancelled. PHONE: 717-653-2300 I EMAIL: ZONINGOMOUNTJOYPA.ORG I OFFICE HOURS: MON - FRI, 7AM TO 4PM Stormwater Stormwater permits issued included in the attached permits issued report. Items of Note Attended MJB Council Meeting 3/3/25, Planning Commission Meeting 3/12/25, ,and Public Safety Meeting 3/24/25. 3/4/2025 = Final Inspection walk-thru for COU, 78 W. Main St. 3/5/2025 - attended meeting regarding Sketch Plan for 100 New Haven St. 3/10/25 = attended Lancaster Clean Water Partners meeting/Listening session. 3/12/25 = attended LANCODE 2021 IBC Changes Class 3/17/25 - performed Fire Safety/Occupancy evaluation waik-thru of Juniper Village with Maintenance supervisor. 3/18/25 - Met with Reist Seed regarding planned 100 year anniversary sign project. 3/20/25 - Final nspection walk-thru for COU, 122 Merchant - Resolute Physical Therapy 3/21/25 - Final Inspection walk-thru for Temporary COU, 30 Orchard Rd. - CPRS Physical Therapy Respectfully, Brett R. Hamm, Mount. Joy Borough Codes, Zoning, & Stormwater Administrator MOUNT, JOY BOROUGH CODES DEPARTMENT PHONE: 717-653-2300 1 EMAIL: ZONINGOMOUNTJOYPA.ORG / OFFICE HOURS: MON - FRI, 7AM TO 4PM 9h MOUNT JOY BOROUGH MEMORANDUM TO: Council & Mayor FROM: Rachel Stebbins, Community & Economic Development Coordinator DATE: March 27, 2025 RE: C&ED's Report Highlights: 1. Newsletter has been mailed 2. C2P2 Grant will be submitted by next meeting Time Breakdown: Community & Economic Development = 30% Grants - 60% General counci/commitee meetings, staff meetings, C&ED reports, etc.) = 10% Activities: 1. - have attended Mount Joy Chamber luncheon, Mount Joy Chamber Board Meeting, Business Grand Re-opening, Grant Success Webinar, Municipal Complex Groundbreaking, Public Safety Meeting, LCP Phase 3 Easement meeting, AASHTO Bike Guide Webinar, two FOD advisory committee meetings, Lancaster EDC Annual Breakfast 2. Met with Business Owner to assist with coordination of logistics for upcoming event; connected Owner with some advertising resources and business support connections 3. Liaised with local church group and public works/parks to arrange for volunteer day 4. Assisted with connecting Friends of Donegal (FOD) and public works for community gardens work 5. Agreed to present at upcoming FOD "Getting Ahead" program on behalf of the Borough; began working on presentation materials 6. Assisted with inviting people to the municipal complex groundbreaking. including writing and sending press releases and media coverage requests 7. Working with several property owners and real estate agents to fill vacant properties and/or acquire tenants for soon-to-be-vacant properties; created and distributed information about properties to local Chambers and organizations to share with their contacts 8. Met with a local business owner regarding the possible development of a locally-focused podcast with the purpose of promoting Mount Joy and its ousinesses and amenities 9. Coordinated with staff to gather photos and information to create ongoing employee spotlight posts 10. Completed placer.ai training modules 1Page Grants 1. Searching for grant opportunities to determine parameters, qualifications, needs, etc. 2. Continuing to research various opportunities for grants opening in 2025 3. Researching NFWF Grant = Watershed restoration and water quality improvement projects = LCP Phase 3; Range $150,000 to $1M; match encouraged but not required; Due 5/13/25 4. Exploring People Parks Grant = Opens in April; $25,000 max; no match 5. C2P2 Round 31 - Phase 1 for Little Chiques Park Development; DCNR $200,000; 50/50 match; Due April 2, 2025. 6. Greenways. Trails, and Recreation Program (GTRP) = Lions Club Splash Pad; DCED $250,000 max; 15% match; $100 application fee; Due May 23, 2025 7. PFBC Habitat Improvement Grant - $75,000 towards Little Chiques Streambank Restoration Phase 3; collaborated with Kara at Rettew; submitted 1/21/25. 8. Multimodal Transportation Fund = Includes possible RRFB's, crosswalk markings and speed tables; Shovel Ready 9. Main Street Matters Program - Includes lighting and trash cans for Main Street; Shovel Ready 10. Local Share Account Statewide - In process; construction for new building; Submitted 11. Fitness Court from National Fitness Campaign = participated in conference call with Borough Manager and NFC; grant is tentatively awarded pending committee/council approval; UPDATE: Public Works Committee does not feel that the Borough will be able to budget $140,000 match amount in 2025 nor meet other deadlines required. After speaking with representative from NFC, deadlines can be adjusted; HOLD 12. 902 Grant- Awarded 13. NIBRS Compliance Efforts Grant - Awarded; 2Q reports due in April 14. ARLE Transportation Enhancement Grant = Awarded ****End of Report*s** 2/Page 91 BOROUGH OF MOUNT JOY PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT MEMORANDUM TO: Mark Pugliese, Borough Manager FROM: Dennis Nissley, Public Works Director DATE: April 2, 2025 RE: Public Works Department Activities for March 2025 Following is a list of activities for the Public Works Department for March 2025 > Parks - Weed spraying > Parks - Mulching > Parks - Picking up sticks and cleanup to prepare for mowing. > Parks - Maintain and monitor barriers at the owl tree at Little Chiques Park > Parks - Equipment preparation > Parks - Install Softball championship sign at Gateway Park > PW - Two employees attended flagger training > PW/Parks = Build bin for Diamatex soil at Kunkle Field > PW - Replace stormwater culvert on Square Street, build new inlet boxes and install RCP. > PW - Remove damaged Hometown Hero banners > PW - Pothole repair as needed > PW - Repair sinkhole on Mount Joy Street > Signs Repair and replacement of missing or damaged signs as needed. > Compost Site Manage material at compost site, screen compost Meetings: > Attend Public Works Committee meeting > Attend Staff meetings > Attend meeting for property owners that have adjoining property to the streambank project phase 2 > Attend streambank project phase 1 walk-thru inspection > Conduct interviews for open Public Works positions. > Meet with property owners to review sidewalk inspections related to street projects > Attend PA OneCall meeting Projects: > Ongoing planning for future street projects and updating Roadway Maintenance Plan > Sent initial letter to S. Market Ave. property owners to inform them of 2027 street reconstruction project which will include installation of curbs and sidewalks. > Monitor progress ofLittle Chiques Phase I of streambank project AK To: Borough Council From: Jill Frey - Assistant Borough Manager/I Finance Officer Date: 3/31/2025 March 3rd - Attended Council Meeting. March 4th - Attended the Economic Development Company annual meeting, along with Mark and Rachel. March 19th - Attended a webinar on State Ethics and Office of Open Records. March 27th - Attended the Lancaster County Association of Township Supervisors meeting. Continue to work with the Auditors to complete the 2024 audit. I expect them to present to the Administration & Finance meeting on April 24, 2025, and then to Council on May 5, 2025. Received notification from the Auditor General's s office regarding a 2023 and 2024 Liquid Fuels Audit. I have it scheduled for April 17, 2025. Received 10 Right to Know Law requests; five have been fulfilled and five are rather large, requiring a 30-day extension. Attached you will find the following items: Account Balance Report - A report of the reserves in our four major operating funds as of March 31, 2025. Again, as for the budget reports, I typically do not include this report for the first few months of the year, as it does not show significant information at this point. If any of you have questions, please do not hesitate to reach out to me. Respectfully submitted, Jill Frey Assistant Borough Manager/Finance Officer MOUNT JOY BOROUGH MEMORANDUM TO: Councilors & Mayor FROM: Mark G. Pugliese I, Borough Manager DATE: March 27, 2025 RE: Manager's S Report 1. Meetings I have attended the Council Meeting, EDC Annual Breakfast Meeting, Parks & Recreation Advisory Board Meeting, Public Works Committee Mtg., Public Safety Committee Meeting, and Staff Meeting. 2. I spent a day on Capital Hill shadowing PSAB Lobbyist as they attended several meetings including on with Rep. Tome Jones. I had the opportunity to speak with other Senators and Representatives regarding funding and bills that may affect Mount Joy Borough. 3. 100 New Haven Street: Met with owner/developer of 100 New Haven Street regarding possibility of placing 61 town homes on the site. 4. Pennsylvania Good Government Svmposium - I attended a symposium on good government run by the PA State Ethics Board and the Office of Open Records. 5. Cresco Labs is currently working on the storm water basin; however, the Zoning Officer is working with them to obtain correct permits. 6. Pickle Ball Court - Parks and Rec Advisory Board had a lengthy discussion on park locates that it felt would be the most desirable location(s). The outcome oft their discussion was to list the top 3 or 4 locations and provide the Public Works Committee with a list of pros & cons. Public Works Committee has asked that a cost opinion be requested from RETTEW with a site-specific location at Borough Park/Kunkle Field. 7. Borough Handbook: All edits have been addressed, and the Employee Handbook is before Admin & Finance Committee. The draft handbook was forwarded to all of Council and to the Borough Solicitor for review. Admin & Finance Committee has reviewed half of the proposed changes and will review the second half at their March Committee Meeting. I sent a copy oft the draft document to the Borough Solicitor on 8/28/2024 and 9/24/2024 seeking her review and comments. No comments received from the Borough Solicitor. 8. Reference to BMP 107/Melhorn Basin & BMP 125/Borough Basin, - Rettew has completed testing at BMP 125 and we are waiting for game plan to move forward. Ihave asked ifit is possible that they include what updates might be able to be taken at BMP 107 as well 9. AMTRAK - I spoke with my AMTRAK over the summer and was told that the end wall in BMP 107 is a priority and that they are hoping to have funding for the project in October of this year. I reached out to Amtrak again on 10/1/2024 to see if there was an update and additionally advised them of several washouts along Sassafras Alley. Idid not receive any response from AMTRAK, I exchanged emails with a District Manager providing all the information regarding the washouts and BMP 107. I was advised that they would contact and forward information along to the proper individuals. No response. No Update 1Page 10. Municipal Services Complex - Following the Groundbreaking Ceremony held on March 20th, the General Contractor will be able to start land development. They are currently looking to deviate from their accepted plan to get the building pad completed earlier than the current plans. Additionally, I have been attending bi-weekly meeting with all contractors involved. I am also currently trying to work with PPL to get a temporary account set up for electrical service to the job site. Additionally, bond bidding was held and bids accepted. Closing will take place on April 1, 2025. I will note that interest rates are down slightly than was predicted. 11. Rt 772 Re-Route I received notification from the Planning Department regarding the 2025-2028 Transportation Improvement Project (25 TIP) that PennDOT has identified PA RT 230/Main Street for a potential Traffic Signal Improvement Project. Funding for the project is through the Lancaster Metropolitan Planning organization (MPO). The funding for specific projects have not been identified. Mr. Nissley and I attended a conference call with the Planning Department representative. The re-routing of Rt 772 and the intersection of Routes 772/230 will be on our list of comments. I've also had some discussions with Eric Kinard, District 8 Traffic Unit and we are in the process of setting up a conference call between PennDOT and the Borough. Kinard was to provide several dates and times that will work for him and his staff. have not received any response from him regarding a meeting. No updates. 12. Grants a. DCED Multimodal Transportation Fund Grant Currently waiting on SCTA for the bus shelter installation and our contractor to do street markings. b. DCED/DCNR C2P2 Grant- YSM is working on the final plan and cost estimates were received placing the completed project at a cost of $3.3 Million. We will be looking at phases with the hope of completion in 7 to 10 years depending on grant assistance. C. Kunkle Field/Park Heritage Grant - Project is completed. We did a walk through on Dec 19th, 2024. Ms. Frey is working on closing out the project sO we can receive the last funding check. d. RACP Grant 2022/2023 Ms. Frey and I attended a meeting with Stantic, the oversight firm. They requested multiple documents which have been uploaded to their portal. I am still working on several other documents that need to be uploaded. e. Lancaster County Community Foundationlaneaster Clean Water Partners (Reserve Swale) - This project is completed. I will be contacting the grantors to see about providing some public relations event or notifications as well as receiving final payment of the grant. Final payment request for $10,000 submitted. No updates f. Clean Water Partners/Foundation - Bid tabs for Phase 2 have been received and Council awarded the bid to Flyway Excavation. Ms Stebbins is working on obtaining easements for Phase 2 properties. Phase Istream work is completed, they are now working on the creek berms and embankments. Working on getting easements for property owned by VistaBlock g. Connects 2040 Grant --No Update h. 902 Grant-. Application Approved and documents signed. i. ARLET Transportation Enhancement Grant- Approved 2/Page j. DCED WRPP Grant- RETTEW submitted grant application and grant project manager has requested additional information regarding Phase 1 & 2. NO UPDATES k. Local Shared Grant - Submitted. I. PA Fish & Boat Commission = Ms Stebbins has submitted the application in the amount of $75,000 for Phase 3 of the Streambank Restoration Project. Submitted 13. Shovel Ready Proiects -Ms Stebbins and I met with Councilor Haigh to review a list of projects that he would like to see accomplished in the Borough. Staffi is willing to meet with or review any projects that other councilors or the mayor have to offer. We can then make a consolidated list and prioritize projects to do some oft the legwork required to make projects shovel ready SO that when grants become available, we have appropriate projects to submit, 14. Schatz V. Borough of Mount Joy. I received documentation from the engineering firm representing Mr. & Mrs. Schatz. I received a packet from Whittemore and Haigh regard expert review and report. No updates from Borough's law firm. 15. Florin Hills = Staff, Borough Solicitor, and Borough Engineers have been working with FHP, their attorney and their engineer on the reviews and agreement non-stop this month. It is hopeful that there will be an agreement presented at Council Meeting for Council's approval. There are ongoing talks to reach a settlement agreement for Phase 3. All documents are either signed or will be signed. Committee to address a request from FHP to permit the recreation fee of $1,000 per unit to be paid at the same time Building Permits are issued or percentages as recommended by the Admin & Finance Committee. 16. Borough Solicitor = Staff and I have been working on numerous projects with the Borough Solicitor. a. Ordinance for permit parking. Need discussion w/Chief Goshen b. Employee Handbook review. Sent 8/28 & 9/24/2024. 17. Public Works/Parks Department & Authority Facilities Discussion. Final documents being reviewed by solicitors. I expect documents will be ready to sign in the very near future. 18. Chiques Crossing - Iam currently compiling a list of issues and alternates submitted by Council members and the public. ****End of Report**** 3/Page 6 Pending Change Order: 1 eciConstruction Demo Tree & Credit MJB Submission Date: 3/6/2025 Owner : Mount Joy Borough Project: 25104. / Mt Joy Admin and Police Dept Facility 21 East Main Street 300 Orchard Road Mount Joy, PA 17552 Mount Joy, PA 17552 Scope of Work: Supply all labor, material and equipment to demo one (1)additional treeper RFI GC #5, and credit for MJB to relocate shed, remove signs, and remove baseball backstop. Description Est Units UM Unit Cost Est Hrs Hrs Cost Estimated Cost Demo Tree & Credit MJB Project Management and Coordination 0.00 HRS 0.00 1.00 120.00 120.00 SM. Johns & Son 0.00 LS 0.00 0.00 0.00 1,350.00 Subtotal Item 1 1,470.00 Cost' Type Recap: Amount 1 Labor 120.00 4 Subcontract 1,350.00 Subtotal Item 1,470.00 OH&P - Labor 15.00% 18.00 OH&P - Sub 5.00% 68.00 Bond 1.00% 16.00 Requested Total For Item 1 1,572.00 Department CADTTAL Total For Change Order 1,572.00 P.O. # Account # (a). 30.400.600 (b). DspatonAwRTZAL 3LOG - CLANG L ONDSL tti Pay $ $ 1572,00 Supervisor At this time eciConstruction is not requésting a time extension as a result of this change proposal. If at a later date, it is determined this change to the work has extended the contract duration eciConstruction reserves the right to seek compensation for extension of time. Ify you have questions please call me at 717-638-3000. Approved By: Mount Joy Borough Submitted By: eciConstruction, LLC Waré g. Pughise a Btionh Dale Signed: Signed: By: Mark G. Pugliese I By: Brian Imler Date: 3/24/2025 Date: 3/6/2025 124 West Church Street, P.O. Box 459 Dillsburg, PA 17019-0459 . 717.638.3000 www.eciConstnction.us &. Lane johns 3 Sarah SM Son Construction, LLC Mount Joy, PA 17552 PA071985 (717) 492-8126 Accoumting@smyohns.com ADDRESS Proposal 5722 ECI 124 W Church Rd Dillsburg, PA 17019 DATE 02/21/2025 P.O. NUMBER SALES REP Tree Demo C/O request Steven M. Johns ACTIVITY QTY RATE AMOUNT Demo 1 additional tree and stump not shown on the plans 2,150.00 Credit for work preformed by MJB that SMJ had priced -800.00 Relocate shed outside of LOD Remove 3 signs Remove baseball field backstop Due to the volatile nature of the economy, material pricing is SUBTOTAL 1,350.00 not guaranteed. Vendor pricing and fuel surcharges are TAX 0.00 subject to sudden changes which are out of our control and may affect the estimate. We will honor SM Johns labor and equipment rates. Exclusions: Rock, dewatering, unsuitable soils, permits, inspections, any other item not specified in this estimate. To schedule work, please return the signed acceptance. Balance will be invoiced NET DUE 15 days after completion of work. Credit cards accepted to $3,000. Over $3,000 will include a 2.75% surcharge / 3.5% if not presented for swipe. Fee for processing permits: $55 / hour PLUS permit cost. TOTAL $1,350.00 Accepted By Accepted Date Please remit payments to 3 Sarah Lane, Mount Joy PA 17552 eciConstruction REQUEST FOR INFORMATION 124 W. Church, Street, Dillsburg, PA 17019 (717) 638-3000-Office * (717) 638-3002-Fax New Mount Joy Borough Administration and Police Department Facility Architect: Crabtree Rohrbaugh & Associates 401 E. Winding Hill Rd. Mechanicsburg, PA 17055 Job No. 3271 REQUEST FOR INFORMATION RFI No. Job No. Spec. Section: GC-05 ECI: Drawing No.: Contractor's Ref. No.: Brief Description: Tree Request Date: Requested by: Response Needed By: Brian Imler, Project Manager 2-27-25 Estimated Cost Impact: Estimated Time Impact: Additional Cost No Change Credit YES Amount: NO Detailed Description: There is an additional tree not shown on any drawings. Please advise if anything should be done with the tree. Thank you. RESPONSE Response Date: Response by: Discipline: Marc Singley - K&W Engineers Civil 3/4/2025 Estimated Cost Impact: Estimated Time Impact: XAdditional Cost No Change Credit YES X NO Response: The tree in question is required to be removed as it is in conflict with the new building and site construction. Attached Document Description: Hill St Hill St y a . a Grandview Park 2a /ab. RECEIVED LANCASTER COUNTY FEB 18 2015 Conservation District To: Lancaster County Township and Borough Managers From: Christopher M. Thompson, District Manager Date: February 2025 Re: 2025 Memorandum of Understanding The Lancaster County Conservation District (LCCD) is celebrating our 75th anniversary this year. For about a quarter of that time, we have maintained a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with our Municipal partners to outline the scope and scale of responsibilities and expectations between our two organizations. The attached 2025 Municipal MOU is a revised copy of the MOU we last offered in 2022. There are not many changes to the new document, but the revisions we did make were reflective of changes to the state programs as well as a response to questions and comments we received from you. For the municipalities that are subject to the Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System (MS4) reporting protocols, an executed MOU has an added value of serving as the documentation required to satisfy several Minimum Control Measures (MCM). After May 1, 2025, the 202verionwilbecome void. Therefore, this 2025.MOUrequires action by your municipal board. Please return only a signed copy of the Execution page and Attachment A - Municipal Contact Information, pages 15-16, in the enclosed self-addressed envelope by May 1, 2025. Please reflect the positive action in your meeting minutes and keep a copy of1 the full 2025 MOU document for your records. Ifyou have questions regarding the 2025 MOU, the District has schedule four Municipal outreach meeting in March (see the attached schedule) and encourages your supervisors and staff to attend the meeting that best suits their location and schedule. Ifyou still have questions after the outreach meetings or would like a district representative to present the 2025 MOU1 to your Board, please contact the office at (717) 299-5361 X 51 to discuss the options. Sincerely, Cb6 bp Christopher M. Thompson, District Manager 1383. Arcadia Road, Room 200 : Lancaster, PA 17601 I (717) 299-5361 - Equal Opportunity Employer : lancasterconserationorg Promoling the Stewardship of Natural Resources in Lancaster County LANCASTER COUNTY Conservation District 2025 Municipal Meetings The Lancaster County Conservation District is hosting four municipal outreach March throughout the county. At these meetings, we hope to hear from and meetings also in oft the resources and programs that we offer. Breakfast will be you share some provided. All meetings are held 8:30 am - 10:30 am. March 6 - Upper Leacock Township Building 161 Newport Rd Leola, PA 17540 March 13 - Ephrata Borough Building 124 S. State St Ephrata, PA 17522 March 20 - East Drumore Township Building 925 Robert Fulton Hwy Quarryville, PA 17566 March 27 - West Hempfield Township Building 3476 Marietta Ave Lancaster, PA 17601 Overview of Agenda: 1. Welcome & Introductions 2. 75th Celebration & Municipal Connection 3. Local Project Showcase & Brief Program Services 4. Verification & Data Sharing 5. MOU Overview 6. LCCD Services Hope to see you there! RSVP by emailing d-snaaes 1383 Arcadia Road, Room 200 I Lancaster, PAI 17601 - (717) 299-5361 - Equal Opportunity Employer I lancasterconsrvationorg Promoting the Stewardship ofNatural Resources in Lancaster County MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING BETWEEN THE LANCASTER COUNTY CONSERVATION DISTRICT AND MOUNT JOY BOROUGH WHEREAS, the Lancaster County Conservation District, hereafter referred to as "LCCD", and MOUNT JOY BOROUGH, hereafter referred to as Municipality, have common areas of responsibility in serving the citizens of MOUNT. JOY BOROUGH and WHEREAS, there are common areas of work that require communication and support of each of these parties to the other party, and WHEREAS, the District and the Municipality desire to formalize their interactions in relation to common programs and responsibilities, and WHEREAS, this Memorandum of Understanding will serve as a foundation for a cooperative and mutually beneficial working relationship between the District and the Municipality, NOW THEREFORE, the parties agree to jointly enter into this Memorandum of Understanding. The Memorandum of Understanding which has six component parts as listed herein: Page I. Erosion & Sediment Pollution Control/NPDES for Stormwater Discharges 2 Associated with Construction Activities II. Chapter 105- Dam Safety & Waterway Management 6 IH. NPDES Municipal Separate Storm Sewer Systems 7 (MS-4 = NPDES Permit PAG13 MCM 1, 2,4) IV. Agricultural Related Activities (Manure Management & Erosion Control) 9 1. Plain Sect Outreach V. Education and Outreach 11 1. Watershed Program 2. Educational Program 3. Ombudsman Program VI. EXECUTION 15 VII. ATTACHMENT A - Municipal Contact Information 16 ATTACHMENT B - Common Complaint Contacts List 17 1 1. EROSION AND SEDIMENT POLLUTION CONTROL NPDES for Stormwater Discharges Associated with Construction Activities PURPOSE: Erosion and the resulting deposition of sediment in our waterways are the primary pollutant by volume of our streams. Minimizing erosion and sediment pollution of our streams requires initiatives at the federal, state, county and local municipal levels of government. The purpose of this Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) is to serve as a joint commitment to control accelerated erosion and to prevent sediment pollution to the Waters of the Commonwealth, which may result from earth disturbance activities. This MOU also serves as a basis for stating the role of each party in appropriately updating and administering appropriate Ordinances of the municipality in relation to Erosion and Sediment Pollution Control. DISTRICT RESPONSIBILITIES: In carrying out the intent of this Memorandum of Understanding, the LCCD shall, within the limits of its capabilities and within the scope of its Delegation Agreement with PA DEP, administer and implement the Commonwealth's Erosion and Sediment and Stormwater Control (Chapter 102 and Chapter 92- NPDES) Programs: 1. Records, Resources, Materials and Documents: a. Provide on its website an E&S Control Plan/Chapter 102 Permit Review Application and Fee Schedule. The LCCD will promptly notify the municipality of any approved changes to this document. b. Provide on its website links to all information necessary to successfully prepare an E&5 Plan and/or NPDES Permit application for discharges of stormwater associated with construction activities. This may include but may not be limited to the PA DEP Erosion and Sediment Pollution Control Manual, National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permit applications, and related forms, worksheets, and checklists. C. Provide the municipality with a year-end summary of NPDES and Erosion and Sediment Pollution Control activities within the municipality. The summary is intended to inform the municipality of activities and document activities for municipal MS4 permit requirements. The report is titled Annual MS4 Supplemental Report. d. Serve as a repository for erosion and sediment (E&S) control plans, permit applications, plan and permit reviews, complaints, inspection reports, correspondence and other materials and documents submitted to the LCCD for review concerning earth disturbance activities. All such information shall be contained in a dedicated filing system, which shall be available for inspection by municipal officials at any time. e. The LCCD will maintain information and materials on its website related to NPDES permitting and the E&S program. Municipalities may provide links to the LCCD website from municipal websites. This activity provides additional outreach and may satisfy relevant MS4 requirements. f. The LCCD shall maintain a filing system, in accordance with DEP's Records Retention Policy, that may be available for municipal official review. 2 2. Plan Reviews and Permitting: a. Receive all applications and E&S plans required by NPDES permitting regulations and complete administrative and technical reviews within time frames established by PA DEP. b. Receive all E&S plans either required by municipal ordinance or submitted voluntarily, and complete reviews of the plans within time frames established by the LCCD. C. Within 5 calendar days of a review action, the LCCD will forward to the municipality, applicant and/or responsible party: I. Notice of NPDES Permit decisions including, but not limited to, permit and plan approvals, renewals, deficiency letters, denials and withdrawals. II. Notice of E&S plan decisions where NPDES Permits are not required including approvals and deficiency letters. 3. Inspections: a. The LCCD will inspect earth disturbance activities to ensure that the implementation and maintenance of the E&S plan and Chapter 92 E&S practices are in compliance with the approved E&S Plan, the NPDES Permit and Chapter 102 regulations. b. Inspections will be performed: I. At a minimum, in compliance with PA DEP inspection schedules for permitted projects. II. At the request of the municipality. III. Within 8 calendar days of receipt, in response of a complaint from the municipality or the public. IV. Routinely, as time, workload, or staffing resources may allow. C. Within 8 calendar days of completion the LCCD will forward to the municipality and applicant or responsible party: I. Inspection reports resulting from complaint investigations and other inspections d. Initiate enforcement actions within the scope of the delegation agreement between the LCCD and the PA DEP. 3 4. Municipal Assistance: a. The LCCD will assist the municipality with environmental problems, permit applications and resource management issues within the scope of the LCCD's role under the Chapter 92 and Chapter 102 programs. The LCCD will enlist assistance from cooperating agencies when appropriate. b. The LCCD will provide an invitation to the municipality to all appropriate educational events. C. At the request of the municipality, the LCCD will review appropriate sections of municipal stormwater management and subdivision and land development ordinances and make recommendations for consistency with current Chapter 102 regulations and NPDES Permit requirements. d. Meetings: I. The LCCD will invite the municipality to all scheduled pre-application meetings. Where the LCCD is not the entity organizing the meeting, the LCCD will recommend to the meeting organizer that the municipality be invited. Attendance and choice of representative is at the discretion of the municipality. II. LCCD staff, will schedule to meet with municipal representatives as requested to provide information or to discuss issues related to NPDES permitting and Chapter 102 regulations. III. LCCD staff, where appropriate, will notify the municipality of any site meetings related to inspections, violations or complaints and invite the municipality to attend these meetings. MUNICIPAL RESPONSIBILITIES: In carrying out the intent of this Memorandum, the municipality shall: 1. Resources and Information: a. Inform those involved with earth disturbance activities of any Erosion and Sediment Pollution Control and NPDES permitting requirements involving municipal ordinances. b. Refer responsible parties to LCCD's E&S Control Plan/Chapter 102 Permit Review Application and Fee Schedule for all proposed earth disturbance projects that require review and approval in accordance with the provisions of the municipal ordinance. The municipality shall provide instructions as necessary to have the E&S plans submitted to the LCCD. C. Distribute educational information about the LCCD's programs and provide contact information to the public for the LCCD. d. Retain all correspondence from the LCCD including copies of inspection reports, permit authorizations, denials and withdrawals, notices of violations; E&S plan approvals and other correspondence needed by the municipality for MS4 permit documentation or other municipal purposes. 4 2. Notice and Referral to the District: a. Forward complaints involving earth disturbance activities to the LCCD within 10 calendar days of receipt for inspection. b. Forward all questions related to the preparation of E&S plans and NPDES permit applications to the LCCD. C. Notify the LCCD of the receipt of a building permit application involving earth disturbance of one acre or more within five (5) working days of receipt. (Required under 25 PA Code $102.42). d. Forward to the LCCD an Act 167 consistency letter to confirm that the proposed projects meet the intent of the municipality's S stormwater management ordinance, if covered under an approved Act 167 ordinance. e. Forward to the LCCD copies of municipal engineer review letters when comments pertain to the E&S plans, stormwater management plans, and/or NPDES applications. f. Coordinate pre-application meetings with the LCCD whenever possible. g. Complete Attachment A, contained in this MOU, to better facilitate communications between the municipality and the LCCD. 3. Municipal Approvals and Actions: a. Before issuing any Municipal permits or approvals, with the exception of local stormwater approvals, the municipality will require evidence of an issued Individual NPDES Permit, authorized General NPDES Permit or approved E&S Permit if required, or an approved E&S plan where municipal regulations require an approved E&S plan where NPDES or E&S permits are required. Per Section 102.43, municipalities may not issue building or other permits to applicants proposing earth disturbance activities requiring a permit under Chapter 102. b. Where violations of Chapter 102 or NPDES permitting regulations are discovered, the municipality wili cooperate with the LCCD to document and resolve the violations. Cooperation may entail providing access or copies of approved subdivision or land development plans, issued permits, review comments, revocation of municipal permits and other reasonable measures legally and practically available to the municipality. C. Encourage the preservation and responsible use of all of Lancaster County's natural resources. 5 II. Chapter 105- Dam Safety & Waterway Management PURPOSE: Pennsylvania's Chapter 105 program regulates the waterways and wetlands of the Commonwealth. Chapter 105 establishes the thresholds for permitting requirements for encroachment or obstruction activities to jurisdictional waters and wetlands. The regulations also specify for requirements related to dam and floodway activities. DISTRICT RESPONSIBILITIES: The PA DEP South-Central Regional Office (SCRO) oversees implementation of the Chapter 105 program in Lancaster County. All questions and complaints regarding the Chapter 105 Program should be directed to PA DEP SCRO at aepioiguestionsepaor: MUNICIPAL RESPONSIBILITIES: a. Refer residents to the PA DEP when they have questions on permitting or earth moving activities related to streams, wetlands, ponds, springs or other waters regulated under Chapter 105. b. Distribute fact sheets and other educational materials provided by the DEP. C. Forward any complaints related to the Chapter 105 program to PA DEP SCRO within 10 calendar days of receipt. 6 III. NPDES Municipal Separate Storm Sewer Systems (MS-4 = NPDES Permit PAG-13) PURPOSE: Many municipalities in Lancaster County and the County itself are subject to NPDES permit requirements for Municipal Separate Storm Sewer Systems (MS4). The purpose of this agreement is to coordinate, where possible and desirable, the activities of the municipalities and the county associated with MS4 permit requirements. While not all requirements lend themselves to coordination, several of the requirements are such that coordination will result in decreased compliance cost and greater efficiency for both the municipality and county. The following details the municipal and LCCD responsibilities by Minimum Control Measure (MCM) MCM 1 - PUBLIC EDUCATION AND OUTREACH DISTRICT RESPONSIBILITIES: In carrying out the intent of this memorandum, the LCCD shall, within the limits of its capabilities: a. Distribute an educational publication to developers, contractors, farmers and other stakeholders in Lancaster County, once per permit year at minimum. b. Maintain on the LCCD website, information related to stormwater regulations, educational materials and resources. It is recommended that Municipalities provide a link from the municipal website, ifa available, to the LCCD website. C. Annually, no later than 30 days after the end of the permit year, provide a summary to each regulated municipality of the above activities and any other educational activities conducted by the LCCD that would be applicable for MS4 permit compliance. Where possible, copies of the educational materials, the dates distributed and a summary or list of those the material was distributed to will be included in the summary. MUNICIPAL RESPONSIBILITIES In carrying out the intent of this memorandum, the municipality shall, within the limits of its capabilities: a. Annually, no later than 30 days prior to the end of the permit year, provide a summary to the LCCD of the use and or distribution of educational posters. b. Where practical and applicable, notify the LCCD at least 15 calendar days in advance of municipal public outreach events where the LCCD could play a role in providing public outreach. MCM 2 - PUBLIC PARTICIPATION 7 DISTRICT RESPONSIBILITIES: In carrying out the intent of this memorandum, the District shall, within the limits of its capabilities: a. Notify regulated municipalities of public participation events, as appropriate 30 days prior to the event. MUNICIPAL RESPONSIBILITIES: In carrying out the intent of this memorandum, the municipality shall, within the limits of its capabilities: a. Notify the LCCD of public participation events, as appropriate, at least 30 days prior to the event. MCM 4 - CONSTRUCTION SITE STORMWATER MANAGEMENT DISTRICT RESPONSIBILITIES: In carrying out the intent of this memorandum, the LCCD shall, within the limits of its capabilities: a. Meet all of its responsibilities listed in the E&S section of this MOU. b. Annually, no later than 30 days after the end of the permit year, provide a summary to each regulated municipality of LCCD activities conducted in the municipality. The summary will include: I. The number of sites inspected and the number of inspections conducted. II. The number of complaints received, the number of inspections conducted in response to complaints, and the number of complaints referred to other parties. III. The number of enforcement actions taken. IV. The number of NPDES permits issued. V. The number of E&S plans reviewed. VI. A list of NPDES permits issued with the date of issuance, expirations and permit number. MUNICIPAL RESPONSIBILTIES: In carrying out the intent of this memorandum, the municipality shall, within the limits of its capabilities: a. The municipality will meet all of its responsibilities listed in the E&S section of this MOU. b. Retain all correspondence from the LCCD including copies of inspection reports, permit authorizations, notices of violation; E&S plan approvals and other correspondence needed by the municipality for MS4 documentation purposes. 8 C. Annually provide the LCCD with a list of contacts, their company, address, email and phone number, as to where the municipality would like copies of correspondences sent. d. Provide copies of ordinances related to stormwater management, erosion and sediment control and illicit discharges. The municipality will provide the LCCD with copies of any revised ordinances within 30 days of adoption. IV.A AGRICULTURAL RELATED ACTIVITIES (MANURE MANAGEMENT & EROSION CONTROL) PURPOSE: To conserve the agricultural resources of Lancaster County, by educating local municipalities and the public. This document encompasses but is not limited to, Nutrient Management, erosion control on farms, and compliance related topics. DISTRICT RESPONSIBILITIES: In carrying out the intent of this memorandum, the LCCD is a clearing house of information relating to agricultural farming. The following items are available to municipalities across Lancaster County. a. Administer the State's Act 38 program, also known as the Nutrient Management Law. LCCD staff reviews nutrient management plans, conducts onsite yearly status reviews relating to nutrient application. These plans are developed on an animal density calçulation. Any operation that has over 2.0 Animal Equivalent Units (AEU's)/Acre, is required to have an approved Act 38 Nutrient Management Plan. b. The Commonwealth also requires farmers to have a Manure Management Plan (Chapter 91.36), developed for every farm that produces or applies manure on their ground, no limit on size or scope of operation. Once farm size reaches certain thresholds based on livestock, further requirement for nutrient management may be required (such as Act 38 or CAFO). These plans must be available upon request for review from the andowner/operator on site, but are not required to be submitted for review or approval. C. Erosion and Sediment Control on farming operations: i. The LCCD will oversee PA Code Chapter 102.4(a) (Erosion & Sediment Control) relating to agriculture operations. Chapter 102.4 requires all farming operations that disturb over 5,000 sq. ft. to have a Conservation Plan or Ag E&S plan developed and implemented. This also includes heavy use areas and no-till as earth disturbing practices. These plans must be available upon request for review from the andowner/operator on site, but are not required to be submitted for review or approval. d. The LCCD will offer Technical Assistance for farming operations within the county. This technical assistance can be used by the farming landowner/operator to help with the implementation of BMPs found within their Conservations Plans. When needed, for BMP implementation, a reviewed design packet will accompany, along with spot inspections of construction implementation, and certification. e. Conduct complaint investigations regarding nutrient and sediment pollution events. (See Attachment B) 9 f. When applicable, provide guidance on conservation planning, within the Bio-Solids Program. g. Provide the LCCD wide fee schedule, which includes fees pertinent to agricultural operations. h. Provide the municipality with a reasonable quantity of related resource materials at the request of the municipality. MUNICIPAL RESPONSIBILITIES: In carrying out the intent of this memorandum, within the limits of its capabilities and available resources, the municipality shall: a. Forward to the LCCD (Ag Compliance Coordinator), any agricultural complaint relating to, but not limited to: Nutrient pollution, and sediment pollution. b. The LCCD highly recommends that the municipality require development of these plans before building permits for agricultural operations are approved. The municipality should not release permits to agricultural operations, until those landowners can produce a Nutrient or Manure Management Plan AND Conservation, or Ag E&S Plan. C. Make available to the public any educational materials provided by the LCCD. IV.1 Plain Sect Outreach PURPOSE: The LCCD dedicates an Ag staff person as the 'Plain Sect' Outreach Coordinator. This person has experience working with the 'Plain Sect' community and is available to meet with municipal representatives to provide information related to conservation issues within the 'Plain Sect' community. This staff person is available to meet with individual 'Plain Sect' farmers and can serve as a resource person for any municipal sponsored informational meeting for the agriculture community. DISTRICT RESPONSIBILITIES: a. Provide assistance to the "Plain Sect" community by informing the community on agricultural regulatory requirements and best management farming practices. b. Refer farmers to the appropriate Agricultural Technician within the LCCD for technical guidance and planning. C. Provide assistance to municipalities when they need support in working with the Plain Sect. MUNICIPAL RESPONSIBILITIES: a. Be aware that the Plain Sect Outreach Coordinator position exists and is available for assistance. b. Refer Plain Sect farmers to the LCCD for assistance, when appropriate. 10 V. Education & Outreach PURPOSE: The mission of the LCCD is to promote stewardship of the land, water, and other natural resources; and to make all citizens aware of the interrelationships between human activities and the natural environment; to provide assistance for current efforts in natural resource conservation; and to develop and implement programs which promote the stewardship of natural resources; while enlisting and coordinating help from public and private sources in accomplishing this mission. The education departments ofi the LCCD serve as a beginning point for many of our goals. Educating the public about our county's naturalresources is a primary goal. Through education we can protect, preserve and promote the mission of the LCCD. V.I Watershed Program PURPOSE: The LCCD's Watershed Program goals are to educate, create and foster grassroot volunteer watershed efforts, water quality monitor, and be a resource on all things water related in Lancaster County. The Watershed Coordinator for the LCCD should be used as a resource tool by community members, businesses, schools, and especially municipalities. Items the Watershed Program can deal with include, but are not limited to, stream water quality, wetlands, stormwater education, volunteer conservation efforts, and many additional issues. One of the ultimate goals of the watershed program is to get local streams off the state's list of impaired waterways. This goal can be accomplished through combined efforts from the LCCD, surrounding landowners, businesses, and the municipality. This MOU outlines general areas of cooperation oetween both parties. DISTRICT RESPONSIBILITIES: In carrying out the intent of this memorandum, the LCCD shall, within the limits of its capabilities: a. Help to keep all municipalities informed of local watershed associations/group activities within their jurisdiction. The types of activities these organizations conduct can assist municipalities in their MS4 requirements. (i.e. public education and public participation) b. Provide the municipality with any volunteer water monitoring data that may be gathered for streams within your municipal boundary. All of this data can be found on the Lancaster County Watersheds website, www.lancasterwaterwatersheds.org: under the volunteer monitoring data tab. 11 C. Provide copies of resource and educational materials the LCCD may create. Limited amounts of such copies will be provided at no charge. For larger quantities, the LCCD will provide copies in a format, where practical, suitable for producing copies or at cost. (i.e. stormwater management, riparian buffers, floodplains, water conservation, backyard conservation, and other natural resource issues.) d. Maintain a Lancaster County Watershed website w.hmastraterihdiord that provides current and useful local, regional, and statewide water resources that municipalities can use. (i.e. local watershed plans, list of volunteer watershed groups, stormwater action plans, local TMDL plans, electronic versions of educational publications, and a host of other useful tools.) e. Assist the municipality with watershed or water quality/quantity issues and permit applications that fall within the LCCD's area of expertise. The LCCD will enlist the services of cooperating agencies when necessary. f. Provide the municipality with watershed technical training opportunities and points of contact for LCCD programs. g. Notify municipalities of public participation events, as appropriate 30 days prior to the event. MUNICIPAL RESPONSIBILITIES: In carrying out the intent of this memorandum, the municipallty shall, within the limits of its capabilities: a. Be an active participant in local volunteer watershed groups as they devise ways to educate, restore, or improve the local watershed within your municipality. b. Inform the LCCD of natural resource issues especially those that are water related. C. Where practical and applicable, notify the LCCD at least 30 calendar days in advance of municipal public outreach events where the LCCD could play a role in providing public outreach. d. Cooperate with the LCCD on studies, pilot projects or surveys related to water resource conservation within the municipality. ITIS MUTUALLY AGREED WITHIN THE LIMITS OF ABILITIES AND RESOURCES: a. Both parties will provide for the mutual sharing of information. b. Both parties will supply each other with available maps, geographic information system and computer aided drafting files, printed material, photos/slides, video and displays pertaining to pertinent programs. C. Both parties will work on projects mutually benefiting the LCCD and the municipality. V.2 Education Program 12 PURPOSE: The purpose of this agreement is to define educational programs provided by the LCCD and available to the municipalities and the county. The mission of the LCCD is the stewardship of land, water, and other natural resources. The LCCD administers and participates in a variety of programs to protect and promote the wise use of natural resources. DISTRICT RESPONSIBILITIES: In carrying out the intent of this memorandum, the LCCD shall, within the limits of its capabilities: a. Develop and present lessons and programs designed to address the PA Department of Education Environment and Ecology Standards for teachers, students, community organizations, watershed organizations, and the public within municipalities. b. Publish and distribute educational materials for teachers, students, and the public. C. Provide educational materials requested by municipalities for schools or public outreach. LCCD Education Program Links www.ancasterconservation.org www.lancasterwaterwatersheds.org MUNICIPAL RESPONSIBILITIES: In carrying out the intent of this memorandum, the municipality shall, within the limits of its capabilities: a. Notify the Conservation LCCD when possible and applicable of municipal public outreach activities or events where the LCCD could be of assistance in providing educational presentations or materials. b. Notify the Conservation LCCD of public participation events, as appropriate. C. Post educational materials or programs available from the LCCD, as appropriate. V.3 Agricultural Ombudsman Program PURPOSE: The PA Agricultural Ombudsman Program handles public relations, education and conflict management related to agriculture. The Program offers statewide liaison services to communities on issues affecting agriculture, land use, environment and planning. The Ombudsman Program focuses on pro-active education, but has re-active responsibilities, too. The Agricultural Ombudsman is not an advocate for any particular party, but seeks to achieve a satistactory resolution to disputes through training and education. DISTRICT RESPONSIBILITIES: a. Serve as an intermediary between agricultural producers and municipalities, Conservation Districts and regulatory authorities, and to assist producers in navigating applications and permit and plan review processes to ensure the producer is treated fairly and expeditiously in that process, while ensuring municipalities, Districts and regulatory agencies that the producer has met all the applicable requirements. 13 b. Provide assistance to help municipal officials prepare for meetings expected to attract significant public interest or concern. Sample policies are available for municipalities to review and consider using to ensure an orderly, productive meeting that allows all parties involved to give their input. C. Inform municipalities and residents about current farming practices and help dispel myths about modern agriculture. d. Provide educational materials to help address public concerns about agricultural operations. MUNICIPAL RESPONSIBILITIES: a. Contact the Conservation District seeking services of the Agricultural Ombudsman to assist with conflict management, resulting from the interface of production agriculture and suburban/urban constituents. b. Contact the Conservation District seeking services of the Agricultural Ombudsman to assist with educationali input or non-legal advice regarding impacts on agriculture and the potential for farmer/resident conflicts because of what is currently written or proposed in a municipal ordinance. C. Direct residents to contact the Agricultural Ombudsman when residents are experiencing fly concerns, odor management concerns or other concerns generated by agricultural activities. 14 VI. EXECUTION This Memorandum of Understanding shall become effective only after it has been adopted by vote of the governing bodies of both parties. Signatures must be those of a member of the governing body authorized to sign for the governing body. This Memorandum of Understanding may be terminated by either party for any reason. Termination of this Memorandum of Understanding must be by certified mail. Termination shall become effective 30 days after receipt of the notice of termination. This Memorandum of Understanding shall be reviewed periodically by either or both parties and may be amended by mutual consent of both parties. With the execution of this Memorandum of Understanding any previous Memorandum of Understandings between the Municipality and the District shall be invalid. LANCASTER COUNTY CONSERVATION DISTRICT By: Smiaiaeza Title: Sonia Wasco, Chairwomen Date: January 2025 By: Title: Date: (SIGN AND RETURN THIS PAGE ALONG WITH THE NEXT PAGE, ATTACHMENTA) 15 ATTACHMENT A- Municipal Contact Information Please complete the entire form. Contact information will be used by the LCCD to communicate with your municipal officials throughout the year. Revised for 2025 Municipal Information Municipal Manager: Zoning Officer: Road Master: Municipality Mailing Address: Phone Number Manager's email address: Municipal Engineer Information Municipal Engineer (Name): Engineer's Email Address: Engineering Firm: Firm Mailing Address: 16 ATTACHMENT B COMMON COMPLAINT CONTACTS LIST Complaints that the Lancaster County Conservation District has Authority to Respond to: Soil Erosion from Ag Operations Agricultural Compliance Coordinator, Kevin Seibert Act 38 Nutrient Management Law (717) 874-2524 Agriculture Department Manager, Kevin Lutz (Ifunavailable, see "Other Organizations") (717) 874-2527 OR Soil Erosion from Construction Sites State Conservation Commission E&S Program Manager, Adam Stern Brady Sealy (717) 874-2546 717-705-3895 damstem@lancastereonservation.org Flies Pennsylvania Agriculture Ombudsman Program, E&S Technical Manager, Eric Hout Shelly Dehoff 717-874-2519 (717) 874-2547 erichout@lancasterconservation.org (717) 880-0848 (If unavailable, see "Other Organizations") ShelyDehott@lancasterconsenation.org Manure Biosolids Agriculture Compliance Coordinator, Kevin Seibert Kevin Seibert, Agriculture Compliance Coordinator (717) 874-2524 (717) 874-2524 (If unavailable, see "Other Organizations") (If unavailable, see "Other Organizations") Complaints that Other Organizations have the Authority to Respond to: Storm Water Biosolids Local Borough or Townships PA Dept of Environmental Protection Eric Laur, Soil Scientist (717) 507-4773 Invasive Species (plant or insects) PA: Dept of Agriculture Region VI Office 717-772-5209 OR Some Local Borough or Townships Dead Animal (Mortality) Disposal PA Dept of Agriculture Region VI Office Dr. Aliza Simeone (717) 443-1199 asimeone@pa.gov Suzette Thompson (717) 443-1189 suthompson@pa.govy Fax: 717-787-1868 Environmental Emergency (Situation requiring an immediate response) PA DEP Emergency Response Hotline 1-800-541-2050 17 1RC MOUNT JOY BOROUGH OTHER POSTEMPLOYMENT BENEFITS PROGRAM GASB 75 DISCLOSURE INFORMATION FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDING DECEMBER 31, 2024 INTERIM UPDATE Valuation Date: January 1, 2023 Measurement Date: December 31, 2024 Fiscal Year End Date: December 31, 2024 FOSTER & FOSTER ACTUARIES AND coN SuL TANT 75 FOSTER & FOSTER ACTUARIES ANp DONS SULTANTS March 14, 2025 Mr. Mark Pugliese Borough Manager Mount Joy Borough 21 E. Main Street Mount Joy, PA 17552 Re: Mount Joy Borough - FYE December 31, 2024 GASB 75 Report Dear Mr. Pugliese: We are pleased to present to the Borough this report oft the annual actuarial valuation of Mount Joy Borough's Police Other Postemployment Benefits (OPEB) Program. This valuation was performed to determine annual expenses associated with providing OPEB benefits, the current funded status of the Plan, and to provide all necessary schedules required to comply with the Governmental Accounting Standards Board No. 75. The measurements shown in this actuarial valuation may not be applicable for other purposes. Future actuarial measurements may differ significantly from the current measurements presented in this report due to such factors as the following: retiree group benefits plan experience differing from that anticipated by the assumptions; changes in assumptions; increases or decreases expected as part oft the natural operation oft the methodology used for these measurements (such as the end of an amortization period); and changes in retiree group benefits plan provisions or applicable law. Retiree group benefits models necessarily rely on the use ofa approximations and estimates and are sensitive to changes in these approximations and estimates. Small variations in these approximations and estimates may lead to significant changes in actuarial measurements. Due to the limited scope of this report, we did not provide an analysis of these potential differences. The funded status measurements included in this report are based on the assumptions and methods used to determine the Plan's obligations and asset values as of the Measurement Date. Funded status measurements for financial accounting purposes may not be appropriate for assessing the sufficiency of Plan assets to cover the estimated cost of settling the Plan's benefit obligations. Likewise, funded status measurements for financial accounting purposes may not be appropriate for assessing the need for orthe amount of future actuarially determined contributions. Foster & Foster does not provide legal, investment or accounting advice. Thus, the information in this report is not intended to supersede or supplant the advice or the interpretations of the Borough or its affiliated legal, investing or accounting partners. 1605 N. Cedar Crest Blvd., Suite 510, Allentown, PA 18104 (610) 435-9577 Fax (239) 481-0634 www.foster-foster.com March 14, 2025 Page 3 The valuation has been conducted in accordance with generally accepted actuarial principles and practices, including the applicable Actuarial Standards of Practice as issued by the Actuarial Standards Board, and we believe it reflects all applicable federal laws and regulations. In our opinion, the assumptions used in this valuation represent reasonable expectations of anticipated plan experience. In performing the analysis, we used third-party software to model (calculate) the underlying liabilities and costs. These results are reviewed in the aggregate and for individual sample lives. The output from the software is either used directly or input into internally developed models to generate the costs. All internally developed models are reviewed as part of the process. As a result of this review, we believe that the models have produced reasonable results. We do not believe there are any material inconsistencies among assumptions or unreasonable output produced due to the aggregation of assumptions. In conducting the valuation, we have relied on personnel and plan design information supplied by Borough personnel, and the actuarial assumptions and methods described in the Actuarial Assumptions section of this report. While we cannot verify the accuracy of all this information, the supplied information was reviewed for consistency and reasonableness. Because ofthis review, we have no reason to doubt the substantial accuracy of the information and believe that it has produced appropriate results. This information, along with any adjustments or modifications, is summarized in various sections of this report. The total OPEB liability and certain sensitivity information shown in this report are based on an actuarial valuation performed as of January 1, 2023, and certain results were projected to the Measurement Date using generally accepted actuarial methods. It is our opinion that the assumptions used for this purpose are internally consistent, reasonable, and comply with the requirements under GASB No. 75. The undersigned are familiar with the immediate and long-term aspects of OPEB valuations and meet the Qualification Standards of the American Academy of Actuaries necessary to render the actuarial opinions contained herein. AIl the sections of this report are considered an integral part of the actuarial opinions. To our knowledge, no associate of Foster & Foster, Inc. working on valuations ofthe program has any direct financial interest or indirect material interest in Mount Joy Borough, nor does anyone at Foster & Foster, Inc. act as a member of the Mount Joy Borough Council . Thus, there is no relationship existing that might affect our capacity to prepare and certify this actuarial report. 16051 N. Cedar Crest Blvd., Suite 510, Allentown, PA 18104 . (610) 435-9577 Fax (239) 481-0634 www.foster-foster.com March 14, 2025 Page 4 If there are any questions, concerns, or comments about any of the items contained in this report, please contact us at 610 435-9577. Respectfully submitted, Foster & Foster, Inc. - / bagiba By: Bradley R. Heinrichs, FSA, EA, MAAA Collen M Atduom By: Colleen M. Atchison, FSA, MAAA 1605 N. Cedar Crest Blvd., Suite 510, Allentown, PA 18104 * (610) 435-9577 Fax (239) 481-0634 www.foster-foster.om Table of Contents SECTION 1 - EXECUTIVE SUMMARY. 6 SECTION 2 - NOTES TO THE FINANCIAL STATEMENTS 9 SECTION 3 - GASB 75 DISCLOSURE SCHEDULES 12 SECTION 4 - EXPENSE DEVELOPMENT AND AMORTIZATION SCHEDULES 14 SECTION 5 = PER CAPITA CLAIMS COSTS AND CONTRIBUTION AMOUNTS 18 SECTION 6 - MEMBER STATISTICS 19 SECTION 7 = ACTUARIAL ASSUMPTIONS AND FUNDING METHODS 21 SECTION 8 - SUMMARY OF PLAN PROVISIONS 26 SECTION 1 - Executive Summary SECTION 1 - EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The valuation results presented in this report have been prepared in accordance with the Government Accounting Standards Board Statement 75 (GASB 75) for Mount Joy Borough's Other Postemployment Benefits (OPEB) Program offered to Police, based on the actuarial valuation performed as of January 1, 2023. For purposes of this valuation, Medical Insurance OPEBs were taken into consideration. Premiums for the Dental and Vision insurances are assumed to cover the entire cost oft the respective benefits. The results of this valuation are based on a Measurement Date of December 31, 2024 and are applicable to the fiscal year ending December 31, 2024. The following table shows the key components of the Borough's OPEB valuation for the fiscal year ending December 31, 2024 under GASB 75. Actuarial Present Value of Projected Benefits as of. January 1, 2023: $7,826,744 Valuation Date January 1, 2023 January 1, 2023 Fiscal Year End Date December 31, 2024 December 31, 2023 Total OPEB Liability as ofthe Measurement Date $ 6,458,141 $ 6,458,663 OPEB Expense For the Fiscal Year $ 236,659 $ 231,142 Covered Employee Payroll (Projected) $ 913,289 $ 869,799 ** Borough's Total OPEB Liability as a percentage of Covered Employee Payroll 707.13% 742.55% Census Information as ofthe Valuation Date: Active Participants 8 8 Retirees, Beneficiaries, and Disabled Members 8 8 Covered Spouses 6 6 Total Participants 22 22 ** * This represents a correction from the fiscal year end 12/31/2023 report. 6Foster & Foster SECTION 1 - Executive Summary Covered payroll is actual calendar year 2023 covered payroll provided by Borough personnel projected to the measurement date using applicable salary increase assumptions. Borough Funding Policy: The Plan is not funded through a Trust. The contributions made to the program are assumed to be the benefits paid to retirees and administrative expenses. Notes on the Valuation: The following changes have been made since the prior valuation: The GASB 75 discount rate as of the measurement date is 4.28%. The GASB 75 discount rate is based on the S&P 20-year municipal bond rate published as of December 31, 2024. All other assumptions remain unchanged from the prior report issued for the fiscal year ending December 31, 2023. 7Foster & Foster SECTION 1 - Executive Summary Governmental Accounting Standard No. 75: GASB 75 requires governmental employers to recognize the Net OPEB Liability and the OPEB expense in their financial statements, along with the related deferred outflows and inflows of resources. GASB 75 is similar to GASB 68 for pensions. Under GASB 75, the Net OPEB Liability is the difference between the Total OPEB Liability (i.e. Actuarial Accrued Liability) and the Plan's Fiduciary Net Position (i.e. assets). For unfunded plans, the OPEB liability recorded on the employer's balance sheet is equal to the Total OPEB Liability. The balance of this report presents additional details of the actuarial valuation and the general operation of the Fund. The undersigned would be pleased to meet with the Borough to discuss the report and any pending questions concerning its contents. Respectfully submitted, FOSTER & FOSTER, INC. bapaiak By: Bradley R. Heinrichs, FSA, EA, MAAA Callen MAtcon By: Colleen M. Atchison, FSA, MAAA 8Foster & Foster SECTION 2 - Notes to Financial Statements SECTION 2 -1 NOTES TO THE FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (For the Year Ended December 31, 2024) GENERAL INFORMATION ABOUT THE OPEB PLAN Plan Description: Mount Joy Borough's Retiree Health Care Plan (Plan) is a single employer defined benefit postemployment health care plan that covers eligible retired Police employees ofthe Borough. The Plan, which is administered by the Borough, allows Police employees who retire and meet retirement eligibility requirements under one of the Borough' 's retirement plans to continue health insurance coverage as a participant in the Borough's plan. For purposes of applying Paragraph 4 under Statement No. 75, Accounting and Financial Reporting for Postemployment Benefits Other Than Pensions, the Plan does not meet the requirements for an OPEB plan administered through a trust. Employees Covered by Benefit Terms: At January 1, 2023, the following employees were covered by the benefit terms: Inactive Plan Members, or. Beneficiaries Currently Receiving Benefits 8 Inactive Plan Members Entitled to But Not Yet Receiving Benefits Active Plan Members 8 16 Benefits Provided: A retired employee and his or her spouse are eligible to continue medical, dental and vision insurance identical to active employees, including a Health Reimbursement Account (HRA), if they meet the eligibility for retirement under the applicable retirement plan. If retire prior to January 1, 2011, no retiree contribution is required. Ifretire on or after January 1, 2011, the retiree and spouse are responsible for paying the same contribution that was in effective for actives at the time of retirement. The spouse's contribution amount may not exceed $115 per month. Surviving spouses may stay in coverage provided he/she contributes the amount the retiree contributed prior to death. The contribution amounts remain constant until Medicare eligibility, at which time there is no longer a contribution. Ifhired prior to January 1, 2014, coverage continues for the life oft the retiree and spouse. Ifhired on or after January 1, 2014, coverage continues for a period of 5 years following the date of retirement. Ifhired on or after January 1, 2018, retiree coverage is not provided. 9Foster & Foster SECTION 2 - Notes to Financial Statements TOTAL OPEB LIABILITY The measurement date is December 31, 2024. The measurement period for the OPEB expense was January 1, 2024 to December 31, 2024. The reporting period is January 1, 2024 through December 31, 2024. The Borough' S Total OPEB Liability was measured as of December 31, 2024. Actuarial Assumptions: The Total OPEB Liability was determined by an actuarial valuation as of. January 1, 2023, updated to December 31, 2024, using the following actuarial assumptions: Inflation Rate 2.50% Salary Increase Rate(s) 5.00% Discount Rate 4.28% Initial Trend Rate 8.50% Ultimate Trend Rate 3.45% Years to Ultimate 53 All mortality rates were based on the 2010 Public Safety mortality tables projected 5 years past the valuation date using mortality improvement scale MP-2021. Discount Rate: Given the Borough' S decision not to fund the program, all future benefit payments were discounted using a high-quality municipal bond rate of 4.28%. The high-quality municipal bond rate was based on the S&P Municipal Bond 20 Year High Grade Rate Index as published by S&P Dow Jones Indices nearest the measurement date. The S&P Municipal 20 Year High Grade Rate Index consists of bonds in the S&P Municipal Bond Index with a maturity of 20 years. Eligible bonds must be rated at least AA by Standard and Poor's Ratings Services, Aa2 by Moody's or AA by Fitch. Ift there are multiple ratings, the lowest rating is used. 10Foster & Foster SECTION 2 - Notes to Financial Statements CHANGE IN TOTAL OPEB LIABILITY Increases and (Decreases) in Total OPEB Liability Reporting Period Ending December 31, 2023 $ 6,458,663 Changes for the Year: Service Cost 195,102 Interest 261,437 Differences Between Expected and Actual Experience Changes of Assumptions (219,050) Changes of Benefit Terms Contributions - Employer Benefit Payments (238,011) Other Changes Net Changes (522) Reporting Period Ending December 31, 2024 $ 6,458,141 Changes of Assumptions reflect a change in the discount rate from 4.00% for the reporting period ended December 31, 2023, to 4.28% for the reporting period ended December 31, 2024. Sensitivity ofthe Total OPEB Liability to changes in the Discount Rate: The following presents the Total OPEB Liability of the Borough, as well as what the Borough's Total OPEB Liability would be ifi it were calculated using a discount rate that is one percentage- point lower or one percentage-point higher than the current discount rate: Current 1% Decrease Discount Rate 1% Increase 3.28% 4.28% 5.28% Total OPEB Liability (Asset) $ 7,300,471 $ 6,458,141 $ 5,765,333 Sensitivity ofthe Total OPEB Liability to changes in the Healthcare Cost Trend Rates: The following presents the Total OPEB Liability of the Borough, as well as what the Borough's Total OPEB Liability would be ifit were calculated using healthcare cost trend rates that are one percentage-point lower or one percentage-point higher than the current healthcare cost trend rates: Healthcare Cost 1%. Decrease Trend Rates 1% Increase Total OPEB Liability (Asset) $ 5,593,741 $ 6,458,141 $ 7,521,956 1IFoster & Foster SECTION 3 GASB 75 Disclosure Schedules SECTION 3 = GASB 75 DISCLOSURE SCHEDULES OPEB EXPENSE AND DEFERRED OUTFLOWS OF RESOURCES AND DEFERRED INFLOWS OF RESOURCES RELATED TO OPEB For the year ended December 31, 2024, the Borough will recognize OPEB Expense of $236,659. On December 31, 2024, the Borough reported Deferred Outflows of Resources and Deferred Inflows of Resources related to OPEB from the following sources: Deferred Deferred Outflows of Inflows of Resources Resources Differences Between Expected and Actual Experience $ $ 600,190 Changes of Assumptions 864,640 1,253,609 Total $ 864,640 $ 1,853,799 Amounts reported as Deferred Outflows of Resources and Deferred Inflows of Resources related to OPEB will be recognized in OPEB Expense as follows: Year ended December 31: 2025 $ (221,529) 2026 $ (221,529) 2027 $ (230,465) 2028 $ (263,042) 2029 $ (21,302) Thereafter $ (31,292) 12Foster & Foster SECTION 3 - GASB 75 Disclosure Schedules SCHEDULE OF CHANGES IN THE BOROUGH'S TOTAL OPEB LIABILITY AND RELATED RATIOS Reporting Period Ending 12/31/2024 12/31/2023 Measurement Date 12/31/2024 12/31/2023 Total OPEB Liability Service Cost $ 195,102 $ 175,184 Interest 261,437 250,398 Changes ofBenefit Terms (8,128) Diffèrences Between Expected and Actual Experience (445,527) Changes ofA Assumptions (219,050) 515,464 Benefit Payments (238,011) (215,289) Net Change in Total OPEB Liability (522) 272,102 Total OPEB Liability - Beginning 6,458,663 6,186,561 Total OPEB Liability - Ending $ 6,458,141 $ 6,458,663 Covered Employee Payroll (Projected) 913,289 869,799 Borough's Total OPEB Liability as a Percentage ofCovered Employee Payroll 707.13% 707.19% ** Represents a correction from the fiscal year 12/31/2023 GASB 75 report. Notes to Schedule: Covered payroll is projected to the measurement date based on actual covered payroll as of calendar year 2023 using applicable salary increase assumptions. Changes of assumptions. Changes of assumptions and other inputs reflect the effects of changes in the discount rate each period. The following are the discount rates used in each period: Fiscal Year Ending December 31, 2024: 4.28% Fiscal Year Ending December 31, 2023: 4.00% Fiscal Year Ending December 31, 2022: 4.31% Benefit Payments. The plan sponsor did not provide actual net benefits paid by the Plan for the fiscal year ending on December 31, 2024. Expected net benefit payments produced by the valuation model for the same period are shown in the table above. 13Foster & Foster SECTION 4 - Expense Development and Amortization Schedules SECTION 4 - EXPENSE DEVELOPMENT AND AMORTIZATION SCHEDULES The following information is not required to be disclosed under GASB 75 but is provided for informational purposes. 14Foster & Foster SECTION 4 - Expense Development and Amortization Schedules COMPONENTS OF OPEB EXPENSE (For the Year Ended December 31, 2024) Total OPEB Deferred Deferred OPEB Liability Inflows Outflows Expense Beginning Balance $ 6,458,663 $ 2,112,440 $ 1,120,776 $ Total OPEB Liability Factors: Service Cost 195,102 195,102 Interest 261,437 261,437 Changes in Benefit Terms Ditferences between Expected and Actual Experience with Regard to Economic or Demographic Assumptions Current Year Amortization ofExperience Difference (161,548) (10,120) (151,428) Change in Assumptions About Future Economic or Demographic Factors or Other Inputs (219,050) 219,050 Current Year Amortization ofChange in Assumptions (316,143) (246,016) (70,127) Benefit Payments (238,011) Net change $ (522) $ (258,641) $ (256,136) $ 234,984 Pay-As-You Go Related Costs: Contributions Employer $ 239,686 $ $ $ Benefit Payments (238,011) Administrative Expenses (1,675) 1,675 Other Net change 1,675 Ending Balance $ 6,458,141 $ 1,853,799 $ 864,640 $ 236,659 Notes to Schedule: The Plan is not funded through a trust, however, certain Pay-As-You-Go" related costs must still be considered when developing the OPEB expense. 15Foster & Foster SECTION 4 - Expense Development and Amortization Schedules AMORTIZATION SCHEDULE - DUE TO RECOGNITION OF THE EFFECTS OF ASSUMPTION CHANGES Increase (Decrease) in OPEB Expense Arising fromt the Recognition ofthel Efècts ofChanges ofA Assumptions Measurement Assumption Recognition Year Changes Period (Years) 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2019 $ (400,301) 5.13 $ (10,146) $ $ $ $ $ $ $ 2020 5.13 2021 1,185,964 6.88 172,378 172,378 172,378 151,696 2022 (1,889,964) 6.88 (274,704) (274,704) (274,704) (274,704) (241,740) 2023 515,464 7.00 73,638 73,638 73,638 73,638 73,638 73,636 2024 (219,050) 7.00 (31,293) (31,293) (31,293) (31,293) (31,293) (31,293) (31,292) Net Increase (Decrease) in OPEB Expense $ (70,127) $ (59,981) $ (59,981) $ (80,663) $ (199,395) $ 42,343 $ (31,292) $ 16Foster & Foster SECTION 4 - Expense Development and Amortization Schedules AMORTIZATION SCHEDULE - DUE TO DIFFERENCES BETWEEN EXPECTED AND ACTUAL LAPERIENCE Increase (Decrease) in OPEB Expense Arising fromt the Recognition ofthe Effects ofDiffèrences between) Expected and Actual Experience Diffèrences Between Measurement Expected and Recognition Year Actual Experience Period (Years) 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2019 $ 399,295 5.13 $ 10,120 $ $ $ $ $ $ $ 2020 5.13 2021 (673,561) 6.88 (97,901) (97,901) (97,901) (86,155) 2022 6.88 2023 (445,527) 7.00 (63,647) (63,647) (63,647) (63,647) (63,647) (63,645) 2024 7.00 Net Increase (Decrease) in OPEB Expense $ (151,428) $ (161,548) $ (161,548) $ (149,802) $ (63,647) $ (63,645) $ $ 17/Foster & Foster SECTION 5 - Per Capita Claims Costs and Contribution Amounts SECTION 5 - PER CAPITA CLAIMS COSTS AND CONTRIBUTION AMOUNTS Actual Capital Blue Cross premiums were utilized, because the premiums were based on age. Below is a sampling of unisex per capita premiums provided by Capital Blue Cross. Per Capita Claims Cost Age 12/12022-11/302023 12/12023-11/302024 20 $ 7,035 $ 7,472 25 7,282 7,734 30 8,232 8,743 35 8,863 9,413 40 9,269 9,845 45 10,473 11,124 50 12,953 13,758 55 16,173 17,178 60 19,684 20,907 64 21,758 23,110 Unisex premium rates show below are a sampling of fiscal year 2023 rates. Age Per Capita Claims Cost 20 $ 7,072 25 7,319 30 8,274 35 8,909 40 9,317 45 10,527 50 13,020 55 16,257 60 19,786 64 21,871 1 18Foster & Foster SECTION 6 - Member Statistics SECTION 6 = MEMBER STATISTICS STATISTICAL DATA 1/1/2023 Number of Active Participants Eligible for Retiree Health Benefits U Not Yet Eligible for Retiree Health benefits 8 Total 8 Average Current Age 39.6 Average Age at Employment 26.9 Average Past Service 12.6 Covered Employee Payroll at Valuation Date $ 869,799 Average Salary $ 108,725 Number ofInactives Receiving Benefits Retirees, Beneficiaries, and Disabled Members 8 Covered Spouses 6 Total 14 Average Current Ages Retirees, Beneficiaries, and Disabled Members 58.8 Covered Spouses 56.8 All Inactives 57.9 19Foster & Foster SECTION 6 - Member Statistics ACTIVE AGE AND SERVICE DISTRIBUTION TOTAL PASTSERVICE AGE <1 1-4 5-9 10-14 15-19 20-24 25-29 30-34 35-39 40+ Total <25 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 25-29 0 0 0 0 0 1 30-34 0 ) 1 0 0 0 1 35-39 0 2 2 40-44 0 0 1 0 1 a 2 45-49 0 0 0 0 - 1 1 a 2 50-54 0 ) 0 0 0 0 55-59 0 0 60-64 0 0 65+ 0 0 0 0 0 0 a a ) Total 0 ) 3 2 2 1 U 0 0 8 20Foster & Foster SECTION 7 - Actuarial Assumptions and Funding Methods SECTION 7 - ACTUARIAL ASSUMPTIONS AND FUNDING METHODS ACTUARIAL ASSUMPTIONS Valuation Date January 1, 2023. Measurement Date December 31, 2024. Fiscal Year End December 31, 2024. Discount Rate 4.28%. Based on the December 31, 2024 S&P Municipal Bond 20 Year High Grade Rate Index as published by S&P Dow Jones Indices. Mortality Rates Employees None assumed. Retirees 2010 Public Service Amount Based Male and Female Mortality Tables projected 5 years past the valuation date using Scale MP-2021. Retirement Rates 100% are assumed to retire by age 50 and 25 years of service. Service-incurred disabled employees are assumed to retire immediately. Termination Rates None assumed. Disability Rates None assumed. Inflation 2.50% per year. Salary Inflation 5.0% per year. Marital Status 100% assumed married, with male spouses 3 years older than female spouses. Health Care Participation 100% participation assumed, with 90% electing spouse coverage 21Foster & Foster SECTION 7 - Actuarial Assumptions and Funding Methods Health Care Inflation Non-Medicare Medical & Drug Inflation Fiscal Year Rate 2023-2024 8.50% 2025 7.90% 2026 7.35% 2027 6.75% 2028 6.20% 2029 5.60% 2030 5.05% 2031-2037 4.45% 2038-2039 4.35% 2040 4.30% 2041-2043 4.25% 2044-2046 4.20% 2047-2049 4.15% 2050-2054 4.10% 2055-2060 4.05% 2061-2065 4.00% 2066 3.90% 2067 3.85% 2068 3.80% 2069 3.75% 2070 3.70% 2071 3.65% 2072 3.60% 2073 3.55% 2074 3.50% 2075+ 3.45% 22/Foster & Foster SECTION 7 - Actuarial Assumptions and Funding Methods Medicare Medical & Drug Inflation Fiscal Year Rate 2023-2024 7.50% 2025 6.90% 2026 6.50% 2027 6.10% 2028 5.70% 2029 5.25% 2030 4.45% 2031-2037 4.45% 2038-2039 4.35% 2040 4.30% 2041-2043 4.25% 2044-2046 4.20% 2047-2049 4.15% 2050-2054 4.10% 2055-2060 4.05% 2061-2065 4.00% 2066 3.90% 2067 3.85% 2068 3.80% 2069 3.75% 2070 3.70% 2071 3.65% 2072 3.60% 2073 3.55% 2074 3.50% 2075+ 3.45% The above rates reflect recent healthcare trend rate surveys blended with long-term rates. Dental Inflation 0% in 2023 and 2% per year thereafter. Vision inflation 2% per year. HRA inflation 3% per year for 13 years only. Health Claims Non-Medicare claims are based on age adjusted premiums provided by Capital Blue Cross. Dental Claims Developed using the fully insured rates. Vision Claims Developed using the fully insured rates. 23IFoster & Foster SECTION 7 - Actuarial Assumptions and Funding Methods HRA Claims Developed using historical reimbursement amounts. Funding Method Entry Age Cost Method (Level Percentage of Pay). 24Foster & Foster SECTION 7 - Actuarial Assumptions and Funding Methods DISCUSSION OF CENSUS DATA AND ASSUMPTIONS All census information, non-prescribed assumptions, and methods are the same as those used in the prior valuation as of January 1, 2023. 25Foster & Foster SECTION 8 - Summary of Plan Provisions SECTION 8 - SUMMARY OF PLAN PROVISIONS POLICE OPEB PLAN Eligibility Ifhired prior to January 1, 2018, age 50 and 25 years ofservice. Ifhired on or after. January 1, 2018, OPEB is not provided. Disability Ifthe disability is service related, there are no minimum eligibility requirements. The benefits are the same as normalr retirement. Retirees receive the same medical, prescription drug, dental and vision coverages as received when Coverage active (including an HRA) untill Medicare eligible. Upon Medicare eligibility, the benefit becomes reimbursement for a Medicare Supplement plan with prescription drug coverage, which the retiree is responsible for purchasing. Once eligible for Medicare, dental, vision and HRA are not provided. Ifhired prior to January 1, 2014, coverage continues for the life ofthe retiree and spouse. Ifhired on or after January 1, 2014, coverage continues for a period of5 years following the date of retirement. Ifhired on or after. January 1, 2018, retiree coveragei is not provided. Retiree Contribution Ifretire prior to January 1, 2011, no contribution is required. Ifretire on or after. January 1, 2011, retirees must pay the same contribution that was in effect for actives at the time ofretirement. For 2017, the contribution is $104.00 per month. Effèctive. January 1, 2018, the contribution: increases to $114.83 per month. Effective. January 1, 2019, the contribution: increases to $125.67 per month. Effective. January 1, 2020, the contribution mcreases to $136.50 per month. Effective January 1, 2021, the contribution increases to $147.33 per month. Effèctive. January 1, 2022, the contribution; imcreases to $173.33 per month. The contribution amount remains constant untill Medicare eligibility, at which point there is no longer a retiree contribution. Spousal Coverage Yes, provided the same contribution that was in effective for active spouses at the time ofretirement is paid. This amount may not exceed $115 per month. Effèctive. January 1, 2017, the contribution amount is $26 per month. The contribution amount remains constant until Medicare eligibility, at which time there is no longer a contribution. Ifthe spouse elects not to continue in the plan or becomes ineligible due to employment which covers 100% ofthe cost ofcoverage, the spouse may rejoin the plan at any time. Survivor Benefits Yes, ifthe surviving spouse continues to contribute the same amount the retiree contributed priort to death. Ifhired prior to. January 1, 2014, the surviving spouse may stayi in coverage for life. Ifhired on or after. January 1, 2014, the surviving spouse may stay in coverage for a total of5 years from date ofretirement. Ifhired on or after] January 1, 2018, retiree coverage is not provided. Dependent Child Coverage No Life Insurance No 26/Foster & Foster MOUNT JOY BOROUGH OTHER POSTEMPLOYMENT BENEFITS PROGRAM GASB 75 DISCLOSURE INFORMATION FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDING DECEMBER 31, 2024 INTERIM UPDATE Valuation Date: January 1, 2023 Measurement Date: December 31, 2024 Fiscal Year End Date: December 31, 2024 FOSTER & FOSTER ACTUA A RIES NND CONSUATANTS FOSTER & FOSTER ACTUARIES 3 ND ONSULTANT March 14, 2025 Mr. Mark Pugliese Borough Manager Mount Joy Borough 21 E. Main Street Mount Joy, PA 17552 Re: Mount Joy Borough - FYE December 31, 2024 GASB 75 Report Dear Mr. Pugliese: We are pleased to present to the Borough this report of the annual actuarial valuation ofMount Joy Borough's Police Other Postemployment Benefits (OPEB) Program. This valuation was performed to determine annual expenses associated with providing OPEB benefits, the current funded status of the Plan, and to provide all necessary schedules required to comply with the Governmental Accounting Standards Board No. 75. The measurements shown in this actuarial valuation may not be applicable for other purposes. Future actuarial measurements may differ significantly from the current measurements presented in this report due to such factors as the following: retiree group benefits plan experience differing from that anticipated by the assumptions; changes in assumptions; increases or decreases expected as part of the natural operation of the methodology used for these measurements (such as the end of an amortization period); and changes in retiree group benefits plan provisions or applicable law. Retiree group benefits models necessarily rely on the use of approximations and estimates and are sensitive to changes in these approximations and estimates. Small variations in these approximations and estimates may lead to significant changes in actuarial measurements. Due to the limited scope oft this report, we did not provide an analysis of these potential differences. The funded status measurements inçluded in this report are based on the assumptions and methods used to determine the Plan's obligations and asset values as of the Measurement Date. Funded status measurements for financial accounting purposes may not be appropriate for assessing the sufficiency of Plan assets to cover the estimated cost of settling the Plan's benefit obligations. Likewise, funded status measurements for financial accounting purposes may not be appropriate for assessing the need for or the amount of future actuarially determined contributions. Foster & Foster does not provide legal, investment or accounting advice. Thus, the information in this report is not intended to supersede or supplant the advice or the interpretations of the Borough or its affiliated legal, investing or accounting partners. 1605 N. Cedar Crest Blvd., Suite 510, Allentown, PA 18104 . (610) 435-9577 Fax (239) 481-0634 www.foster-foster.com March 14, 2025 Page 3 The valuation has been conducted in accordance with generally accepted actuarial principles and practices, including the applicable Actuarial Standards of Practice as issued by the Actuarial Standards Board, and we believe it reflects all applicable federal laws and regulations. In our opinion, the assumptions used in this valuation represent reasonable expectations of anticipated plan experience. In performing the analysis, we used third-party software to model (calculate) the underlying liabilities and costs. These results are reviewed in the aggregate and for individual sample lives. The output from the software is either used directly or input into internally developed models to generate the costs. All internally developed models are reviewed as part of the process. As a result of this review, we believe that the models have produced reasonable results. We do not believe there are any material inconsistencies among assumptions or unreasonable output produced due to the aggregation ofa assumptions. In conducting the valuation, we have relied on personnel and plan design information supplied by Borough personnel, and the actuarial assumptions and methods described in the Actuarial Assumptions section of this report. While we cannot verify the accuracy of all this information, the supplied information was reviewed for consistency and reasonableness. Because ofthis review, we have no reason to doubt the substantial accuracy of the information and believe that it has produced appropriate results. This information, along with any adjustments or modifications, is summarized in various sections ofthis report. The total OPEB liability and certain sensitivity information shown in this report are based on an actuarial valuation performed as of January 1, 2023, and certain results were projected to the Measurement Date using generally accepted actuarial methods. It is our opinion that the assumptions used for this purpose are internally consistent, reasonable, and comply with the requirements under GASB No. 75. The undersigned are familiar with the immediate and long-term aspects of OPEB valuations and meet the Qualification Standards of the American Academy of Actuaries necessary to render the actuarial opinions contained herein. All the sections of this report are considered an integral part oft the actuarial opinions. To our knowledge, no associate of Foster & Foster, Inc. working on valuations of the program has any direct financial interest or indirect material interest in Mount Joy Borough, nor does anyone at Foster & Foster, Inc. act as a member of the Mount Joy Borough Council . Thus, there is no relationship existing that might affect our capacity to prepare and certify this actuarial report. 1605 N. Cedar Crest Blvd., Suite 510, Allentown, PA 18104 (610) 435-9577 . Fax (239)481-0634 www.foster-foster.com March 14, 2025 Page 4 If there are any questions, concerns, or comments about any oft the items contained in this report, please contact us at 610 435-9577. Respectfully submitted, Foster & Foster, Inc. - bapisk By: Bradley R. Heinrichs, FSA, EA, MAAA Collen MAtcuom By: Colleen M. Atchison, FSA, MAAA 1605 N. Cedar Crest Blvd., Suite 510, Allentown, PA 18104 (610) 435-9577 Fax (239) 481-0634 www.foster-foster.com Table of Contents SECTION 1 - EXECUTIVE SUMMARY. 6 SECTION 2 - NOTES TO THE FINANCIAL STATEMENTS 9 SECTION 3 - GASB 75 DISCLOSURE SCHEDULES 12 SECTION 4 = EXPENSE DEVELOPMENT AND AMORTIZATION SCHEDULES 14 SECTION 5 - PER CAPITA CLAIMS COSTS AND CONTRIBUTION AMOUNTS 18 SECTION 6 - MEMBER STATISTICS 19 SECTION 7 - ACTUARIAL ASSUMPTIONS AND FUNDING METHODS 21 SECTION 8 - SUMMARY OF PLAN PROVISIONS 26 SECTION 1 - Executive Summary SECTION 1 - EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The valuation results presented in this report have been prepared in accordance with the Government Accounting Standards Board Statement 75 (GASB 75) for Mount Joy Borough's Other Postemployment Benefits (OPEB) Program offered to Police, based on the actuarial valuation performed as of January 1, 2023. For purposes of this valuation, Medical Insurance OPEBS were taken into consideration. Premiums for the Dental and Vision insurances are assumed to cover the entire cost oft the respective benefits. The results of this valuation are based on a Measurement Date of December 31, 2024 and are applicable to the fiscal year ending December 31, 2024. The following table shows the key components ofthe Borough's OPEB valuation for the fiscal year ending December 31, 2024 under GASB 75. Actuarial Present Value of Projected Benefits as of. January 1, 2023: $7,826,744 Valuation Date January 1, 2023 January 1, 2023 Fiscal Year End Date December 31, 2024 December 31, 2023 Total OPEB Liability as ofthe Measurement Date $ 6,458,141 $ 6,458,663 OPEB Expense For the Fiscal Year $ 236,659 $ 231,142 Covered Employee Payroll (Projected) $ 913,289 $ 869,799 * Borough's Total OPEB Liability as a percentage of Covered Employee Payroll 707.13% 742.55% Census Information as ofthe Valuation Date: Active Participants 8 8 Retirees, Beneficiaries, and Disabled Members 8 8 Covered Spouses 6 6 Total Participants 22 22 ** This represents a correction from the fiscal year end 12/31/2023 report. 6Foster & Foster SECTION 1 - Executive Summary Covered payroll is actual calendar year 2023 covered payroll provided by Borough personnel projected to the measurement date using applicable salary increase assumptions. Borough Funding Policy: The Plan is not funded through a Trust. The contributions made to the program are assumed to be the benefits paid to retirees and administrative expenses. Notes on the Valuation: The following changes have been made since the prior valuation: The GASB 75 discount rate as of the measurement date is 4.28%. The GASB 75 discount rate is based on the S&P 20-year municipal bond rate published as of December 31, 2024. All other assumptions remain unchanged from the prior report issued for the fiscal year ending December 31, 2023. 7Foster & Foster SECTION 1 - Executive Summary Governmental. Accounting Standard No. 75: GASB 75 requires governmental employers to recognize the Net OPEB Liability and the OPEB expense in their financial statements, along with the related deferred outflows and inflows of resources. GASB 75 is similar to GASB 68 for pensions. Under GASB 75, the Net OPEB Liability is the difference between the' Total OPEB Liability (i.e. Actuarial Accrued Liability) and the Plan's Fiduciary Net Position (i.e. assets). For unfunded plans, the OPEB liability recorded on the employer's balance sheet is equal to the Total OPEB Liability. The balance of this report presents additional details of the actuarial valuation and the general operation of the Fund. The undersigned would be pleased to meet with the Borough to discuss the report and any pending questions concerning its contents. Respectfully submitted, FOSTER & FOSTER, INC. bapaak By: Bradley R. Heinrichs, FSA, EA, MAAA Callen MAtcom By: Colleen M. Atchison, FSA, MAAA 8Foster & Foster SECTION 2 - Notes to Financial Statements SECTION 2 - NOTES TO THE FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (For the Year Ended December 31, 2024) GENERAL INFORMATION ABOUT THE OPEB PLAN Plan Description: Mount Joy Borough's Retiree Health Care Plan (Plan) is a single employer defined benefit postemployment health care plan that covers eligible retired Police employees ofthe Borough. The Plan, which is administered by the Borough, allows Police employees who retire and meet retirement eligibility requirements under one ofthe Borough's retirement plans to continue health insurance coverage as a participant in the Borough's plan. For purposes of applying Paragraph 4 under Statement No. 75, Accounting and Financial Reporting for Postemployment Benefits Other Than Pensions, the Plan does not meet the requirements for an OPEB plan administered through a trust. Employees Covered by Benefit Terms. At January 1, 2023, the following employees were covered by the benefit terms: Inactive Plan Members, or Beneficiaries Currently Receiving Benefits 8 Inactive Plan Members Entitled to But Not Yet Receiving Benefits Active Plan Members 8 16 Benefits Provided: A retired employee and his or her spouse are eligible to continue medical, dental and vision insurance identical to active employees, including a Health Reimbursement Account (HRA), if they meet the eligibility for retirement under the applicable retirement plan. If retire prior to January 1, 2011, no retiree contribution is required. Ifretire on or after January 1, 2011, the retiree and spouse are responsible for paying the same contribution that was in effective for actives at the time of retirement. The spouse's contribution amount may not exceed $115 per month. Surviving spouses may stay in coverage provided he/she contributes the amount the retiree contributed prior to death. The contribution amounts remain constant until Medicare eligibility, at which time there is no longer a contribution. Ifhired prior to January 1, 2014, coverage continues for the life of the retiree and spouse. Ifhired on or after January 1, 2014, coverage continues for a period of 5 years following the date of retirement. Ifhired on or after January 1, 2018, retiree coverage is not provided. 9Foster & Foster SECTION 2 Notes to Financial Statements TOTAL OPEB LIABILITY The measurement date is December 31, 2024. The measurement period for the OPEB expense was January 1, 2024 to December 31, 2024. The reporting period is January 1, 2024 through December 31, 2024. The Borough' S Total OPEB Liability was measured as of December 31, 2024. Actuarial, Assumptions: The Total OPEB Liability was determined by an actuarial valuation as of. January 1, 2023, updated to December 31, 2024, using the following actuarial assumptions: Inflation Rate 2.50% Salary Increase Rate(s) 5.00% Discount Rate 4.28% Initial Trend Rate 8.50% Ultimate Trend Rate 3.45% Years to Ultimate 53 All mortality rates were based on the 2010 Public Safety mortality tables projected 5 years past the valuation date using mortality improvement scale MP-2021. Discount Rate: Given the Borough' S decision not to fund the program, all future benefit payments were discounted using a high-quality municipal bond rate of 4.28%. The high-quality municipal bond rate was based on the S&P Municipal Bond 20 Year High Grade Rate Index as published by S&P Dow Jones Indices nearest the measurement date. The S&P Municipal 20 Year High Grade Rate Index consists of bonds in the S&P Municipal Bond Index with a maturity of 20 years. Eligible bonds must be rated at least AA by Standard and Poor's Ratings Services, Aa2 by Moody's or AA by Fitch. If there are multiple ratings, the lowest rating is used. 10/Foster & Foster SECTION 2 - Notes to Financial Statements CHANGE IN TOTAL OPEB LIABILITY Increases and (Decreases) in Total OPEB Liability Reporting Period Ending December 31, 2023 $ 6,458,663 Changes for the Year: Service Cost 195,102 Interest 261,437 Differences Between Expected and Actual Experience Changes of Assumptions (219,050) Changes ofBenefit Terms Contributions - Employer Benefit Payments (238,011) Other Changes Net Changes (522) Reporting Period Ending December 31, 2024 $ 6,458,141 Changes of Assumptions reflect a change in the discount rate from 4.00% for the reporting period ended December 31, 2023, to 4.28% for the reporting period ended December 31, 2024. Sensitivity ofthe Total OPEB Liability to changes in the Discount Rate: The following presents the Total OPEB Liability of the Borough, as well as what the Borough's Total OPEB Liability would be ifit were calculated using a discount rate that is one percentage- point lower or one percentage-point higher than the current discount rate: Current 1% Decrease Discount Rate 1% Increase 3.28% 4.28% 5.28% Total OPEB Liability (Asset) $ 7,300,471 $ 6,458,141 $ 5,765,333 Sensitivity ofthe Total OPEB Liability to changes in the Healthcare Cost Trend Rates: The following presents the Total OPEB Liability of the Borough, as well as what the Borough's Total OPEB Liability would be ifit were calculated using healthcare cost trend rates that are one percentage-point lower or one percentage-point higher than the current healthcare cost trend rates: Healthcare Cost 1% Decrease Trend Rates 1% Increase Total OPEB Liability (Asset) $ 5,593,741 $ 6,458,141 $ 7,521,956 11Foster & Foster SECTION 3 - GASB 75 Disclosure Schedules SECTION 3 - GASB 75 DISCLOSURE SCHEDULES OPEB EXPENSE AND DEFERRED OUTFLOWS OF RESOURCES AND DEFERRED INFLOWS OF RESOURCES RELATED TO OPEB For the year ended December 31, 2024, the Borough will recognize OPEB Expense of $236,659. On December 31, 2024, the Borough reported Deferred Outflows of Resources and Deferred Inflows of Resources related to OPEB from the following sources: Deferred Deferred Outflows of Inflows of Resources Resources Differences Between Expected and Actual Experience $ $ 600,190 Changes of Assumptions 864,640 1,253,609 Total $ 864,640 $ 1,853,799 Amounts reported as Deferred Outflows of Resources and Deferred Inflows of Resources related to OPEB will be recognized in OPEB Expense as follows: Year ended December 31: 2025 $ (221,529) 2026 $ (221,529) 2027 $ (230,465) 2028 $ (263,042) 2029 $ (21,302) Thereafter $ (31,292) 12/Foster & Foster SECTION 3 - GASB 75 Disclosure Schedules SCHEDULE OF CHANGES IN THE BOROUGH'S TOTAL OPEB LIABILITY AND RELATED RATIOS Reporting Period Ending 12/31/2024 12/31/2023 Measurement Date 12/31/2024 12/31/2023 Total OPEB Liability Service Cost $ 195,102 $ 175,184 Interest 261,437 250,398 Changes ofBenefit Terms (8,128) Differences Between Expected and Actual Experience (445,527) Changes ofAssumptions (219,050) 515,464 Benefit Payments (238,011) (215,289) Net Change in Total OPEB Liability (522) 272,102 Total OPEB Liability - Beginning 6,458,663 6,186,561 Total OPEB Liability - Ending $ 6,458,141 $ 6,458,663 Covered Employee Payroll (Projected) 913,289 869,799 * * Borough's Total OPEB Liability as a Percentage ofCovered Employee Payroll 707.13% 707.19% ** Represents a correction from the fiscal year 12/31/2023 GASB 75 report. Notes to Schedule: Covered payroll is projected to the measurement date based on actual covered payroll as of calendar year 2023 using applicable salary increase assumptions. Changes of assumptions. Changes of assumptions and other inputs reflect the effects of changes in the discount rate each period. The following are the discount rates used in each period: Fiscal Year Ending December 31, 2024: 4.28% Fiscal Year Ending December 31, 2023: 4.00% Fiscal Year Ending December 31, 2022: 4.31% Benefit Payments. The plan sponsor did not provide actual net benefits paid by the Plan for the fiscal year ending on December 31, 2024. Expected net benefit payments produced by the valuation model for the same period are shown in the table above. 13Foster & Foster SECTION 4 a Expense Development and Amortization Schedules SECTION 4 = EXPENSE DEVELOPMENT AND AMORTIZATION SCHEDULES The following information is not required to be disclosed under GASB 75 but is provided for informational purposes. 14Foster & Foster SECTION 4 - Expense Development and Amortization Schedules COMPONENTS OF OPEB EXPENSE (For the Year Ended December 31, 2024) Total OPEB Deferred Deferred OPEB Liability Inflows Outflows Expense Beginning Balance $ 6,458,663 $ 2,112,440 $ 1,120,776 $ Total OPEB Liability Factors: Service Cost 195,102 195,102 Interest 261,437 261,437 Changes in Benefit Terms Differences between Expected and Actual Experience with Regard to Economic or Demographic Assumptions Current Year Amortization ofExperience Difference (161,548) (10,120) (151,428) Change in Assumptions About Future Economic or Demographic Factors or Other Inputs (219,050) 219,050 Current Year Amortization ofChange in Assumptions (316,143) (246,016) (70,127) Benefit Payments (238,011) Net change $ (522) $ (258,641) $ (256,136) $ 234,984 Pay-As-You Go Related Costs: Contributions Employer $ 239,686 $ $ $ Benefit Payments (238,011) Administrative Expenses (1,675) 1,675 Other Net change 1,675 Ending Balance $ 6,458,141 $ 1,853,799 $ 864,640 $ 236,659 Notes to Schedule: The Plan is not funded through a trust, however, certain Pay-As-You-Go" related costs must still be considered when developing the OPEB expense. 15IFoster & Foster SECTION 4 - Expense Development and Amortization Schedules AMORTIZATION SCHEDULE - DUE' TO RECOGNITION OF THE EFFECTS OF ASSUMPTION CHANGES Increase (Decrease) in OPEB Expense Arising fomt the Recognition ofthe Effècts ofChanges ofAssumptions Measurement Assumption Recognition Year Changes Period (Years) 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2019 $ (400,301) 5.13 $ (10,146) $ $ $ $ $ $ $ 2020 5.13 2021 1,185,964 6.88 172,378 172,378 172,378 151,696 2022 (1,889,964) 6.88 (274,704) (274,704) (274,704) (274,704) (241,740) 2023 515,464 7.00 73,638 73,638 73,638 73,638 73,638 73,636 2024 (219,050) 7.00 (31,293) (31,293) (31,293) (31,293) (31,293) (31,293) (31,292) Net Increase (Decrease) in OPEB Expense $ (70,127) $ (59,981) $ (59,981) $ (80,663) $ (199,395) $ 42,343 $ (31,292) $ 16/Foster & Foster SECTION 4 - Expense Development and Amortization Schedules AMORTIZATION SCHEDULE - DUE TO DIFFERENCES BETWEEN EXPECTED AND ACTUAL EXPERIENCE Increase (Decrease). in OPEB Expense Arismng fromt the Recognition ofthe Effècts ofDiffèrences between. Expected and Actual Experience Diffèrences Between Measurement Expected and Recognition Year Actual) Experience Period (Years) 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2019 $ 399,295 5.13 $ 10,120 $ $ $ $ $ $ $ 2020 5.13 2021 (673,561) 6.88 (97,901) (97,901) (97,901) (86,155) 2022 6.88 2023 (445,527) 7.00 (63,647) (63,647) (63,647) (63,647) (63,647) (63,645) 2024 7.00 Net Increase (Decrease) in OPEBI Expense $ (151,428) $ (161,548) $ (161,548) $ (149,802) $ (63,647) $ (63,645) $ $ 17/Foster & Foster SECTION 5 - Per Capita Claims Costs and Contribution Amounts SECTION 5 - PER CAPITA CLAIMS COSTS AND CONTRIBUTION AMOUNTS Actual Capital Blue Cross premiums were utilized, because the premiums were based on age. Below is a sampling of unisex per capita premiums provided by Capital Blue Cross. Per Capita Claims Cost Age 12/12022-11/302023 12/12023-11/302024 20 $ 7,035 $ 7,472 25 7,282 7,734 30 8,232 8,743 35 8,863 9,413 40 9,269 9,845 45 10,473 11,124 50 12,953 13,758 55 16,173 17,178 60 19,684 20,907 64 21,758 23,110 Unisex premium rates show below are a sampling of fiscal year 2023 rates. Age Per Capita Claims Cost 20 $ 7,072 25 7,319 30 8,274 35 8,909 40 9,317 45 10,527 50 13,020 55 16,257 60 19,786 64 21,871 - 18Foster & Foster SECTION 6 - Member Statistics SECTION 6- = MEMBER STATISTICS STATISTICAL DATA 1/1/2023 Number ofActive Participants Eligible for Retiree Health Benefits 0 Not Yet Eligible for Retiree Health benefits 8 Total 8 Average Current Age 39.6 Average Age at Employment 26.9 Average Past Service 12.6 Covered Employee Payroll at Valuation Date $ 869,799 Average Salary $ 108,725 Number ofInactives Receiving Benefits Retirees, Beneficiaries, and Disabled Members 8 Covered Spouses 6 Total 14 Average Current Ages Retirees, Beneficiaries, and Disabled Members 58.8 Covered Spouses 56.8 Alll Inactives 57.9 19IFoster & Foster SECTION 6 - Member Statistics ACTIVE AGE AND SERVICE DISTRIBUTION TOTAL PAST SERVICE AGE <1 1-4 5-9 10-14 15-19 20-24 25-29 30-34 35-39 40+ Total <25 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 25-29 0 a 1 0 0 0 à 1 30-34 0 0 I 35-39 0 U 2 ) 2 40-44 0 0 I 0 I 0 à ) ) a 2 45-49 0 0 0 0 I - ) à 0 2 50-5 54 0 . ) a a 0 55-59 0 0 60-64 0 0 0 0 ) 0 0 1 0 a 0 65+ 0 0 ) 0 0 0 0 ) U 0 Total 0 ) 3 2 2 1 0 U 8 20Foster & Foster SECTION 7 - Actuarial Assumptions and Funding Methods SECTION 7 - ACTUARIAL ASSUMPTIONS AND FUNDING METHODS ACTUARIAL ASSUMPTIONS Valuation Date January 1, 2023. Measurement Date December 31, 2024. Fiscal Year End December 31, 2024. Discount Rate 4.28%. Based on the December 31, 2024 S&P Municipal Bond 20 YearH High Grade Rate Index as published by S&P Dow Jones Indices. Mortality Rates Employees None assumed. Retirees 2010 Public Service Amount Based Male and Female Mortality Tables projected 5 years past the valuation date using Scale MP-2021. Retirement Rates 100% are assumed to retire by age 50 and 25 years of service. Service-incurred disabled employees are assumed to retire immediately. Termination Rates None assumed. Disability Rates None assumed. Inflation 2.50% per year. Salary Inflation 5.0% per year. Marital Status 100% assumed married, with male spouses 3 years older than female spouses. Health Care Participation 100% participation assumed, with 90% electing spouse coverage 21Foster & Foster SECTION 7 - Actuarial Assumptions and Funding Methods Health Care Inflation Non-Medicare Medical & Drug Inflation Fiscal Year Rate 2023-2024 8.50% 2025 7.90% 2026 7.35% 2027 6.75% 2028 6.20% 2029 5.60% 2030 5.05% 2031-2037 4.45% 2038-2039 4.35% 2040 4.30% 2041-2043 4.25% 2044-2046 4.20% 2047-2049 4.15% 2050-2054 4.10% 2055-2060 4.05% 2061-2065 4.00% 2066 3.90% 2067 3.85% 2068 3.80% 2069 3.75% 2070 3.70% 2071 3.65% 2072 3.60% 2073 3.55% 2074 3.50% 2075+ 3.45% 22Foster & Foster SECTION 7 - Actuarial Assumptions and Funding Methods Medicare Medical & Drug Inflation Fiscal Year Rate 2023-2024 7.50% 2025 6.90% 2026 6.50% 2027 6.10% 2028 5.70% 2029 5.25% 2030 4.45% 2031-2037 4.45% 2038-2039 4.35% 2040 4.30% 2041-2043 4.25% 2044-2046 4.20% 2047-2049 4.15% 2050-2054 4.10% 2055-2060 4.05% 2061-2065 4.00% 2066 3.90% 2067 3.85% 2068 3.80% 2069 3.75% 2070 3.70% 2071 3.65% 2072 3.60% 2073 3.55% 2074 3.50% 2075+ 3.45% The above rates reflect recent healthcare trend rate surveys blended with long-term rates. Dental Inflation 0% in 2023 and 2% per year thereafter. Vision inflation 2% per year. HRA inflation 3% per year for 13 years only. Health Claims Non-Medicare claims are based on age adjusted premiums provided by Capital Blue Cross. Dental Claims Developed using the fully insured rates. Vision Claims Developed using the fully insured rates. 23Foster & Foster SECTION 7 Actuarial Assumptions and Funding Methods HRA Claims Developed using historical reimbursement amounts. Funding Method Entry Age Cost Method (Level Percentage of Pay). 24Foster & Foster SECTION 7 - Actuarial Assumptions and Funding Methods DISCUSSION OF CENSUS DATA AND ASSUMPTIONS All census information, non-prescribed assumptions, and methods are the same as those used in the prior valuation as of January 1, 2023. 25Foster & Foster SECTION 8 Summary of Plan Provisions SECTION 8 - SUMMARY OF PLAN PROVISIONS POLICE OPEB PLAN Eligibility Ifhired prior to. January 1, 2018, age 50 and 25 years ofservice. Ifhired on or after January 1, 2018, OPEBi is not provided. Disability Ifthe disability is service related, there are no minimum eligibility requirements. Thel benefits are the same as normalt retirement. Retirees receive the same medical, prescription drug, dental and vision coverages as received when Coverage active (including anl HRA) until Medicare eligible. Upon Medicare eligibility, the benefit becomes reimbursement for a Medicare Supplement plan with prescription drug coverage, which the retiree isi responsible for purchasing Once eligible for Medicare, dental, vision and HRA are not provided. Ifhired priort to January 1, 2014, coverage continues for the life ofthe retiree and spouse. Ifhired on or after. January 1, 2014, coverage continues for a period of5 years following the date of retirement. Ifhired onor after. January 1, 2018, retiree coverage is not provided. Retiree Contribution Ifretire prior to January 1, 2011, no contribution: is required. Ifretire on or after. January 1, 2011, retirees must pay the same contribution that was in effect for actives at the time ofretirement. For 2017, the contribution is $104.00 per month. Effèctive. January 1, 2018, the contribution increases to $114.83 per month. Efèctive January 1, 2019, the contribution: increases to $125.67 per month. Effective January 1, 2020, the contribution increases to $136.50 per month. Effèctive January 1, 2021, the contribution increases to $147.33 per month. Efective January 1, 2022, the contribution increases to $173.33 per month. The contribution. amount remains constant until Medicare eligibility, at which pointt there is no longer a retiree contribution. Spousal Coverage Yes, provided the same contribution that was in effective for active spouses at the time ofretirement is paid. This amount may not exceed $115 per month. Effèctive January 1, 2017, the contribution amount is $26 per month. The contribution amount remains constant until Medicare eligibility, at which time there is no longer a contribution. Ifthe spouse elects not to continue int the plan or becomes ineligible due to employment which covers 100% ofthe cost ofcoverage, the spouse mayr rejoint the plan at any time. Survivorl Benefits Yes, ifthe surviving spouse continues to contribute the same amount the retiree contributed prior to death. Ifhired prior to January 1, 2014, the surviving spouse may stay inc coverage for life. Ifhired ond or afer. January 1, 2014, the surviving spouse may stayi in coverage for at total of5 years from date ofretirement. Ifhired on or after January 1, 2018, retiree coverage ist not provided. Dependent Child Coverage No Life Insurance No 26Foster & Foster 138 ISO 9001:2015CERTFED EN INEERS - PLANNERS SCIE NTISTS . CONSTRUCTION MANAGERS KCI 5001 Louise Drive, Suite 201 . Mechamicsburg. PA 17055 . Phone 717-691-1340 October 23, 2024 Mount Joy Borough Borough Council 21 East Main Street Mount Joy, PA 17552 Subject: Cornerstone Business Park Lot W-4 Use of Access Drive Easement KCI Project Number: Dear Council, KCI Technologies, Inc. (KCI) is working with Kinsley Properties on a development project for Lot W-4 of the Cornerstone Business Park on Cornerstone Drive. Lot W-4 is located entirely in Rapho Township, but the southern property boundary is also the municipal boundary with Mount Joy Borough. The current site plan for the development ofLot W-4 has one of the access drives crossing over the southern boundary line into Lot 5 which is located in Mount Joy Borough. Lot W-4 and Lot 5 are both owned by entities of] Kinsley and they would like to create an access easement to allow for the access drive for Lot W-4 to cross Lot 5. We have had discussion with Rapho Township regarding the access drive layout and they support using an access easement for the project but wanted written correspondence from Mount Joy Borough that you are also in agreement with the use of an access easement. I have attached a Conceptual Site Plan oft the proposed development ofLot W-4 showing the access drive's location. There are two access drives proposed to serve. Lot W-4 and keeping adequate separation distance between the two access drives and between the access drive and Willow Creek Drive is what pushes the one access drive onto Lot 5. We request the use of an access easement for the construction of the access drive across Lot 5. Ifthis is an acceptable approach, please let us know. Respectfully, Sacth DE3ell Scott DeBell, PE Practice Leader Land Development Empleva-Ovned: Since 1988 RISE TO THE CHALLENGE WWW.KCI.COM & A & 2 de 5 2 S 3 - * 5 * € : : g E 2 3 - a - 3 $ a 4 - 8 I B - € a 3 o I 3 I I a 8 9 - E B * : 3 * a 5 I 8 a X 8 5 : - E e 8 8 & I 3 * - 3 3 E I E B - - DE - a 8 9 9 - : * E € 4 dà F 9 et e 4 4 I 9 9 8 9 9 a 5 3 de - * * 6 € - : E a 3 I 5 I I 8 I 3 # 3 - 9 - - 5 I e - I E ) DQT TITRTT ' 5 AD B & a = - 1 D 1 CRO ven l af Dear Mr. Pugliese: As recommended by Borough Council at their March 3, 2025 regular meeting, lam forwarding to you my thoughts and concerns with the proposed Chiques Crossing apartment complex proposed by Vistablock for the north side of Little Chiques Creek behind my 227 Park Avenue residence. The property is situated almost entirely within Rapho Township, and for that reason Rapho Township has the predominant jurisdiction regarding the approval or disapproval of this project. The developers are seeking Borough approval of a sanitary sewer easement on Borough property within the confines of Little Chiques Park. This required easement may be the only point of leverage the Borough has to seek a change in the proposed design and or to request financial remediation to the many potential negative impacts this project would likely have on the citizens of Mount Joy Borough and upon the Borough finances in general. This correspondence speaks primarily to the concerns of my wife and I personally, but also represent a concerned citizens group of 34 members, sO many of my thoughts and concerns were generated in collaboration with my neighbors, many ofwhom reside in Mount Joy Borough. have outlined below the many ways in which I feel the Borough and its residents will be negatively affected by this excessively-dense and extremely-obtrusive apartment development, which is SO blatantly out-of-character with the immediate neighborhood and the small-town charm of our beloved Mount Joy. tried personally to stay away from emotional responses, not that they aren't important, but wanted this correspondence to concentrate more SO on the regulations effecting the development ofthis property, and how the regulations are being twisted and often ignored, in favor of the developer and at the detrimental expense of the adjoining property owners and the Borough in general. SANITARY SEWER CONNECTION: The developer has told the Borough publicly, that the only feasible option fori their proposed sewer connection is to tie into the public sewer line within the limits of Little Chiques Park (owned by Mount Joy Borough). The developer also suggested that the only other option is to go 30 times farther at 30 times the cost. I would like to contest this in two ways. See the attached copy of the prior plan submission (the "revised" plan that was recently submitted to the Borough included only Sheets 1 and 3 of 11 and does not have enough information to assess the sewer situation completely). The other 9 sheets of the plan set should be provided to the Borough. What I believe we can ascertain from the recent information the Borough was provided, and the plan information which had been provided previously, is that the developer may be able to access the existing sewer main near the Pine Street terminus, without crossing any lands of Mount Joy Borough. They may be able to do this by using the Pine Street right of way. At the very least, the Borough should request that the developer prove to the Borough that there are no other feasible options which wouid avoid the use of Borough land, before they allow the easement on Borough property, which could subject the Borough to liability concerns in the future, if the line ever fails for any reason. I - also believe there is an alternate design that could be pursued that would relocate the pump station and direct the force main toward and into the North Barbara Street right of way (where public sewer exists) without straying from the developer's property. This would only be a littie 1iPaga less than double the length of the current design. It is certainly not 30times the length and cost, and likely nowhere near a 7-figure increase when compared to the currently-proposed design, as was publicly alluded to by the developer recently. Recommendation: The Borough should make certain they know all the facts before making a final decision on the sewer easement request through Borough property. PROPOSED DENSITY: This is perhaps the most concerning aspect of the proposed design in the eyes of all those who live adjacent to, or within eyeshot of the subject development property. This should be a major concern of the Borough as well, because as the developer's density is allowed to increase, SO too will the traffic impacts throughout the Borough's road network and all the other identified negative impacts be further exacerbated. What is the density that the developers are proposing, and what is the density that the Rapho Township Ordinance permits, based upon the reasonable interpretation ofthe Ordinance text? The developer originally proposed a total of 378 apartment units, but has since decreased the total count to 343 total units. Rapho Township's Ordinance, in my professional opinion, allows the following in the Open Space Design Overlay District: See the attached density analysis for my computations regarding the density that I think is specifically permitted by the Rapho Township Ordinance. Although the Rapho Township Ordinance as it relates to the Open Space Design Overlay District (OSDO) is a challenge to interpret at times, I am confident in my interpretation of the literal intent of the Ordinance language, and as a result believe the maximum allowable total number of apartment units allowed on this site, as previously designed, would be 302 units, and not 378 units nor 343 units as the developer has and is now proposing. Our concerned citizens' group attorney agrees. would much prefer that the Borough not divulge the actual specific math presented here to the developer, until we are ready to present this information at a Rapho Township hearing, with our group's attorney present. We would, however, like to see the Borough negotiate a total unit count to be something even less than the maximum allowable 302 units that the Rapho Township Ordinance appears to allow. I do have a number in mind and will present a rough conceptual plan later in this correspondence, along with a proposed possible design solution which is intended as a visual conversation tool and is not to be considered any kind of an offer from myself personally, or our concerned citizens' group in general. Recommendation: The Borough should negotiate a maximum NET density (or total unit count) with a fee simple single-family detached buffer around the outer perimeter of the developer's developable area. WHAT DO THE COUNTY AND MUNICIPAL COMPREHENSIVE PLANS HAVE TO SAY REGARDING RESIDENTIAL DENSITIES IN THE DONEGAL REGION URBAN GROWTH AREA (UGA)? There are several Comprehensive Plans that have been adopted that are of extreme relevance when determining an appropriate density for the subject property. The County Plan (Places 219:8 2040), the Manheim Central Region Comprehensive Plan (Manheim Borough, Rapho Township and Penn Township) and the Donegal Region Comprehensive Plan (Mount Joy Borough, Mount Joy Township, Marietta Borough and East Donegal Township) all have specific recommendations for average "NET" densities within various Urban Growth Areas that should have been formulated into the various applicable municipal governing body's Zoning Ordinances (Rapho Township included). The Chiques Crossing development parcel is within the identified Donegal Region Urban Growth Area. Places 2040, the Lancaster County Comprehensive Plan clearly states that the average "NET" residential density should be a composite 7.5 dwelling units per net acre inside "all" ofthe various urban growth areas within Lancaster County in its entirety. However, this plan also designates that the average residential net density should be 6.5 dwelling units per net acre within the Donegal Region Urban Growth Area, of which the subject property is a part. The Manheim Central Region Comprehensive Plan (of which Rapho Township was a planning participant) further reinforces the County's specific density goal of an average "NET" density of 6.5 dwelling units per "NET" acre. It actually suggests a slightly lower average minimum net density of 6.0 dwelling units per net acre for residential development within those urban growth areas within the Manheim Central Region, which includes the Donegal Region UGA (this is less than the 6.5 units the County Comprehensive Plan recommends). As a further reference point, although not specifically relevant, the Donegal Region Comprehensive Plan recommends an average net density of 7.5 dwelling units per net acre within that portion of the Donegal Region UGA within the jurisdiction of the Donegal Region Comprehensive Plan. The point being, Vistablock is proposing a gross density of roughly 15 dwelling units per gross acre which is equivalent to approximately a density of 30 dwelling units per net acre, which greatly exceeds (by almost 5 times) the recommended densities found within all three Comprehensive Plans which were intended to steer the density of development in this specific area of the County. Mount Joy Borough should make every effort within its powers to decrease the proposed net density in this proposed development sO that the proposed net density will be closer to the recommended average net density of 6.0 dwelling units per net acre, as recommended by Rapho Township's own Comprehensive Plan and the County's Comprehensive Plan (@ 6.5). It is important to realize that net density is computed based upon net acreage available to development, excluding public street right aways, public parks and open space areas, and floodplain areas as is specifically defined within each Comprehensive Plan. MODIFICATIONS REQUESTED BY THE DEVELOPER: Note: the modifications outlined below are in accordance with the initial plan submission by the developer, which has since been withdrawn. We do not yet know what modifications might be requested with the revised submission. Recommendation: Mount Joy Borough should take the position that all modifications requested by the developer for the sole purpose of increasing the proposed density of the project beyond that which is possible, without the approval of the modifications, should not be requested of Rapho Township by the developer. Mount Joy Borough has no jurisdiction over what modifications Rapho Township may or may not approve. For this reason, if the Borough 317a5 does agree to grant the requested sewer easement to the developer, the Borough may wish to stipulate in any sewer easement agreement between the developer and Mount Joy Borough, that the developer agrees not to request "any" modifications that would allow the developer to achieve an overall unit density that is greater than what he could otherwise achieve without any such modifications, unless the overall "NET" density of the development is at or below the 6.0 dwelling units per net acres as re3commended by the Manheim Central Region Comprehensive Plan. I believe the following modifications, at a minimum, are being requested for no other reason than to allow more dwelling units to be proposed than what would otherwise be permissible without any modifications: BUILDING HEIGHT MAXIMUM OF 45 FEET: No building should be allowed to exceed the 45 feet maximum prescribed by Rapho Township, without exception. Building height should be measured in strict accordance with all Rapho Township and applicable Building Code definitions. This would certainly help with Fire Protection. Recommendation: Include this stipulation in any sewer easement agreement negotiated between the developer and the Borough. BUILDING WIDTH (aka Length) OF 160 FEET: No building width (length) should be allowed to exceed the 160 feet maximum prescribed by Rapho Township, without exception. Building width (length) should be measured in strict accordance with all Rapho Township and applicable Building Code definitions. This would certainly help with Fire Protection. Recommendation: Include this stipulation in any sewer easement agreement negotiated between the developer and the Borough. BUILDING DEPTH OF 75 FEET: Although no modifications of building depth were previously requested, moving forward, no building depth should be allowed to exceed the 75 feet maximum prescribed by Rapho Township, without exception. Building depth should be measured in strict accordance with all Rapho Township and applicable Building Code definitions. This would certainly help with Fire Protection. Recommendation: Include this stipulation in any sewer easement agreement negotiated between the developer and the Borough. 4 = MAXIMUM LOT COVERAGE: Allowable maximum lot coverage is 70%. In the previous design the developer was proposing 74.8% impervious coverage. We do not know what is proposed for the revised submission, but the developer should agree with Mount Joy Borough not to request any modifications to the Rapho Township Ordinance with regards to maximum lot coverage. This could benefit flood levels in the general vicinity. Recommendation: Include this stipulation in any sewer easement agreement negotiated between the developer and the Borough. TOWNSHIP ACCESS REQUIREMENTS TO PUBLIC PARKS: The Rapho Township engineer has said, in his review letter, that a modification would be approved to the need to meet the Township's access requirements to the developers proposed public open space, if a pedestrian access is provided to Little Chiques Park. Recommendation: The Borough should, if they deem it appropriate, not approve any pedestrian access from this development into Little Chiques Park at this time. If we want to reserve the right to allow such an access at a later date after total build out, once the Borough can assess the real (not perceived) impacts, both negative and positive, that such a decision to allow pedestrian access, would have on Little Chiques Park, that couid be discussed at a further point in time. would hope the Borough would make no commitment or guarantee at this time, if ever. This should be a condition of the negotiated sewer easement agreement. FRONT BUILD-TO-LINE: A modification was previously requested to the minimum 15 foot / maximum 20 foot front build-to-line requirement of the Rapho Township Ordinance. Recommendation: As similarly stated above, if this is solely to increase density, the Borough should require that the developer agree to not request any modifications to this particular requirement of the Rapho Township Ordinance as part of any agreement to secure the sanitary sewer easement that is being requested. This should be a condition of the negotiated sewer easement agreement. PRE-DEVELOPMENT PERIMETER SETBACK: The same is true of the developer's request for a modification to the required 30-foot predevelopment perimeter setback previously requested. Recommendation: The developer should agree with the Borough that they will not request any such modification from Rapho Township, because it is intended solely to permit increased density within the proposed development. This should be a condition of the negotiated sewer easement agreement. 51 Page MINIMUM BUILDING SETBACK FROM REQUIRED OPEN SPACE: Recommendation: Lastly, the prior request to modify the requirement for a 25-foot minimum building setback to any portion of the required public open space should not be requested by the developer. And this should be agreed to within the confines of the sewer easement negotiation. OVERALL RECOMMENDATION REGARDING ALL MODIFICATION REQUESTS BY THE DEVELOPER: To the best of our knowledge, the above modifications (sometimes known as waivers) were requested with the original conditional use application. To the extent that these modification requests remain the same and/or and any other "new" modifications are requested by the developer, the Borough should establish a condition within the sewer easement agreement text, that the developer agrees to request no modifications and/or waivers to the Rapho Township Ordinance requirements (Zoning, Stormwater Management, and Subdivision/land Development Ordinances) that would be for the sole purpose of increasing density in the proposed development beyond that which could be achieved if no modifications were to be granted. In conclusion, the above recommendations are offered to the Borough based primarily upon the premise that the Open Space Design Overlay District regulations of Rapho Township are already wayi too gratuitous with regards to density within the R-1 Residential Low Density Zoning District, when compared to the target densities recommended in all three Comprehensive Plans intended to influence maximum densities allowed within the subject urban growth area (Donegal Region UGA), which is 6.0 (Manheim Region Comprehensive Plan) to 7.5 dwelling units (Donegal Region Comprehensive Plan) per "NET" acre, depending upon the Comprehensive Plan being referenced, which is much, much less than the density which the developer is proposing. According to Rapho Township's Zoning Ordinance, 'modifications are only to be granted if they better serve or serve equally the intended purposes set forth in the OSDO Zone, and such modification would not result in adverse impacts to adjoining lots." The two "Purpose Statements" of the OSDO requirements are found in Section 350-405.A(1 of the Rapho Township Zoning Ordinance): "Complement existing uses, landscapes and community character". and Provide for 'appropriate and compatible development". None of the previously requested modifications would satisfy these two purpose statements and should therefore ultimately be denied by Rapho Township. Because we cannot assume Rapho Township will deny these requests, the Borough should include a stipulation in any 61 5 negotiated sewer easement agreement that the developer will submit a plan to Rapho Township that will "not" include any modification requests. It is extremely important for the Borough to also realize that the Rapho Township Zoning Ordinance OSDO regulations actually states in Section 350- 405.D(2)(d) that "the applicant is advised that the number of dwelling units calculated per the provisions of the OSDO regulations may not always be achievable while meeting the minimum requirements for public open space land and all other standards, criteria and regulations set forth in the OSDO Zone". For this reason, no modifications should be granted by Rapho Township unless they meet the strict guidelines for granting modifications, which they do not. This Ordinance criteria, - would suggest, requires Rapho Township to deny any modification requests that do not satisfyt the prescribed purpose of the Ordinance criteria, do not meet the standards for requesting a modification, as prescribed in the ordinance, and are only being requested as a means to increase the proposed density. The Borough's only leverage to request a plan with no modifications would be to include this restriction as a condition inside the sewer easement agreement. FLOODPLAIN / FUTURE FLOODING: Neither myself nor anyone in our concerned citizens' group has professional licensed experience with floodplain elevation computations, and for this reason we will leave analysis of this aspect ofthe developer's project in the hands of the Borough's stormwater engineer and/or floodplain expert to scrutinize. What we can say is that there are three members of our citizens' group (two within Mount Joy Borough) who have experienced severely damaging flooding as a result of significant heavy rains in the past (not to mention that the Borough'sown Little Chiques Park, set to undergo $3-$5 million dollars of improvements or more, over the next 5-10 years, could experience damages from flooding because the park is situated downstream from the subject development site). The elevation of the floodwaters experienced by these individuais has been documented to be higher than the 100 year floodplain elevation previously proposed by the developer in their initial submission. The developer has since made public comments at recent Borough meetings that they will now be planning to stay out of the 500 year floodplain, yet the plan recently provided to the Borough with the request fort the required sewer easement still only shows the 100 year floodplain line. It has no specific reference to the 500 year floodplain line recently referenced by the developer. Interestingly enough when t printed both the previous plan and the current plan (see attached) out at the same scale and overlaid the new plan on the old plan, the 100 year floodplain limit on the new plan is now less restrictive (i.e. closer to the creek) than the old plan (i.e. further from the creek), which does not make sense with what the developer has told us. Recommendation: The Borough should attempt to get to the bottom of this floodplain issue, and make certain that those Borough residents experiencing damaging flooding in this area at the current time, are no worse off after this development is built, and preferably better off, if possible, when compared to what they currently experience. Building vertical walls on or near the floodplain, placing stormwater management facilities within the floodplain itself, and placing significant landscaping within a floodplain that does not currently have such obstructions to inhibit flow, not to mention the displacement of storage volume that results 71Pag3 (the existing floodplain is mostly cultivated, agricultural land), all of which can cause floodwaters to dangerously rise, not only at the site, but upstream and downstream for certain distances as well. Many in our concerned citizens' group are concerned about this potential negative impact. If you would like to talk to those in our group who are specifically affected, please reach out and I will set up a meeting. PENNDOT/TRAFFIC IMPACT: Once again, our group has no traffic engineering expertise among us, but we are all intuitively concerned about this development's inevitable negative impact on our Borough's Road network. We are not just concerned about its impact on intersections within the Borough (772 and Main, 772 and Barbara, 772 and Market, and Main and Lefever), but we are also concerned about increased traffic internally on Barbara and Market Streets, which are both decidedly narrow with much-needed parking curbside. As a concerned citizens' group, we simply cannot comprehend why this developer, and even more sO Rapho Township, did not invite Mount Joy Borough to the PennDOT and floodplain tables during the infancy ofthis project when discussions first began. The potential negative impacts on Mount Joy Borough relative to these two issues (and many others) will be tenfold more detrimental and costly to our Borough over time, than those experienced by Rapho Township. if the development proceeds as proposed and Mount Joy Borough is only provided the opportunity to comment "after" formal plans have already been submitted, it may simply be too late to influence impactful, positive change. At that point significant dollars have already been invested by the developer, and they are less likely to make any major adjustments to their scope of work based upon anything a concerned citizens' group might have to say after the fact, especially knowing how Rapho Township has reacted favorably toward this project in the past. But what Mount Joy Borough has to say could definitely have an impact if it occurs early in the process before the developer and Rapho Township dig in their proverbial heals. The PennDOT scope number is S 0820210058. It appears that the PennDOT scoping meeting occurred back in 2021. Many important things have changed since 2021. Recommendation: Mount Joy Borough should do everything within their powers to request that PerinDOT holds a new scoping meeting and that Mount Joy Borough be invited to the table (this time). Intuitively (our group has no traffic engineers among us), we collectively have several concerns about what the developer is proposing, aside from the traffic impact study that we hope the Borough will continue to consult with their traffic engineering consultant on. Some things the Borough should perhaps be aware of, even though Rapho Township has primary jurisdiction: Why is the round-a-bout (traffic circle) being proposed at a private driveway (access drive), instead of at a public street intersection? The traffic benefits of a round-a-bout, we believe, would function better at a public street intersection where it is difficult to enter a public road (Route 772) from another public road, such as either Milton Grove Road or Lefever Road. The proposed location only benefits the developer, not the community at large. 8 e: a Round-a-bouts at the crest of a roadway can be challenging because approaching vehicles may not see it and won't slow down before entering. It appears that the developer is proposing a change in grade in the area of the proposed round-a-bout, and we must wonder if theyhave all the necessary adjacent property owner permissions that would be required to lower the grade of the round-a-bout and affect change to the private driveways that currently enter 772at the round-a-bout location. What impact will the round-a-bout have on the approach grades for existing driveways, and the ability to enter and exit them safely. It would appear that permission from several property owners (those which were not bought out) will be needed where individual property owner driveway access will need to be altered to accommodate the proposed round-a-bout design, or the developer has to indemnify PennDOT. We are not convinced that all necessary permissions have been received from adjacent property owners. Itis our understanding that round-a-bouts work best when traffic volumes are balanced well between approaches. Even with the apartments proposed, the three approaches to this round- a-bout will likely be unbalanced. Generally speaking, it is believed that PennDOT, as a matter of policy, typically only allows a second access driveway if the subject property has more than 600 feet of roadway frontage. The subject property currently only has approximately 554 feet of frontage if you exclude the frontage east of the bridge, which is all floodplain. We could see an argument being made that by installing a round-a-bout which only serves a private driveway and doesn't mitigate a pre-existing public road deficiency, the developer's proposal is actually impairing the free movement of normal traffic on Route 772. Although we are not traffic engineers, we believe that the developer may be able to solve the Route 772 and Main Street intersection situation by altering the sidewalk at the Beanies corner to eliminate the current split phasing oft the traffic signal. Then the developer would be able to add a left turn phase for eastbound Main Street, which would likely be a movement where the proposed development would be adding traffic. Recommendation: Mount Joy Borough could perhaps include a stipulation in any forthcoming sewer easement agreement with the developer, that would require the developer to investigate this possibility. We have not seen any new or revised traffic impact study information, but the prior report had used counts from July 2021. Using data collected over the summer, when school is not in session, would seem to be a concern, especially when the subject site in the affected Route 772 corridor is so close to the Lancaster County Career and Technology Center, Donegal School District, and even Manheim Central School District, because of how Rapho Township wraps around the southern end of Mount Joy Borough. Existing traffic counts could be skewed in the developer's favor as a result. Although this is within Rapho Township jurisdiction, no one seems to be talking about this development S impact on the 772/283 on and off ramps. These intersections are already 91 35H becoming another State Road scenario (East Hempfield Township) where the ramps become backed up and impatient drivers pull out into oncoming traffic, when they should not. Definitely a quality-of-life issue for all Mount Joy Borough residents. More drivers over time will avoid this interchange until it becomes signalized, and many will choose to enter the town of Mount Joy from the east, along Route 230/Main Street, an already congested traffic corridor that will only get more congested as Rapho Township continues to get developed on our eastern fringe. It's our understanding, from research that our group has performed, that in order for a developer to propose a round-a-bout, PennDOT requires an Intersection Control Evaluation to be performed to justify that a proposed round-a-bout is the preferred alternative. The Borough should find out, through its traffic engineering consultant, if such an evaluation was indeed previously prepared, what were the results and conclusions as they might relate to the Borough? ifthe round-a-bout is being proposed just SO the developer can avoid the costs and the required right of way acquisitions necessary to accommodate a 75 feet long left turn lane typically required with a more conventional signalized intersection alternative, this would not appear to be valid justification for a round-a-bout. Recommendation: Mount Joy Borough should do all that they can to find out more about this specific situation. With traffic congestion as one of the main concerns of our group, and presumably Mount Joy Borough as well, the Borough needs to attempt to find a seat at the PennDOT table, sO the Borough's concerns can reach the ears of the ultimate decision makers (i.e. PennDOT). ifthe Borough is unsuccessful in simply requesting a seat at the PennDOT table, our group would suggest that the Borough seek INTERVENER" status with PennDOT, whereby at least the Borough would get copies of all submissions directly from PennDOT, as opposed to counting on the cooperation of the developer and/or Rapho Township to provide the Borough with this information in a timely fashion. The means by which a party (Municipality) can request intervener status can be found on page D9-1 of Appendix D9 oft the Highway Occupancy Permit Operations Manual- February 2024 (Publication No. 282) and in various locations within the PACODE, including but not necessarily limited to PACODE-S 3524. Aside from interventions, protests and formal complaints are also means by which individuals or adjacent municipalities might be able to provide input or affect change or reconsideration of a PennDOT approval. We're just providing this information for possible consideration, depending upon how things transpire beyond this point. Obviously, engineering and legal consultation with your professional consultants would be necessary to proceed down this road. COMMUNITY CHARACTER: Section 315-906.b(3) of the Rapho Township Zoning Ordinance, which is "not" a subsection of the OSDO District regulations, and therefore not able to receive modification approvals from the Rapho Township Board of Supervisors, requires that "Each applicant must demonstrate. by credible evidence that the proposed use will not substantially cause a change in the character oft the subiect property's neighborhood (not just Rapho Township, but within Mount Joy 101 I Borough and Mount Joy Township, as well), the conservation of property values, the health and safety of residents or workers on adjacent properties and in the neighborhood.." The key words to emphasize in the above Section are that the "applicant must demonstrate, by credible evidence. and 'property's neighborhood", which is us. With regards to the community character issue, the developer is certainly destroying an impactful portion of the historicaly-significant village of Stauffertown, with his proposed demolition of several homes along Route 772 to make way for his proposed traffic circle. Our group cannot speak to any specific historical preservation regulations for any of the buildings being destroyed as part of this proposal, but the developer should be asked to respond to whether or not any of the buildings that are proposed for demolition have any significant historical value to the local community. Perhaps the Borough has some connections in this regard. MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS WORTHY OF NOTE: Some other items worthy of note that the Borough may wish to further investigate might be as follows: Why was the Borough provided with only Sheets 1 and 3 of 11 of an eleven-sheet plan set? Should not the Borough have been provided with the entire set? What don't they want you to see? And in actuality should not the Borough first have the entire revised Conditional Use plan resubmission set before you respond to the request for Borough permission to secure a sewer easement to tie into the Mount Joy Borough Authority's sanitary sewer main within Little Chiques Park? What are the building heights of each building specifically, measured in strict conformance with the definition of building height as it appears within the Rapho Township Zoning Ordinance and/or any appliçable building code requirements that might relate to maximum building heights and adequate fire protection. Will the Fire Department of Mount Joy (FDMJ) be able to adequately service buildings higher than what the Rapho Township Ordinance allows? Will the FDMJ be able to adequately service buildings which are more than twice as wide (long) as what the Rapho Township Ordinance permits? And even if the FDMJ can adequately reach all facades of all proposed buildings at the higher heights, would they be "better able" to access the buildings if they were at a lower height at or below the allowable 45-foot maximum height, more quickly and with increased efficiency? Has the FDMJ seen turning radii models to ensure they can adequately and quickly get their equipment into position to fight a fire?Isee quite a few tight turning radii, and several places where engines and ladder trucks, once they do get into a space, will have to back out ofthat space at the end of the incident. Is this acceptable? Is the FDMJ comfortable with the fact that building widths (what I would call the length) are more than double that allowed by the Rapho Township Ordinance standards? Can the FDMJ ladder truck reach the entire building facade for each facade with one ladder truck setup 119a8 location? Or will the ladder truck need to be moved into another location to get water onto a different part of the façade of the same building, wasting precious time? is the Fire Department Mount Joy at all concerned with the newly proposed U-shaped building? Will the emergency access to the interior of the U-shaped building be problematic if it is packed with parked cars at the time of responding to an incident? Will the ladder truck even be able to get in to the interior of the U-shaped building, if needed? Once it does get in, will it be able to exit quickly if the status of the event warrants it? Was the Borough/FDMJ even made aware of the proposal to have two levels of parking beneath the three residential floors of the U-shaped building? It is my guess that one level of parking (the lowest) will be completely underground and that the next level of parking above that initial underground level, will be perhaps partially underground or perhaps all at ground surface level. Adequate information has not yet been submitted to assess this situation with confidence. There will then be three residential levels of apartment units above that. Will the FDMJ be able to efficiently and safely attend to a vehicle fire in the lower-level and/or upper-level of the parking garage under the entire U- shaped building? believe they are also proposing underground parking underneath the entire surface area parking lot internal to U-shaped building! Does this concern the FDMJ in any way? The Mount Joy Borough Parks Advisory Board had previously recommended denying planned pedestrian access to the Mount Joy Borough side of the Little Chiques Creek (Little Chiques Park). I do not believe Borough Council has offered any formal response to this scenario, because I do not believe the developer has made a formal request. It's probable that informal pedestrian access will likely occur, to a certain degree, by those who choose to cross Little Chiques Creek by foot, when water levels are low enough and safe enough to do SO. The Borough and the Authority need to consider if they have any concerns about this possibility. Site lighting and the potential for light pollution into Mount Joy Borough is a significant concern of our citizens group, and should be a concern of the Borough. The proposed lights potential effect on wildlife and the presence of beneficial bats, moths and other beneficial insects, should be more than just a fleeting minor concern, especially an area SO diverse with a plethora of precious wildlife. Any proposed lighting that would occur should address all Rapho Township Ordinance criteria, but the Borough may also wish to have stipulations in any sewer easement agreement with the developer, that might require lighting restrictions to be more restrictive than what the Rapho Township Ordinance may require. Any site lighting will impact the residents of Mount Joy Borough, Rapho Township and Mount Joy Township equally. The Borough should have some say in the matter. Visual screening of the proposed development is a major concern of all members of our group. Standard landscape screening requirements typicaily found in most Zoning Ordinances (including those of Rapho Township) will likely be woefully inadequate because of how high the buildings will be on the topography, and how high the buildings will be themselves, especially if they are taller than the 45 feet maximum that the Rapho Ordinance allows. Visual screening of any development on this property must be closely scrutinized now, and not later when it is too late and the Borough loses its opportunity to have an impact! From a conceptual perspective, visual screening should be strategically located at two general locations. Screening should occur along the outer perimeter of the subject property and should be of al height and density that 12 : would completely screen all parking lots and apartment buildings from the adjoining neighborhoods in Mount Joy Borough. Screening should also be provided at or near the fringe of the proposed buildings and parking lots, at a height and density that would completely screen all parking lots and apartment buildings from the adjoining neighborhoods. Mount Joy Borough should not approve any sanitary sewer easement with the developer until the developer has provided the Borough with a detailed landscape screening plan that would screen the entirety of the proposed development from the adjoining properties within Mount Joy Borough. Facility heights as they relate to what Mount Joy Borough residents (and others) can see from their second story windows should be adequately analyzed in order to ensure that a solid visual screen is provided from all possible vantage points. Such a vegetated screen must provide a "complete" visual barrier of all proposed facilities and lighting sources from all the neighboring properties after two years from the date of planting. Although proposed plantings in the floodplain may be beneficial to a certain degree, they can also rob the floodplain of essential storage volume and can act to inhibit flow velocities, both of which can cause floodwater to rise beyond flood levels previously experienced. There are severai Mount Joy Borough, Rapho Township and Mount Joy Township residents adjacent to, or nearby this subject development site, who are extremely concerned about negative impacts upon flood levels and strongly urge that this development would somehow result in less flooding after development than that which presently occurs in the pre-existing condition. Recommendation: The Borough should stipulate in any sewer easement agreement with the developer that landscape screening as referenced in the item above, not be provided within the floodplain itself, SO that those Borough residents concerned about flooding do not see their flooding situation exacerbated. This may cause the developer to place more landscape screening within the developable area to achieve the results desired by the neighbors adjacent to the subject tract, which could cause the developer's density to decrease. Ift the developer truly and sincerely wishes to be a good neighbor, as he has said several times in public, he should gladly agree to any such stipulations. There is, quite frankly, sO much that is detrimental to the Borough with this proposed development being allowed on a property which is zoned R-1 Low Density Residential! As stated previously, but well worth repeating for emphasis, Section 350-906.B(3) of the Rapho Township Zoning Ordinance requires the developer to demonstrate by credible evidence that the proposed use will not cause a change in character of the subject property's neighborhood, nor adversely affect the character of the general neighborhood, nor the conservation of property values. I see no way the developer can suggest compliance to the above with a straight face, although I am certain he will try. I would love for the Borough to ask the developer this question at some point, since this is a particular requirement found within Rapho Township's Conditional Use criteria, which this project will be required to secure. would be curious to see how the developer responds. I cannot imagine him providing a response that would be satisfactory to the Borough in any way shape or form. The developer has on several occasions stated that there are studies indicating that apartments next to single-family detached housing do not negatively impact property values for the single- family property owners. To this, I say, "NO WAY!" This may be true in urbanized settings, but 1319ag : no on the fringe of a rural small town. Take a look at some attachements I have included for further information on this topic. The developer also has not yet explained how he plans to address the fact that his plan proposes to simply abandon a public alley network on the subject property that some of the neighbors within our concerned citizens' group have legal rights too. He simply seems toi ignore this situation (which was also referenced in the RETTEW Associates review letter regarding the first submission). This issue is not of specific concern to Mount Joy Borough, only reference it as a major issue which could have potential implications relative to the developer's design as previously proposed, and to the best of our knowledge, as currently proposed on the revised site plan, which continues to ignore the alleys. We are of the opinion that the developer's plan as proposed is in violation of at least a few regular Zoning Ordinance requirements that are not specific to the OSDO zoning overlay requirements. As such, any relief to these items would require variance approval from the Rapho Township Zoning Hearing Board. In our opinion, the Rapho Township Board of Supervisors would not have legal authority to modify and/or waive any of the following requirements as part of their Conditional Use process: Section 350-512.D which states that, "In no case stronglanguage) shall any structure permitted above the maximum permitted height of the applicable zone (which is 45 feet in both the R1 and OSDO Overlay Zoning Districts) be used for the purpose of providing additional occupiable space. " My non-legal conclusion is that the Board ofSupervisors, even though they could modify the allowable building height to be above 45 feet, they cannot waive or modify this particular section of the Zoning Ordinance, because it is not found within the frameworkof the OSDO regulations, but rather in the body ofthe Zoning Ordinance outside of the OSDO regulations. I must wonder if even the Zoning Hearing Board could approve a variance of this section based on the "in no case" language prescribed in the text. We do not possess enough information to know if the developer is providing occupiable space beyond the 45-foot maximum allowable height, as defined, but if he is, this could be real problematic to his density. If the Borough is serious about affecting significant change to the developer's proposed density, the Borough may wish to have their solicitor investigate this particular section of the Ordinance, and perhaps determine if there are any other specific sections of the Rapho Township Zoning Ordinance criteria that the developer may need relief from the Zoning Hearing Board in the form of variances, that could not be approved as modifications by the Board of Supervisors as part of the required Conditional Use application process. POSSIBLE ACCEPTABLE ALTERNATE DESIGN: Lastly, I want to be clear that I am personally vehemently opposed to any development on this property other than the 10,000 square foot minimum single-family detached lot size homes which are permitted by right in the underlying R-1 Low Density Zoning District, which the subject parcel is designated. I do realize, however, that this developer is not a single-family developer and for this reason, he will likely not be interested in proposing a strictly single- family detached development on this property 50 he can protect his return on investment having already purchased the various properties based upon his ill-advised speculation that the 14 I : property would support 378 (now 343) apartment units. I also am of the opinion that this developer has made a huge mistake by purchasing outright the subject property and several single-family detached properties bordering his property, for a price based upon (his) speculation that he could secure approvals for a certain number of apartment units. Most developers would typically only enter into a sales agreement on a property such as this, and would only actually purchase the property once all of the required approvals were actually secured (or at a minimum, after a certain comfort level is obtained that such approvals are forthcoming). The Borough should not feel any empathy toward this developer, who chose not to get the Borough involved early on in his due diligence process, which quite honestly should have included his seeking the Borough's input on the sewer tie-in and the many other issues which now concern the Borough, many months prior to now! The Borough residents should not have to suffer for the poor decisions this developer and his partners have made in the last two years, and I, and those in my concerned citizens' group are terribly concerned that we may have to suffer for the many more poor decisions this developer will likely continue to make if this project is allowed to move forward. Having said all this, have prepared a conceptual site development plan of a 'potential" proposed development pattern that could be proposed on this property. This is not an indication that I would be in favor of, or opposed to such a proposal, because there are simply way too many issues that remain to be considered and adequately addressed. I only share this for discussion purposes to show what a conscientious developer "could" propose on this property, if he was genuinely and truly concerned about the concerns of his many neighbors who reside around the subject property's perimeter. This is also not an indication that the others within our concerned citizens' group share my thoughts on this matter, as I have not shared my thoughts, nor this plan, with them prior to sending this letter to you. Consider this food for thought only, and nothing more at this time. believe the attached potential concept plan is self-explanatory with the notations provided, and - would be happy to sit down with you or any of the council members to detail my thought process on the matter. This correspondence includes a lot of information, and I would not expect you to read this in its entirety, but I do hope you will peruse it to get a sense of the extent of my personal concerns, and those of many, if not all within our concerned citizens' group. I would ask that you share this with all members of the Borough Council and I can make myself available if anyone has any questions or requires any clarifications. I truly appreciate, as I'm sure those within concerned citizens group do as well, that the Borough shares many of the same concerns that we have on this proposed development project. Thank you for your efforts SO far, and we all look forward to working with you to protect and preserve the small-town character that makes our quaint little town of Mount Joy a wonderful place to live, work and play, for now anyway... 151 15 Sinderely, David Christian 227 Park Avenue Mount Joy 717-475-6006 (cell) dve@dcalarch.com CC: All Mount Joy Borough Council members by Borough Manager Mark Pugliese (Permission Granted) 16 - P 36 e AlaaleDrihy Comptahins CHIQUES CROSSING Allowable Unit Count per Density Analysis The below analysis is based upon the initial Conditional Use application submitted by the developer, which has since been withdrawn and is in the process ofb being revised. This analysis will be recomputed based upon any revisions made to the original submission, and the conclusion will likely change as a result. An adjustment may also need to be made once an appropriate deduction of all public right-of-way areas associated with the revised design are taken, which could include public street rights-of-way, private street rights-of-way and access drive cartway areas as public rights-of-way as defined by the Rapho Township Ordinance provisions. Ordinance Criteria $350-405.D.02)tb) "Maximum permitted number of dwelling units on any tract proposed for an open space design development shall be calculated by multiplying the lou area ofthe tractproposed for an open spacedevelopment by the density multiplier stipulated for the applicable base zone. 99 Table 4-5.4 Zone Max. Permitted Density Multiplier R-1 12' (for Tract Area 15 acres or >) 'On tracts with lot areas of 15 acres or greater, where buildings for multi- family dwellings are proposed, the maximum density may be increased to 15 units per acre (or 3 additional from the 12 normally allowed for units other than apartment units) on that portion of the tract devoted to such dwellings. Lot Area (Area, Lot) is defined as: "The area contained within the property lines of an individual parcel of land, not including any area within a street right-of-way. Interpretation Question: Is the density calculation based upon lot area as it exists prior to development (i.e. w/Route 772 R.O. W. as it pre-exists) or based upon lot area after the PennDOT R.O.W. is expanded to allow traffic circle, etc.? This calculation assumes that both the "existing" and the "proposed" right-of-way are subtracted. Interpretation Question: Must acreage in Mount Joy Borough and Mount Joy Township be excluded from Lot Area and subsequent density calculation because it is not in the Rapho Township R-1 OSDO Zoning District? Point of note, the ground in Mount Joy Borough is zoned LDR - Low Density Residential and the ground in Mount Joy Township is zoned R-1 - Low Density Residential. This calculation assumes non-Rapho acreage is not to be used when calculating the required open space nor when calculating the allowed maximum density.. First Question: What is the lot area oft the tract proposed for the open space development? This is what the developer said on his original Conditional Use Cover Sheet Site Data (no revised information has been submitted to the Borough concerning the proposed density): Gross Property Area - 25.28 Ac Rapho Township Area - 22.92 Ac Mount Joy Borough Area - 1.49 Ac Mount Joy Township Area - .87 Ac Developer took gross area 25.28 Ac Times 15 DU/acre x15 379 Units They originally proposed 378 units for a density of 14.95 DU/Ac per their site data, and are now proposing 343 units. Miscalculations: MJ Boro (1.49 Ac) and MJ Twp (.87) is not eligible for Rapho Twp OSDO benefits Tract area (lot area) is specifically defined as excluding any area within a street R.O.W. Site data on applicant's S plan says 50 Ac proposed R.O.W. So minimum open space required is 50% of lot area ("gross acreage" - specifically listed as such in the Ordinance) but density is based upon gross lot area less street R.O.W.) of tract proposed for Open Space Design Development, as stipulated for the applicable base zone. The presumption is that the developer cannot propose an OSDO design on land in Mount Joy Boro and Mount Joy Township which is not zoned appropriately for that use, even though they may own it. So the gross acreage available for the proposed OSDO Development is 22.92 Acres as stated on the Conditional Use Plan Site Data. So this means 50% or 11.46 acres must be provided as open space. This then means 11.46 (the other half) gross acres or less can be used for development (the actual area used for development should be delineated on the plan and an acreage should be provided). The allowable 12 acre density is based upon tract "lot area" which is defined as "excluding" street R.O.W. So that portion oft the overall tract devoted to development of any kind (apartments or otherwise) may not exceed 11.46 acres minus the .50 Ac street right-of-way (from developer's Site Data), or 10.96 acres. So the maximum allowable density should be as follows: Total "Lot Area" in Rapho Township excluding proposed R.O. W. (22.92-.50) = 22.42 Ac 7) 12 du/ac x12 269.04 - plus - That portion ofthe tract devoted to all apartments = 10.96 Ac a 3 additional du/acre x3 (15 du/ac on this portion instead of 12) 32.88 Max. Allowable Unit Count = 302 units (not 378) (not a guaranteed number as mentioned in Zoning Ordinance Section 350-405.D.(2)dd) TKe Vulagc oR STAPFERTOH CI roothg - reading) Welcome to Stauffertown by Morris N. Sherk YiGor STAUFFERTOWN) Publiahed by dhe Moant Joy Ac Hisescical Seciety 2005 1o No. Peperh U-lefmeln The relationship between multi-family housing and nearby single-family home values. Robert Chang June 16, 2020 Most studies that purport that multi-family developments do not decrease the value of nearby single-family homes, are oftenflawedi in2 (and sometimesincrease) zip code, census tract or other ways. First, they are sometimes done by larger area, rather than by individual home values of the properties that are near a development. This can resuft in overlooking the effect of the specific proximity of the development to the nearby neighbors. Unwanted immediate traffic, lights, height ofthe attributes may be additional noise, buildings, on proximity of neighbors. Second, these studies are high demand areas, like Seattle, Boston, New often done in effect ofe York, or Washington DC. These studies may confuse the extremely high demand for housing, rather than the effect of the newly built housing. I may be exaggerating, but people will pay $3000/month to live in a shoebox high-density areas. in some of those My first reference is a study that makes these errors. This study was to Joe Kujawa, a member of the Elm Grove Plan Commission provided me as a reference by classic example ofthe literature in support of high-density housing. This is a thatlfound while researching that makes that lead to inaccurate conclusions. inappropriate comparisons pssEasNcOe Patument/Hiherpentiy MythFact.ashx - amfshpiskéNgD.hos owlo This study was prepared in collaboration with: a National Muiti Housing Council. "The NMHC is a national association of the nation's larger and most prominent representing the interests apartment firms. NMHC advocates on behalf of rental housing, conducts apartment-related research, encourages the exchange of strategic business information, and promotes the desirability of apartment living. (This description is from the report. Doesn't that sound like it would produce an unbiased opinion?) directly Sierra Club American Institute of Architects Urban Land Institute This study presents an argument for high- -density housing as an alternative to urban better for the environment because it increases spraw! as being A walking and decreases driving. All - However, their conclusions focus on high density urban areas, not bedroom good things. Grove. For example, on p.8 of their study: communities like Elm - "Even very-high-density housing can be practical, safe, and desirable. For income apartments and condominiums example, the mixed- or luxury high rises in New York and the safest and most expensive housing in the Chicago -some of unsafe environment. country-prove that density does not equal an Their additional examples are also not comparable: 3 A Virginia community located within walking distance of a Washington, DC Metro housing, offices, retail, and restaurants. Crate stop, offering (Including a and Barrel.) A Florida development of owned townhomes that reflect a higher value than neighboring single- family homes. A Dallas development located adjacent to the light rail station. A 677-acre Chicago suburb that is a conservancy including wetlands. An Atlanta development attached to the subway system. A mixed use development in Boston's South End. How are any of these comparable to Elm Grove? Please read and think carefully when reviewing information in support of high-density housing having a positive effect on single-home values. It is not likely to hold true for our village location. This second reference, also provided by Mr. Kujawa, actually supported my point. This link will take you to a paper The local relationship between higher density and single-family home values" by Arthur Acolin, Gregg Colburn, and Rebecca Waiter. This is a 2018 study done by the University of Washington and is also prepared with data from "five U.S. metropolitan areas: Chicago, Los Angeles, Minneapolis, Philadelphia and Seattle" all large, urban areas that are not relevant to Elm Grove. hmetsamAcaAIE O5mDOSDA-DA. COMASMEVR-QPZOGNSE However, it makes a couple of good points (p.18): "When analyzing the relationship across all three zones in a metropolitan area, a consistent theme emerges in all five cities in the study. In each city, the relationship between density and value in the urban core is positive, and statistically significant. As one moves away fromthe urban center, the relationship becomes less positive, and in some casesturns negative." The findings across all five cities highlights that, independent of context, the density and value relationship becomes more negative farther from the urban core." In other words. The study's conclusion of multi-family having a positive effect on housing value does not hold true as you move away from the city center of one of these urban areas. Elm Grove is clearly and deliberately distant from the urban center of Milwaukee. This study also points out that demand, and not density, is one variable in these studies that can produce bad results and conclusions (p.3): "Failure to address this challenge may produce biased estimatesthat capture the relationship between demand and home values, rather than the relationship between density and values." This is the flaw with Mandel's notion that housing value in Whitefish Bay increased despite their development there. Housing value in Whitefish Bay consistently increases due to high demand. Whitefish Bay is also a suburb with sidewalks and street lights, and is a more urban setting than our community. The third reference would like to present is a 2012 study done at Colorado State University. The economics researcher is also a Realtor who has access to MLS home sale data. eaneNchaasNss colostate 0053N. 11509.pdf This study concludes (p.30): " find strong evidence that rental density plays an important role in determining a home's S overall selling price; with rentals located within% mile of a property negatively affecting price and rentals located between % and % mile positively affecting selling price." / My fourth reference is a 2002 study done at the University of Nebraska at Omaha. This researcher's study supported her hypotheses that both proximity and density had a negative effect on nearby single- family home values. (p.59) That is, how close you are to the development and the number of units in the development both negatively affect nearby values. RESEMANECESENasaskesaiastaN In conclusion, please make sure you are comparing apples-to-apples when you look at these studies that say high-density housing does not harm adjacent single family home owners. Putting large scale, high- density housing next to single family nousing in a suburban setting will be harmful to home values. A project "for the good of the community" is not acceptable if there is a cost to other homeowners. For many people, their primary home is one of their largest assets. That asset must be protected. Existing residents must be protected. Gentle Density Increases Nearby Property Values, Evidence Shows, Contrary to First published Aprii 20th, 2022 I Updated Popular Belief May Ist, 2023 by Nomer Caceres. Posted in News - 0 Comments By Eric Weld. MassLandlords. Inc. introduce Resuitant lowered property values are one of the main reasons increased housing density. The cultural meme of given by opponents of zoning reform, which could dragging down the valus of more diversity and more properties there - especially peopie in a given among buyers and sellers. single-family homes - is widely repeated and neighborhood accepled But it's wrong, according to numerous studies! And housing stock: especially affordable housing worse, for many us cHes t's standing,in the way of expanding Moont in fact, in most MT 3 ayis cases, Cuy bringine gente to increase property values donewisely Pousiagigensily This into a residential neighborhood has been shown enhancements like addea cultural opportunities. property value boost with increased density is partly due to among other factors. close retail outlets. lower infrastructure costs and shorter lifestyle commutes. Sunte - 2 A The phrase - gentle 1 a density is gaining repetitionn. i apaded rise residential buildings. gente densityralesito média in contrastto high density, which inciudes mid- (ADUS). Slacked townhouses! devel lopment exes triplexes, and high- and emong semi-detached homes and small-scale accessory dwelling units single-lamtly Zemdneighborods Gentle apartmentand condominium: butdings homes alongside small multi-iamily homes. density promotes mixed-use development. with within a g Don 0065 residential and businesses and commercial Sentle den single-family - dentry feel wnle buildings nSiy ans to retain eviatina ousing - ses Property Values Shown to Increase with Gentle Density Studies 30p. wih corcus e ewidence tnar geniy propery es NoL a singie uS Siudys has lound that increased nousing densiy orovcesatieaga: stight boosito proximate single-family homes or rental properties motroducing gentle density negatively impacis vaiues of A 2012 stucly Tie Economic wavegfwarkable conclded . arue of boih sigie-tarsh Niaighporhoods " published in Urban Design Interational dansity of develooinent Part oit mar gropens moreasa esicental Oropenes and multi-fanily antal prope: s eased with ana a m ofx MBian commergiar ane esidiensel was Dye o added amenitias he sidewalks snorer dlocks. suDundings the study said The study went further. Not only did cited properties access to parks and other land uses increase in value. but the quality of increased. too, neighborhoods defined as Tee Kenc Gardnen Policy Instibre ait the Unyesiy ofulah Sall Lake County between 201Dand 2013 This slidy lound studied singie-lanily nome prces suouros arour D0 reduced single-family home values in suourpar Sait Lake apanmencs built bebvean 2010. and 2018 have not withir mile of a newly constructed apartment County, the suudy sums Single-lanily homes ccated homes farther away." building experienced higher overail price appreciation than those 1 addition to increased orpperty vales higher DersHy MaroTex ap association Ofirealiors deveiopment vields sevarai other penefits accordirgito lower infrastructure costs dus to smaller analyzing more housing density in the Dallas-Font Noith metro egion Amorg then density neighborhoods tend C eed 26 own ewe: sompacted cars sarsice areas, less raffic pecause residents in communities: lower taxes since higher than their counterparts n lower density. higher properties including retaii and density areas are more likely lo spread tax assessments single-family new empioyers commercial: more efficient and cost-effective schools: and attractive among mixed-use Circumstances for Fhall Duin n: axausively an in-depth study ytas Surou ding nous sing dansy The study states corducted Ample NO 20050y ue Urpan Land Institute. examineg severs! development orogerly ntegraied nto an existng 6M0 dence suggests thai well-designed e quaiyoiie and communily, can become a nignar-density property Aus es for exisling residents Ra signicant community asser thal adds to pooulauon. addressing me neeas of a growing ang pnasgng er mhe SL ay acknowedges attudestoward cojecrrothe generai concept of icreased housing increasece density persisienty Skew segative Sa!l when peopis who hey orsler the benelits of gende density communiies density are snown IN ages pig gentie densitys varsus lowerdensiny restaurents schoois shopoing ibraries anci andi cnange neir naganve eacuons to L Amenites Socn as sommuces ard argerhome os AIC fewen puonctsnsponamon ih wwaik - dis stance are prefertedic opportunities for walking longer ne Urbanland Insntute stucy aise: eve ecomens ana "pagt on reilerates that several sudies have examines Drogerty values of nearby correlations between pacion muti-family ever a slighty pos: VE apact on appreciation single-famny rates homes. These Studies have shown either no the study conci ades The S160Y gD6s on to cite several other siudles nigner ne : Siy development and those in setal ng percentage increase comparisons oetween properties incrasses verallvalues of nearby ow-dersy areas, Every study concludes that well-designed higher near single amsy romes density tv dus ypost ortas $ Vbhis Urbar y Impact of Gentle Density on Rent Rates in addition to increasing property values, loosening rental rates. density begs this housing controls has the lscs according to 2021 secondary benefit of study conducted Boston reducing We find that reiaxing density restrictianis with relaxing height restrictions iminimum jot Size and maximum dweling units), either alone or allowing fon multi-family are or combined supply and reduce muli-family renis and housing the most fruitful policy reforms to increase Reserve Bank of Bosion Amrita Kuika oithe singie-family prices, state the authors - Nick Chiumenti of the Federal oi Ihe study How to Reduce Housing Costs? University oi Warwick and Aradhya Sood ofthe, University of Toronto - Understanding Local Deterrents to Building Muiti-Family! Housing, This trend aligns tn Sonventionar econont ana- nousing so S Gasa S restricied. both percer ved Supoly 1 ana ineory Whenthe suppiy 1 a destraore produat value and ooce logically icrease A 2021 study By mes S Departmens of o goes further orclude hatie 519 - 9 ' r ao n - Boston apposite S as so true findings and reg:ons Spurising rents tignterhousing density conmois 37 : a Mdensy vnere Bs standar a agonoms sei ars of oursE 5 : e values whipninorease th the aevelopment of gente density - as sgie -fay sropers or more nousi Bo Hoswaver studesooint out that home prices and rents do not always correlate strictly around density. and are significantly influenced by other factors. as stated above Why Objection to Density Persists It's somewhat of a mystery why incorrect attitudes persist egarding h: gner density nousig S negative effects on property values Its well-known that zoning orginated as an exclusionary tool. to keep non-white, foreign and lower-income people from moving into certain neighborhoods Exclusiorary zoning persisted long into the 20th century - and is stil with us - largely on the premise that allowing non-white and poorer pooulations into neighborhoods would harm property values While some communities work to move beyond these prejudices it's likely some of that belief and attitude remain today af e 26 5 o& & Cly part Cpalen ant 2 tnance Still. no m & investigated the persistent. but errant. collective attitude that genue dehsity legativ l impagis fact. property values are shown to be based more on practical considerations and life- ennalging opportunies than on density and diversity Proximity to amenities. specific architecture and good building mainienas and the availability of quality infrastructure and services are the hign-ranking qualifiers determining property values fe CANNOL buasec docsnt ply dasns, Stuboore myths abour the - - - T effects of housing density may also e largely due to leftovermemones ofnigh- density. high-rise urban housing projects of the 1960s and 1970s Housing projects in New York City Chicago ard other cities were broadly deemed falures as models of denser housing The failure labei was certainiy unfair as those projects were doomed with high concentrations of poverty poorly furded and performing schpols and low opportunity for employment. not to mention a dearth of ife-enhancing amenities like green spaces As a resul. many of these developments became riddled with relatively high crime. though that was not a direct corollary with nigh density Systemic racism aiso played a heavy hand in the failure of hign-density housing projects Today's mixed-use. gentle density developments are a stark contrast to tnose high-density projects with emphases on multi-family architecture. green space. mixed-use zoning and lowi car traffic Nonetheless. the perception of hign density as a failed housing policy may be partly souring the puplic attitude toward iow and medium density At least equaily as important are indivicual prejua ces agains: dense housing -je, the NIMBY effect - whicr contnue to be prevalent across demograpnic categories Across every demographic suogroup analyzed. respondents preferred single-family home developments by a wide margin writes Jessica Trounstine in a December 2021 articie for Urban Affairs Review. "Reiative to single family nomes apartments are viewed as decreasing property values. increasing crime rates owering schocl quality. increasing traffic and decreasing desiraoility" Vet none of those beliefs are true accoraing to dozens of SLur dies National Attitude Change Needed across thei Unied Siates consistently have a housing shortage On tharfact: there 15 broac agreemen: Some 83%) E 9or 08 : 18550 36 : ding to the Unzersity of Muchigan S Center for Sustanaoe bystems do fro5438 P 950 Blore peopis ae moving 0 cDes than Carren: housirg Devaloomentcan a k 5o our d ppore es wwpoct Pee :: e urcan moss Makiny B5: corsensus around the pousingin areas Yet simosrs 5 ces ofthe avalableland szoned for singie-iamiy homes onty In ine greater Boston region 27221 cf communites have oetween 315 dnc 90%0 ofavailabie ande zoned for singie-amily use only - nol as aryoisal statishc across the couniry 5 urber areas - according to the FaHous sing Center pfGrealer Bosson One contributor to the intractability of the national housing shortage and cities inabilities to reform obstructive zoning laws is the overriding beliei that denser housing damages property values not to mention other undesirable effects like neighborhood "quality. safety and others - despite all evidence to the contrary Some cities and states. like Minneapolis Portland, Oregon, and California, have begun to break through the wall of erroneous obstruction and pass meaningful zoning reform Still, their reforms are not enough to keep up with the influx of people needing housing. Efforts in other states. including Massachusetts, are in various siages of progress to enact relorms that can ushen new and affordable housing development. But absent a coinciding educational campaign to counter the faise belief that gentle housing density harms single-family housing, it will remain difficult to move policies forward fast enougn. ToR Decussia Ovy * 2 E a * . - FUOLS SIREET ingimui H 3 JmTUm 1 mI mUmw II - uMnG NIS EvA A Ax % a : a a L 5 e - : a 1 - 3 E 9 % I - 19 I C B E 1 B - a PUBLIC STREET l C - GIPMENTU LAGTS E Y R 1 0 9 M -L 1 sun: IGuNNd mTTUTI 264 ing E TUT - 00 2 - 53 lse - 15EHIS Orend - 6 E 2 ERR osoa" JON RAPRD OLNT PAKA RNON A / Rape ToUGIF 2-I 05DO Zoc DLSTRICT REZUATaDS Rapho Township Zoning Ordinance Overlay Zones Article 4 Adopted November 7, 2013 2, Do not violate any of the standards imposed upon the entire development. 3, Do not violate any conditions attached to the original approval of the (vo) Zone. 4. Do not adversely affect the architecture of the approved existing development, M. Modifications of Design Standards. The Township Board ofSupervisors may permit the modification of the design standards in order to encourage the use of innovative design. A developer desiring to obtain such approval shall, whenaking application for approval for a Village Overlay Zone Development as required by the standards of the (VO) Zone, also make application for approval under this subsection (S 404.M.). The Township Board of Supervisors shall consider both requests simultaneously. Any modification of the design standards shall be subject to the following standards: 1. Such modifications of design standards better serve the intended purposes of the (VO) Zone. 2. Such modifiçations of design standards would not result in adverse impact to adjoining properties, nor future inhabitants within the Village Overlay Zone Deveigpment. 3. Such modifications will not result in an increase in residential densities permitted for the site. 4. The extent of modification provides the minimum amount of relief necessary to ensure compliance with the preceding criteria in the subsections above (5 404.M.). Section 405. Open Space Design Overlay (OSDO) Zone A. Purpose Statement and Intent. 1. Within the UGA, it is the intent of the Township Board of Supervisors to: a. Provide an opportunity for flexibility in lot designs and building arrangement not afforded by conventional lot-by-lot deveiopment. b. Provide for a more varied, innovative, and efficient development pattern. - Promote new development which complements existing uses, landscapes, and community: character. d. Preserve unique, sensitive, and important natural features and landscapes on the site by locating new building sites in areas removed from such features and landscapes. Page 4-36 Raphol Township Zoning Ordinance Overlay Zones Article 4 Adopted November 7, 2013 e. Retain and protect the unique, sensitive, and important natural features and landscapes in public open space land within, near, and connected to residential development and other park, recreation, and open space areas. f. Provide for the orderly, appropriate and compatible preservation, growth, and development in Rapho Township, by incorporating the overall objectives and principles of, as well as seeking to implement portions of, the most reçent version of the Comprehensive Plan, any regional open space, recreation, and greenway plan, or other applicable plan adopted by the Township of Rapho. 2. While many of the following standards, criteria, and regulations deal with issues that typically transcend zoning jurisdiction, such standards, criteria, and regulations are provided as an optional set of "overlay" regulations for additional residential density bonuses in exchange for a larger portion of the site be preserved as public open space land, and are, therefore, considered voluntarily self-imposed by prospective developers, but enforceable by the Township of Rapho. 3. Relationship to Other Ordinances of the Township of Rapho and Sections of This Zoning Ordinance. The (OSDO) Zone has different use and design requirements from those contained in other sections of this Zoning Ordinance, the SLDO, and other ordinances of the Township of Rapho. Except for those requirements contained within Article 4 of this Zoning Ordinance relating to Floodplain Overlay (FPO) Zone (5 402.), to the extent the regulations, standards, and provisions of the (OSDO) Zone differs (is more or less restrictive) from other Township of Rapho requirements, those within the (OSDO) Zone shall govern'However, all other provisions ofthisland otherordinancesofthe-Township ofRapho shallremain infullforce. B. Eligibility. 1. Minimum Size. The lot area of the tract proposed for an Open Space Development shall be no less than ten (10) contiguous acres. 2. Public Water and Public Sewer Service. The tract proposed for an Open Space Design Development shall be served by public water service and public sewer service. C. Review Process. 1. General Provisions. a. An Open Space Design Development shall be permitted when approved as a conditionaluse/in accordance with the provisions of Article 9 of this Zoning Ordinance relating to Conditional Uses (5 906.) and where the applicant, to the satisfaction of the Township Board of Supervisors, can demonstrate compliance with all standards, criteria, and regulations set forth in the Page 4-37 Rapho Township Zoning Ordinance Overlay Zones Article 4 Adopted November 7, 2013 (OSDO) Zone, unless otherwise modified per the terms of the (OSDO) Zone regulations. b. The applicant is strongly encouraged to submit a Sketch Plan in accordance with the SLDO, to the Township Planning Commission and to discuss the community development and open space resource conservation objectives with the Township Planning Commission prior to a conditional use application being formally submitted. 2. Conditional Use Plan Submission. At the time of application for conditional use approval, and in addition to the information required as part of the conditional use application set forth in Article 9 of this Zoning Ordinance relating to Conditional Uses (S 906.), the applicant shall submit the following: a. Site Data. Site data shall include the following: (1). Proposed number, density, and type of dwellings and the total density for the entire proposed tract; and (2). Proposed acreage and percentage of required public open space land. b. Landmarks within the proposed tract, including the location of all existing: (1). Unique, sensitive, and important natural features and landscapes identified in the subsection below relating to Public Open Space Land Standards (S 405.F.). C. All existing land uses and lot lines within two hundred (200) feet of the proposed tract, including the location of all: (1). Unique, sensitive, and important natural features and landscapes identified and to the extent required in the subsection below relating to Unique, Sensitive, and Important Natural Features and Landscapes (5 405.F.2.), only to the extent such information is available from publically-available sources including but not limited to those listed in Unique, Sensitive, and Important Natural Features and Landscapes as well as the Lancaster County GIS data, USGS 7.5', Lancaster County and municipal comprehensive plans. d. Conceptual Public Open Space Land Plan showing the potential layout, design, uses, facilities, and activities of the public open space land. e. Reports and Other information. The following conceptual reports and information shall be submitted: Page 4-38 Rapho Township Zoning Ordinance Overlay Zones Article 4 Adopted November 7, 2013 (1). A feasibility report on both sewer service and water service conforming to the requirements oft the SLDO. (2). A description of how storm water management design complies with the provisions of the Township of Rapho storm water requirements. (3). A description of the general character of the intended exterior architectural design of all principal buildings to be constructed on lands as part of an Open Space Design Development in accordance with the standards, criteria, and regulations set forth in the (OSDO) Zone, including conceptual graphic architectural elevations of the principal buildings. (4). An analysis of the suitability of the potential layout, design, uses, facilities, and activities of the public open space land which is to be created as part of the Open Space Design Development, as shown on the Conceptual Public Open Space Land Plan. (5). A traffic impact study prepared in accordance with Article 5 of this Zoning Ordinance relating to Traffic impact Study and Street Classifications (5 533.), ifa applicable. (6). A request for modification in accordance with the subsection below relating to Modifications of Standards, Criteria, and Regulations (5 405.C.4.), ta applicable. 3. Revisions to Approved Development. The plan presented in support of the conditional use is an official part of the record for said conditional use. Such plan may be changed as part of approval under the SLDO, without the need to obtain conditional use approvai of the plan change, provided that: a. To the extent that such change requires additional modification set forth in the subsection below relating to Modification of Standards, Criteria, and Regulations (5 405.C.4.), conditional use approval of such modification is obtained prior to approval of the Preliminary or Final Subdivision and/or Land Development Plan, whichever applies. b. Such change does not ncrease the maximum density limitations set forth in the (OSDO) Zone. C. Such change does not decrease the minimum required percentage of public open space land set forth in the (OSDO) Zone. d. Such change does not increase the maximum lot coverage limitations set forth in the (OSDO) Zone. Page 4-39 Rapho Township Zoning Ordinance Overlay Zones Article 4 Adopted November: 7, 2013 2. Such change does not increase the overall density beyond the density contemplated under the conditional use plan. f. Such change does not decrease the overall percentage of public open space land by more than five (5) percent of the total percentage contemplated under the conditional use plan. g Such change does not increase the overali lot coverage beyond the coverage by more than five (5) percent of the total lot coverage contemplated under the conditional use plan. h. Such change does not alter the layout, location or design of the circulation system (streets, access drives, and bicycle, pedestrian and other similar pathways), residential uses or nonresidential uses, such that the revised layout is fundamentally different from the approved conditional use plan. . The conditional use plan, as modified or changed, complies with the standards, criteria, and regulations set forth in the (OSDO) Zone (except to the extent that any modifications are granted for such changes set forth in the subsection immediately below relating to Modification of Standards, Criteria, and Regulations (S 405.C.4.)). 4. Modification of Standards, Criteria, and Regulations. The Township Board of Supervisors, by conditional use approval, may permit the modification of the standards, criteria, or regulations setf forthin the (OSDO) Zone in order to encourage the use of innovative design. A deveioper desiring to obtain such conditional use approval shall, when making application for conditional use approval for an Open Space Design Development as required by the standards, criteria, and regulations of the (OSDO) Zone, aiso make application for conditional use approval under this subsection (5 405.C.4.). The Township Board of Supervisors shall consider both conditional use approval requests simultaneously. Any conditional use approval permitted for modification of any ofthe standards, criteria, or regulations set forth inthe (O5DO)Zone shall be subject to the following standards: a. Such modification of standards, criteria, or regulations better serves or serves equally butin a different manner the intended purposesset forthin the (OSDO)Zone. b: The design and improvement of buildings, lots, or public open space land which shall contain the modifications hall be in harmony with the design and improvement of other lots or public open space land within the Open Space Design Development and shall not, through the use of the modification, be obviously different from, or inferior to, other lots within the Open Space Design Development. Page 4-40 Rapho Township Zoning Ordinance Overlay Zones Artice 4 Adopted November: 7, 2013 C. Such modification would notr resultin adverse impact to adjoining lots, nor future inhabitants within the Open Space Design Development, including but not limited to endangering the public health, safety or welfare by: (1). Making access by emergency vehicles more difficult to dwellings; (2). Violating the other purposes for which zoning ordinances areto be enacted under Section 604(1)ofthe.MPC. d. Such modification will not result in configurations of buildings, lots, public open space land, or circulation systems (streets, access drives, and bicycle, pedestrian and other similar pathways) which shall be impractical or detract from the appearance of the Open Space Design Development. e Such modification will not result in an increase in the maximum density limitations permitted for the site set forth in the (OSDO)Zone. f. Such modification will not result in a decrease in the minimum required percentage of public open space land for the site set forth in the (OSDO) Zone. g. The extent of such modification provides the minimum amount of relief necessary to ensure compliance with the subsection above relating to Modification of Standards, Criteria, and Regulations (5 405.C.4.). h. Screening and landscaping, beyond the minimum required in Article Sof this Zoning Ordinance relating to Screening and Landscaping (S 526.) may be required to be used to ensure the privacy of the future inhabitants of the dwellings within the Open Space Design Development and to attain the proposed use of the public open space land. D. General Open Space Design Development Standards. 1. Permitted Uses. a, See Table 4-5.2 in this subsection below for the types of uses permitted in the (OSDO) Zone as part of an approved Open Space Design Development set forth by this Zoning Ordinance: Page 4-41 Rapho Township Zoning Ordinance Article 4 Overlay Zones Adopted November 7, 2013 TABLE 4-5.2 PERMITTED USES - OPEN SPACE DESIGN DEVELOPMENT OPENISPACE DESIGN DEVELOPMENT PARENT TRACT LOT AREA USE 0.00T09.99 10ACRESAND ACRES GREATER a. RESIDENTIAL USES (1). Conversion, Multiple Family NP P (2). Conversion, Two Family NP P (3) Multiple Family Dwelling NP D (4). Single Family Attached Dwelling NP P (5). Single Family Detached Dwelling P P (6). Single Family Semi- Detached Dwelling NP P (7). Two Family Detached Dwelling NP P b. NON-RESIDENTIAL USES (1). Neighborhood Center P P (2). Public Open Space Land Uses set forth in the subsection below relating to Public Open Space Permitted Land Uses (S 405.F.3.) P C. SPECIFIC ACCESSORY USES (1). Accessory uses and structures customarily incidental and subordinate to the principal uses permitted in the applicable P zone. NOTES: N/A Not Applicable P Permitted as part of a praposed Open Space Design Development NP Not Permitted as part of a proposed Open Space Design Development Page 4-42 Rapho Township Zoning Ordinance Overlay Zones Article 4 Adopted November: 7, 2013 b. Additional Requirements for Specific Non-Residential Uses. (1). Neighborhood Center (a). Within a Neighborhood Center the following uses shall be permitted: i. Commercial Uses. (1). Bank or Other Similar Financial institution; [2). Dry Cleaner, Laundry, and Laundromat; [3]. Office, Professional and Business; [4). Personal Services; [5]. Recreation, indoor; [6). Restaurant; and [7. Retail Business. ii. Institutional/Civic Uses. [1J. Daycare, Commercial; [2]. Library; and [3]. Office, Medical. ini. Other use which the Township Board of Supervisors determines during the conditional use approval process is substantially similar to the permitted uses in the subsections above (5 405.D.1.b.(1).4a).). (b). The Applicant may list a proposed range of uses that will be allowed. If such range of uses is approved as part of the conditional use approval, then each such use shall become permitted by right, provided the use and development conforms to the conditional use approval. (c). Maximum Size. The Neighborhood Center shall not exceed five thousand (5,000) square feet of gross floor area. Page 4-43 Rapho Township Zoning Ordinance Overlay Zones Article 4 Adopted November 7,2013 MB4 MJT becas 5 Dvclding 2. Area and Bulk Requirements. acrtas Zoned P-1 nar a. Minimum Required Pubfic Open Space Land. See Table 4-5.3 in this 05DO subsection below for he minimum required percentage of public open space land of the lot area (gross acreage) oft the tract proposed for an Open Space Design Developmentas stipulated for the applicable base zone. The But public open space land shall comply wita all standards, criteria, and regulations for the public open space land established in the subsection docs below relating to Public Open Space Land Standards (S 405.F.). TABLE 4-5.3 uncloke MINIMUM REQUIRED PUBLIC OPEN SPACE LAND = OPEN SPACE DESIGN Ro. DEVELOPMENT Shreek MINMUMAMOUINT OF ZONE These PUBIIC OPENSPACEIAND Pet 50% Cscrert (1) R-1) Zone b. Maximum Permitted Density Caiculation. See Tablé 4-5.4 in this subsection below for the maximum permissible number of)btsordwelling units on any tract proposed for an Open Space Desiga/bevelopment which shali be calculated by multiplying the iot area of the tract proposed for an Open Space Design Development by the density multiplier stipulated for the applicable base zone ih net Sunce docs TABLE 4-5.4 5 - MAXIMUM PERMITTED DENSITY - 'gross BCrp OPEN SPACE DESIGN DEVELOPMENT 2.0. DE Arce, MAXIMUM PERMITTED DENSITY MULTIPLIER A FOR OPEN'SPACE DESIGN DEVELOPMENT ZONE TRACT LOT AREA TRACT LOT AREA Cuodilo 0.00T T014.99ACRES 15 ACRESAND GREATER t ca (1(R-1) Zone 2 12: B PD, NOTES: On tracts with lotareas of fifteen (15) acres or greater, where buildings for multiple family dwellings bon. are proposed, the maximum density may be increased to 15 on that portion of the tract devoted to C % such dwellings, and the maximum permitted height for multiplef family dwellings buildings may be increasedt to not more than forty-five (45) feet. & pne C. Fractional Results of Density Multiplier. When determination of the amount of permitted density results in a fraction less than one-half (1/2), the Page 4-44 Rapho Township Zoning Ordinance Overlay Zones Article 4 Adopted November: 7, 2013 fractional result shall be rounded down and disregarded; and any fraction one-half (1/2) or greater, the fractional result shall be rounded up and interpreted as one (1) whole dwelling unit. d. The applicant is advised that the maximum number of dwelling units calculated under the provisions in the subsection above relating to Maximum Permitted Density Calculation (S 405.D.2.b.), may not always be achievable while meeting the minimum requirements for public open space ausvishee shoole ot be land and all other standards, criteria, and regulations set forth in the (OSDO) fortlel Zone. e. Area and Bulk Requirements. Within an Open Space Design Development, minimum setback and EP no lot area is prescribed, rather, the following lot, Ppose u o yard area regulations shall apply to any principal residential building or any - incrsing other building. At the time of conditional use application, the applicant shall Densihy indicate for each permitted use, including potential accessory uses, the limits of the building envelope within which compliance with these dwll provisions is feasible: orah (1). Minimum Building Separations. See Table 4-5.5 in this subsection jel-Pre gunio below for the minimum building separation distance: TABLE 4-5.5 DA SEPARATION DISTANCES - ths MINIMUM BUILDING mler Ppho OPEN SPACE DESIGN DEVELOPMENT krote MINIMUM BUILDING FROM TO SEPARATION DISTANEE Tlop AT ANY ONE (1) POINT (a). Rear WallofPrincipa Building Another Principal Building 50ft (b).F Front or Side Wallo of Principal Building Another Principal Building 20ft. Principal Building to whichi it is accessory (e.g., on the (C). Accessory Building same lot) 20ft. Principal Building to whichi it is not accessory (e.g., not on (d).A Accessory Building the same lot) 50ft. (2). Where any portion of a building wall is located less than five (5) feet from any lot line, the placement and design of windows and doors on such building wall shall ensure privacy for adjacent properties. Privacy is maintained by orienting windows and doors away from sight lines (e.g., above or out of view into adjacent yards or Page 4-45 Rapho Township Zoning Ordinance Overiay Zones Article 4 Adopted November 7, 2013 opposing windows or doors of adjacent buildings) or by using obscure glass. (3). Where any portion of a building is located less than five (5) feet from any lot line, a perpetual easement shall be provided for maintenance of such building, and measuring no less than ten (10) feet in width from the affected walls, which may be provided on the adjacent lot as applicable. This provision shail not apply to any lot line which separates two-family, single family attached, single family semi-detached, or multiple family dwelling units on the interior of the same principal building. (4). Except as provided under the subsection immediately below for principal buildings (5 405.D.2.e.(5)), there shall be a minimum and maximum front build-to line, in which no principal building shall be closer than fifteen (15) feet nor further than twenty (20) feet from the street right-of-way or the outside edge of the curb for an access drive. Additionally, no less than seventy (70) percent of a building's front facade (including the front facade of any covered or uncovered porches) must be located on the front build-to line; except, however, no less than fifty (50) percent of any single family attached or multiple family dwelling building must be located on the front build-to line. Front build-to lines shall be measured between the street right-of-way line or the outside edge of the curb for access drives and the ciosest facade of the building, including porches. No part of any building shall extend closer to a street or access drive than the minimum front build-to line 5Scet (5). All proposed buildings and dwelling units in an Open Space Design Development shall be situated sO that they are set back a minimum distance from the pre-development perimeter boundary of the tract proposed for an Open Space Design equal to the applicable minimum setback dimension under the applicable base zone. Existing buildings and dwellings resulting from the conversion of existing buildings, existing prior to November 7, 2013, shall comply with Article 7 of this Zoning Ordinance relating to Expansion or Alteration (5 704.). (6). Maximum Building Dimensions. See Table 4-5.6 in this subsection below for the maximum building dimension regulations: Page 4-46 Rapho Township Zoning Ordinance Overlay Zones Article 4 Adopted November: 7, 2013 - 1 TABLE 4-5.6 MAXIMUM BUILDING DIMENSIONS - OPEN SPACE DESIGN DEVELOPMENT MAXIMUM MAXIMUM USE BUILDING BUILDING WIDTH DEPTH S % 160 ft. 75ft. * (a). Buildings' NOTES: Existing buildings and dwellings resulting from the conversion of existing buildings, existing prior to November 7, 2013, shall be exempt from these requirements. (7). Maximum Height. The maximum permitted hejght shall be forty-five sagiskip Shoslhoot be (45) feet. Mahgcs Shoolet Do 28 e (8). Additional Requirements' for Specific Residertial Building Types. is All used to (a). Residential Conversions. buildings as part of multiple family conversions or two family conversions shall maintain an exterior that resembles and is EE appearance compatible with most of the existing dwellings in the auikbillny a m, neighborhood. No modification to the external appearances of the fire and Eeprahn building (except safety requirements) which ant ucrese would alter its residential character shall be permitted. denouy (b). Single Family Attached Buildings. MoC The maximum number of dwelling units within one shall be Fire preckn L (1) building eight (8). ii. The minimum width of an individual single family prclemke attached dwelling unit shall be twenty-four (24) feet. iii. No more than two (2) contiguous dwelling units shall have the same, identical: [1). Front yard setbacks and front building wall lines that are generally parallel, otherwise there shall a minimum variation distance of two (2) feet; and [2). Roof lines that generally parallel the ground along the same horizontal plane. Page 4-47 Rapho Township Zoning Ordinance Overlay Zones Articie 4 Adopted November 7, 2013 (9). Maximum Permitred Loi Coverage. See Tabie 4-5.7 in this subsection below for the maximum lot coverage regulations for the buildable portion of the Open Space Design Development tract and public open space land parcel: - TABLE 4-5.7 - e MAXIMUM LOT COVERAGE - Do woecakn OPEN SPACE DESIGN DEVELOPMENT MAXIMUM LOT Br LOT AREA EOVERAGE Soe Ppost (a). Buildable portion of the Open 16lo Uncrcsc Space Design Development tract 70% (b). Public Open Space Land Parcei 10% (10). While conformance to these area and bulk regulations set forth in the subsections above (5 405.D.2.e.) is not dependent upon any danigy specific minimum lot area or dimensions, in the course of conditional use approval, the applicant shall be required to demonstrate to the satisfaction of the Township Board of Supervisors that any lots established under the standards, criteria, and regulations set forth in the (OSDO) Zone are of appropriate size and shape relative to the following: (a). Establishment of suitable private yard areas for all residences; but no private yard area, exclusive of buildings, shall be less than four hundred (400) square feet per dwelling unit for single family and two family dwellings; (b). The proposed use of and activities upon any adjacent public open space land. (c). All principal buildings shall comply with the architectural design provisions of the subsection below relating to Architecturd Design (S 405.E.1.). E. Additional Building and Development Design Standards. 1, Architectural Design. It is not the intention of the Township of Rapho to govern specific architectural design nor to link conditional use approval to any specific architectural design criteria. Where the Township Board of Supervisors determine that architectural design as presented by the applicant is an essential means by which the Open Space Design Development complies with the objectives set forth in the (OSDO) Zone, the Township Board of Supervisors may require, as a condition of Page 4-48 Rapho Township Zoning Ordinance Overlay Zones Article 4 Adopted November 7, 2013 approval, legally-binding assurances in a recordable form acceptable to the Township of Rapho that ensures ongoing and future compliance with these architectural design requirements. F. PublicOpen Space Land Standards. The location, layout, design, uses, facilities, and activities of the public open space land shall comply with the following standards, criteria, and regulations SO as to serve Township residents adequately and conveniently and to promote conservation of the unique, sensitive, and important natural features and landscapes. 1. Consistency with Adopted Plans. The public open space land shall be generally consistent with the most recent version of the Township Comprehensive Plan, any regional open space, recreation, and greenway plan, or other applicable plan adopted by the Township of Rapho. 2. Unique, Sensitive, and Important Natural Features and Landscapes. The public open space land shall be configured to promote conservation of the following unique, sensitive, and important natural features and landscapes, to the extent feasible. It is not the intention of the Township of Rapho to require the preservation of all of the following unique, sensitive, and important natural features and landscapes: a. Natural Watercourses and Riparian Corridors. Natural watercourses, and riparian corridors as set forth in Article 5 of this Zoning Ordinance relating to Riparian Corridors (5 524.); b. Floodplains. Floodplains as set forth in Article 4 of this Zoning Ordinance relating to Floodplain Overlay (FPO) Zone (5 402.); C. Wetlands. Wetlands delineated by the National Wetlands inventory (NWI). d. Karst Topographical Hazards. Lands adjoining and within one hundred (100) feet of karst topographical hazards. Karst topographical hazards are limited to: (1). Sinkholes, (2). Closed depressions, (3). Lineaments in carbonate areas, (4). Fracture traces, (5). Caverns, (6). Faults, (7). Tunnels, Page 4-49 Rapho Township Zoning Ordinance Overlay Zones Article 4 Adopted Novamber 7, 2013 (8). Shafts, and (9). Ghost Lakes; e. Rock Outcroppings and Unique Geologic Features. Rock outcroppings, and all lands adjoining and within one hundred (100) feet of unique geologic features. Unique geologic features consists of those areas listed in the Pennsylvania Geological Survey's publication, Outstanding Scenic Geological Features of Pennsyivania (Part 1 & 2); f. Natural Steep. Slopes. Natural steep slope areas consist of contiguous areas of at least three thousand (3,000) sq. ft. with a slope greater twenty-five (25) percent; B: Highiv Erodible Soils. Highly erodible soils consist of soils: (1). Labeled as Soil Capability Classes VI Of Class VII in the Soil Survey; or (2). Having an Erosion Factor K of 0.40 or greater, as listed in Table 16 of the Soil Survey; h. PHMC Identified Historic and Archeological Resources; i, Natural Heritage Areas. Lands adjoining and within fifty (50) feet of Natural Heritage Areas as identified in the most recent version of the Natural Heritage Inventory of Lancaster County; j- Designated Park, Recreation, and Open Space Land. Lands adjoining and within one hundred fifty (150) feet of any, designated park, recreation, and open space land areas; k. PNDI sites; and Wildlife and natural habitats. 3. Public Open Space Permitted Land Uses. See Table 4-5.8 in this subsection below for the permitted uses for which the public open space land may be used: Page 4-50 Rapho Township Zoning Ordinance Overlay Zones Article 4 Adopted November 7, 2013 TABLE 4-5.8 PUBLIC OPEN SPACE PERMITTED LAND USES - OPEN SPACE DESIGN DEVELOPMENT PERMITTED USE OF USE PUBLIC OPEN SPACE LAND a. Conservation. Areas P. b. Crops/Gardening P c. Municipal Owned Uses P d. Parks/Playgrounds P e. Accessory uses and: structures customarily incidental and subordinate to the principal uses permitted in the applicable zone. P NOTES: P Permitted 4. Storm Water Management Facilities. a. Except as may be provided in the subsection immediately below (S 405.F.4.b.), no more than fifteen (15) percent of the public open space land shall consist of storm water management facilities. All storm water management facilities permitted to be located in public open space land shall be limited to approved storm water/water quality BMPS complying with the provisions of the Township of Rapho storm water requirements. Such storm water management facilities shall be owned and maintained by an approved Homeowners' Association or other entity approved by the Township Board of Supervisors. b. At the discretion of the Township Board of Supervisors. more than fifteen (15) percent of the public open space land may be devoted to storm water management facilities where the applicant can demonstrate to the satisfactionof the Township Board SpenscNSNgS (1). Are designed: (a). As approved stormwater/water quality BMPS; (b). To promote recharge of the groundwater system; (c). To be available and appropriate for active or passive recreational use or scenic enjoyment; and Page 4-51 Rapho Township Zoning Ordinance Overlay Zones Article 4 Adopted November 7, 2013 (2). Otherwise conform to the purposes standards, criteria, and regulations for public open space land set forth in the (OSDO) Zone. (3). Are owned and maintained by an approved Homeowners' Association, condominium, or other entity approved by the Township Board of Supervisors. 5. Sewage Service and Water Supoly Facilities and Essential Services. Subject to the provisions of measurement of minimum required public open space land stipulated in the (OSDO) Zone, underground sewage service and water supply facilities, along with other underground or overhead essential services, may be located entirely or partially within the public open space land. Where such facilities are so located, easements satisfactory to the Township Board of Supervisors shall be established to require and enable maintenance of such facilities by the appropriate parties. 6. Layout and Design of Public Open Space Permitted Land. The layout and design of the required public open space land shall include: a. At least one-half(1/21 of the lots pr dwelling units in an Open Space Design Development shall directly adjoin or face the required public open space *onibesher land across a street or access drive; and all lots or dwelling units shall be within fourhundred/400 feet ofthe required public open space land. Chosd pokce wooe - 1 4 yercase Boe rpoSe b Acentrally locatet access point to the required public open space land, with danat a minimum width of thirty-five (35) feet, shail be for every fifteen Qpand, provideg, 15jlotsorc dwelling units. 1 alshe dor V Espankd Z2as nbe N 6 C. At least one side-of the required bno open space land shall adjoin a street or access drive for a minimum distance of fifty 50) feet and suitable for access of emergency and maintenance vehicles. d, The required public open space land shall be located near and interconnected with park/recreation or open space areas on adjoining parcels wherever possibie including, where appropriate, provisions for trails and pathways for general public use to create linked systems within Rapho Township and surrounding municipalities. DDot de Poroap - Coes - or Wene 7. Areas and Features Not Qualifying for Public Open Space Land. khis, a. No portion of the public open space land shall be measured as contributing to the minimum required public open space land or to any public open space land utilized in calculation of any density bonus where: (1). Within twenty-five (25) feet of any building except buildings devoted to public open space permitted land uses. Soe * Podcishen shoold not be gcanted. l5 do mncrase densihy Page 4-52 Purpone Raphol Township Zoning Ordinance Overlay Zones Article 4 Adopted November 7, 2013 (2). Extending less than one hundred (100) feet in the narrowest dimension at any point, except as provided in the subsection immediately below (S 405.F.7.b.). b. Where deemed appropriate by the Township Board of Supervisors, public open space land may have a dimension less than one hundred (100) feet if such areas contain at least one (1) of the following amenities: (1). Walking/bicycle trail; (2). Playground facility; (3). Picnic table and bench; or (4). Any other amenity as requested by Township Board of Supervisors and agreed to by applicant. 8. Perimeter Parking and Street Frontage and Access. Where deemed appropriate by the Township Board of Supervisors, the required public open space land shall be provided with sufficient perimeter parking, and with safe and convenient access by adjoining street frontage or other rights-of-way or easements capable of accommodating pedestrian, bicycle, maintenance, vehicle, and other trafic, and containing appropriate access improvements. 9, Coordination with SLDO Park and Recreation Land Dedication Requirements. Open Space Design Developments providing the minimum amount of required public open space land as required by the (OSDO) Zone shall not be required to provide onien A additional park and recreation land or fees in lieu ofi in accordance with the SLDO. Tup 60 000 dosb Ac Rcc A Fce e ug a 4g in Phases. Where an Open Space Design Development is planned to occur in two (2) or more development phases, all of the required public open space land shall be offered for dedication, and permanently recorded the first (15) phase. 11. Analysis and Required Public Open Space Land Plan. a. In designing and providing for the public open space land and associated facilities, in addition to the need, adequacy, and feasibility of the proposed location, layout, design, uses, facilities, and activities, the following shall be considered: (1). Compatibility with the public open space resource protection objectives set forth in the subsection above relating to Public Open Space Land Standards (S 405.F.); and (2). The park and recreation facility needs of the Township, and the area adjacent to the proposed Open Space Design Development and the public open space land. Page 4-53 Rapho Township Zoning Ordinance Overlay Zones Article 4 Adoptedi November 7, 2013 b. Any application for an Open Space Design Development shall contain a conceptual plan for the long term management of the public open space land which is to be created as part of the Open Space Design Development. At a minimum, such a plan shall include a discussion of the: (1). Manner in which the public open space land will be owned and by whom it will be managed and maintained; (2). Conservation and land management techniques and practices which will be used to conserve and perpetually protect the public open space land, including a conservation plan in accordance with Article 5 of this Zoning Ordinance relating to Conservation Plans (5 506.), where applicable; (3). Professional and personnel resources that will be necessary in order to maintain and manage the property; (4). Nature of public access that is planned for the public open space land; and (5). Source of money that will be available for such management, preservation and maintenance on a perpetual basis. The adequacy and feasibility of this conceptual management plan, as well, as its compatibility with the open space resource protection objectives set forth in the subsection above relating to Public Open Space Land Standards (S 405.F.) shall be a factor in the approval or denial of the conditional use application by the Township Board of Supervisors. C. The conceptual management plan shall be transformed into a more detailed public open space land management plan and presented to the Township of Rapho for review and approval with the Preliminary Subdivision and/or Land Development Plan. The Township Board of Supervisors may require that the management plan be recorded, with the Final Subdivision and Land Development Plans, in the Office of the Recorder of Deeds of Lancaster County. In order to allow for the changing needs inherent in the perpetual management of land, the management plan shall contain a provision to the effect that it may be changed by written application to the Township Board of Supervisors, SO long as the proposed change is feasible and consistent with the purposes of preservation of open space land set forth in the (OSDO) Zone and sO long as the plan for such change avoids a likelihood of the obligation for management and maintenance of the land falling upon the Township of Rapho without the consent of the Township Board of Supervisors, and the approval of the Township Board of Supervisors in that regard shall not be unreasonably withheld or delayed. Page 4-54 Rapho Township Zoning Ordinance Overlay Zones Article 4 Adopted November: 7,2 2013 G. Standards for Ownership of Public Open Space Land. 1. Except to provide for permitted public open space area land uses, public open space land shall be restricted from further subdivision or development by deed restriction, conservation easement, or other agreement in a form acceptable to the Township of Rapho and duly recorded in the office of the Recorder of Deeds of Lancaster County. Subject to such permanent restrictions and the requirement that the public open space land and associated facilities be open and accessible to the residents of Rapho Township, public open space land in any Open Space Design Development may be owned by the Township Board of Supervisors, a homeowners' association, a land trust or other conservation organization recognized by the Township, or by a similar entity, or may remain in private ownership. a. Offer of Dedication. (1). The Township of Rapho may, but shall not be required to, accept dedication in the form of fee simple ownership of the public open space land provided: (a). Such land is open and accessible to the residents of Rapho Township; (b). There is no cost of acquisition other than any costs incidental to the transfer of ownership such as title insurance and recording fees; and (c). The Township of Rapho agrees to and has access to maintain such lands. (2). Where the Township of Rapho accepts dedication of the public open space land that contain improvements, the Township Board of Supervisors may require the posting of financial security to ensure structural integrity of said improvements as weil as the functioning of said improvements for a term not to exceed eighteen (18) months from the date of acceptance of dedication. The amount of financial security shall not exceed fifteen (15) percent of the actual cost of installation of said improvements. b. Homeowners' Association- The public open space land and associated facilities may be held in common ownership by a homeowners' association. The homeowners' association shall be formed and operated under the following provisions: (1). The developer shall provide a description of the homeowners' association including its bylaws and methods for maintaining the public open space land. Page4-55 Rapho Township Zoning Ordinance Overlay Zones Article 4 Adopted November: 7, 2013 (2). The homeowners' association shall be organized by the developer and operating with financial subsidization by the developer, before the sale of any lots within the Open Space Design Development. (3). Membership in the homeowners' association shall be mandatory for all purchasers of homes therein and their successors. The conditions and timing of transferring control of the homeowners' association from developer to homeowners shall be dentified. (4). The homeowners' association shall be responsible for maintenance and insurance on the public open space land, enforceable by liens placed by the homeowners' association. Maintenance obligations also may be enforced by the Township of Rapho which may place liens to recover its costs. Any governmental body with jurisdiction in the area where the Open Space Design Development is located may place liens on the owners of the public open space land to collect unpaid taxes. (5). The members of the homeowners' association shall share equitably the costs of maintaining and developing such common land. Shares shall be defined within the homeowners' association declaration or bylaws. Homeowners' association dues shall be structured to provide for both annual operating costs and to cover projected long-range costs relating to the repair of any capital facilities (which shall be deposited in a sinking fund reserved for just such purposes). (6). In the event of a proposed transfer, within the methods here permitted, of public open space land by the homeowners' association, or of the assumption of maintenance of such land by the Township, notice of such action shall be given to all property owners within the Open Space Design Development. (7). The homeowners' association shall have or hire adequate staff or professional consuitant to administer common facilities and properly and continually maintain the public open space land. (8). The homeowners' association may lease the public open space land to any other qualified person, or corporation, for operation and maintenance of such lands, but such a lease agreement shall provide: (a). That the residents of Rapho Township shall at all times have access to the public open space land and associated facilities contained therein; and (b). The public open space land to be leased shall be maintained for the purposes set forth in the (OSDO) Zone and this Zoning Ordinance. Page 4-56 Rapho Township Zoning Ordinance* Overlay Zones Artide 4 Adopted November 7, 2013 (9). The lease shall be subject to the approval of the Township Board of Supervisors and any transfer or assignment of the lease shall be further subject to the approval of the Township Board of Supervisors. Lease agreements sO entered upon shall be recorded with the Recorder of Deeds of Lancaster County within thirty 30) days of their execution and a copy of the recorded lease shall be filed with the Secretary of1 the Township of Rapho. (10). Homeowners' association documentation. demonstrating compliance with the provisions herein shall be filed with the Final Subdivision and/or Land Development Plans. At the time of Preliminary Plan submission, the appliçant shall provide draft homeowners' association documentation with sufficient detail to demonstrate feasible compliance with the standards, criteria, and regulations set forth in the (OSDO) Zone. C. Condominiums. The public open space land and associated facilities may be held in common through the use of condominium agreement(s), approved by the Township Board of Supervisors. Such agreement shall be in conformance with the Pennsylvania Uniform Condominium Act. All public open space land shall be held as "common elements" or "limited common elements. # To the degree applicable, condominium agreement(s) shall comply with the provisions of the subsection above (S 405.G.1.b.), set forth for homeowners' associations. Condominium agreement(s) shall be filed with the Final Subdivision and/or Land Development Plans. At the time of Preliminary Plan submission, Applicant shall provide draft condominium agreement(s) with sufficient detail to demonstrate feasible compliance with the standards, criteria, and regulations set forth in the (OSDO) Zone. d. Transfer of Easements to a Private Conservation Organization. With the permission of the Township Board of Supervisors, an owner may transfer easements to a private, nonprofit, organization recognized by the Township of Rapho, among whose purpose it is to conserve open space and/or natural resources, provided that: (1). The organization is acceptable to Township Board of Supervisors and is a bona fide conservation organization with perpetual existence; (2). The conveyance contains appropriate provision for proper reverter or retransfer in event that organization becomes unwilling or unable to continue carrying out its functions; (3). A maintenance agreement acceptable to the Township Board of Supervisors is entered into by the developer and the organization; and Page 4-57 Rapho Township Zoning Ordinance Overlay Zones Article 4 Adopted November 7. 2013 (4). The public open space land and associated facilities are open and accessible to the residents of Rapho Township e. Private Ownership of Public Open Space Land. Public open space land may be retained in ownership by the Applicant or may be transferred to other private parties subject to compliance with all standards, criteria, and regulations for public open space land set forth in the (OSDO) Zone, and open and accessible to the residents of Rapho Township, All or portions of the designated public open space land, where permitted by the Township Board of Supervisors, may be included within or divided among one (1) or more of the individual lots. Where deemed appropriate, the Township Board of Supervisors may require that responsibility for maintenance of the public open space land be conferred upon and/or divided among the owners of one (1) or more individual lots. 2. Public Open Space Land Financial Security for Completion. a. All landscape improvements, plantings, accessways, trails, and recreational facilities within the public open space land shall be provided by the developer as applicable. Financial security shall be required to cover costs of all installation of proposed improvements in the public open space land. The financial security shall be in the same form and adhere to the same conditions as otherwise required for proposed improvements under the SLDO, b. An appropriate portion of the financia! security wil! be applied by the Township of Rapho should the developer fail to install the landscape improvements, plantings, accessways, trails, and recreational facilities. 3. Public Open Space Land Financial Security for Maintenance. Where the Township of Rapho accepts dedication of the public open space land that contain improvements, the Township Board of Supervisors may require the posting of financial security to ensure structural integrity of said improvements as well as the functioning of said improvements. The financial security shall be in the same form and adhere to the same conditions as otherwise required for proposed improvements under the SLDO. Page 4-58 CooNTy COpREMESSIE PA LACES 1040 - N IIL 51 0 a - 1 E I a 5 o 9 9 3 - - - 3 - : a I R t à ts ES2 attrsa BsCa - E - 1 - / a : I 2 N E a a - 0O f HE HE B Mauten LESTRAL PE4a) CorP Pno Manheim Central Region Comprehensive Plan MANHEIM BOROUGH : PENN TOWNSHIP . RAPHO TOWNSHIP . MANHEIM CENTRAL SCHOOLDISTRICT Environment Community Agriculture Manheim Central Region Comprehensive Plan Section 1: Executive Summary Introduction Located in northern Lancaster County on the border of Lebanon County, the Manheim Central Region is comprised of Manheim Borough, Rapho Township and Penn Township. andis wholly encompassed by the Manheim Central School District. Agriculture is the comerstone of the Region's economy, environment and community character. Anchored by the goods, services and housing provided in the Manheim Urban Growth Area and the Donegal/Mount Joy Urban Growth Area, the Region's rural areas are extensive with rich soils, creeks and the mountainous highlands in the north. Land Use Defining Urban and Rural Areas Manheim Borough, Rapho Township and Penn Township were the first region in Lancaster County to adopt an urban growth area in 1993. The Region adopted the urban growth area with the shared goal of supporting reinvestment and development in the Borough, preserving natural resources and strengthening the agricultural industry in rural areas. Today the goal remains essentially the same. The Manheim Central Region seeks to efficiently develop land within designated growth areas, while preserving land in the rural areas for agricultural use and environmental conservation. Urban Growth Area Adjustments The Plan recommends six areas of adjustment to the existing urban growth area (UGA) two expansions and designation of four "future growth areas" to counterbalance the expansions. One expansion area is simply encompassing the Brookshire neighborhood in Penn Township that is already developed and connected to public water and sewer. The second expansion area is in Penn Township and allows for development that would extend water and sewer infrastructure to the Penryn Village Area to ameliorate the failing on-lot systems that degrade water quality in the area. The Manheim Central Region has a considerable amount of land nside its UGAs; however, not all of the land inside the UGAS is expected or desired to be developed in the short- to medium-term. Four such areas have been designated as future growth areas to reflect the Region's desire to preserve the current agricultural or rural development patterns. In the Manheim UGA, these include two areas in Penn Township near the southern edge of the Manheim UGA that are currently active farms and the Sporting Hill area of Rapho Township, which lacks the infrastructure to support significant new development In the DonegalountoyUGA; allland in Rapho thatis currentlyzoned for agricultural use has been designated af future growth area. The map on the following page llustrates all land use recommendations. 3 Manheim Central Region Comprehensive Plan LZABET OWNSH BDVAT UPAN Exsansion A E:pansian 72 Futu Grott: Aras Future Longtern Growth Futars Area Growta Ana 8: S" Raphe frungie JAT4 SOLRCE Cou y Ges gr pnc rig Ps Digt Future Land Use Policy Map Future Land Use Categaries Residential Industrial Park Crossroad Community Mixed Use Rurai Mixed Use Rural Adjustments to Growtn Area - Future Growth Area Commercial Village Growth Area (Growth expeçted in the: ong-termj 4 Manheim Central Region Comprehensive Plan Natural Resources Sustaining Environmental Quality The Regioni is united by its vital natural resources including water resources, agricultural soils, wetlands, floodplains, wocdlands and important habitat areas. The Plan recommends several strategies fori stormwater management to protect Chiques Creek watershed. Recommendations include improving local updating development ordinances and utilizing the Chiques Creek Watershed Alliance to promote programs and projects. Community Character Celebrating Our Heritage, Taking Pride in Our Future The Region's agricuitural and wooded landscapes, the Borough's dense concentration of historic resources and vibrant business district, as well as new areas of development all bring energy and vitality to the Region. The goals for the Community Character Element of the Planinclude conserving the agricultural as well as cuitural and historic resources and encouraging high quality design in new development. landscape, Community Services Keeping Our Community Active and Safe The Community Services element covers recreation, community facilities and emergency services. The Plan recommends developing strategic plans in each of these areas to address opportunities to coordinate and shareresources. Short- and long- term strategic plans are needed for recreational facilities and programs in the Region. Planning and fundraising for an improved library facility is also needed. Similarly, a plan and coordinated effort for funding and potentially consolidating the Region's emergency services should be explored a regional emergency management committee. through Education Teaching Our Community Vision The education-related goals of this Plan include providing high-quality, cost effective educational opportunities to all children and adults in the Region and improving communication among the and the general public about the benefits of implementing this Plan. municipalities Regional Coordination Working Together for Long-Term Prosperity The Region has agreed in this element of the Plan to continue to identify and pursue future coordinate the provision of services to the citizens of the Region. Three key recommendations opportunities to include continuing 106 evaluate ther need foriccal pciice service inPapnoTownshp. formalizing the existing sharing ofresources across municipal boundaries and pursuing sharedorcoordinatedi water andi wastewater systems. 6 Manheim Central Region Comprehensive Plan Map 3.2 County Growth Management Plan Framework Elstoaville Mastimsomille DOMEGAL Newtown Growth Area Capacity Analysis A growth area capacity analysis, shown in Table 3.3 Build-Out Analysis, was conducted to assist the Region in determining whether there is adequate land areacontained in the existing urban and village growth areas to accommodate projected growth over the life of the Comprehensive Plan. The County's Comprehensive Plan recommends that 85 percent of future growth be targeted in urban and village growth areas, with the remaining 15 percent accommodated inl Rural Areas, with at least 5 percent in village growth areas. Density for Growth Areas Zonin Assumptions Kay-Rpho Uses qss Balance, the Growth Management Element of the County Comprehensive Plan recommends that a - nsh the average density of fnew development within an urban growth area be 7.5 dwelling units pec net S acre. The County expects that, in addition to new development, urban growth areas will also encourage infill and redevelopment a 2-1 opportunities to provide range of housing options, including multi-family housing. Balance also recommends that commercial and industrial development be 05Do directed into growth areas. In addition to considering the County's policy guidelines for new residential densities, the Region reviewed existing particularly recent - development densities to better understand the context for new development. Understanding what density exists versus what densities are proposed is important to understanding how the Region may need to change to meet future development goals. 24 Manheim Central Region Comprehensive Plan To understand existing densities and trends, this Plan analyzed existing residential densities in the Borough as well as recent development in each of the townships. The total acreage of occupied residential land in the Borough amounts to approximately 380 net acres1, which accommodates approximately 2,009 households. The average number of households per net acre is 5.3. The recent Brookshire development in Penn Township ranges from 2.7 to 8.4 dwelling units perr net acre, for an average of 4.4 dwelling units per net acre. The new Elm Tree development in Rapho Township ranges from 3.8 to 11.4 dwelling units per net acre, for an average of5 5.8 dweling units per net acre. Penn Township's Pleasant View development contains a combination of apartments, cottages, assisted living rooms and nursing care rooms with a final approved plan of 423 units, or 8.5 dwelling units per net acre. As is noted in the Land Use Goals and Objectives of the Plan, the Region supports the conceptof more compact development in the designated growth areas. The Region seeks future development at densities thatare higherthan fypical suburban development in ordert to provide more diversityin housing types more efficient use ofla land and support compact mixed-use neighborhoods. The Region supports increasing development densities in concert with building design standards that ensure new development is pedestran-supporlive and incorporates appropriate scale and massing, open space areas, stormwater management and other sustainable design elements. After carefully considering existing built densities, particularly those for recent residential projects, and the County's recommendation for average new densities in the growth areas, the Region has agreed to set the average minimum density at 6 dwelling units per acre for new development inside the UGAS. Given its overail rural and small-town nature, the Region/ considers a 6 unit per acre net density target to be a chalienging, yet achievable goal. Det) The capacity analysis assumes that the average density of future residentiar development wil be 6 dwelling units per hetàcre. The existing zoning does not permit this intensity of development by right in most situations. and this Plan's recommendations include strategies for increasing the density of future development in the urban growth areas and ensuring that new deveiopment buiit at these densities adhere to high-quality design principles. 1 6 now Ropho Various Densities gel*e Examples of Som here to IZ. PS Tss The following examples of residential housing densities are provided in a range from densest to least dense. These examples are from Lancaster County and some of the examples were taken àcre from the May 2009 report by the Lancaster County Planning Commission, "The Neighborhoods of ts Lancaster County: A Local Guide to Visualizing Residential Densities." R-I -The densities arep providedas "Net Density" or Dwelling Units per NetAcre!" These terms are OS0D defined as the units on land devoted to facilities. It Crihisl number of housing per acre residentialf does not + include land that is public, such as right-of-ways. parks and sidewalks. Generally the parcel lot lines are considered to define the net acreage. The exception to that rule is on land where 3 mort environmental features are present. In thisPlan, steep slopes. wetlands and floodplains are not considered partoft ther net acreage. per It should be noted that the densities below are average densities of the entire neighborhood. acr Eyt Pr C Ther residential land area includes occupied, residential parcel area from the Lancaster County Tax Assessor 2008. lond hr opon 25 "onky patess s proposcl Manheim Central Region Comprehensive Plan 9.1 dwelling units per net acre - Hazel Street in Manheim Borough a : 8.5 dwelling units pernet acre = Pleasant View in Penn Township EE 7 dwelling units per net acre - Castleton in Marietta Borough and Mill Creek in West Lampeter Township 26 Manheim Central Region Comprehensive Plan 5.8 dwelling units per net acre - Elm Tree in Rapho Township A 4.4 dwelling units per net acre - Brookshire in Penn Township Build-Out Methodology Utilizing data from the Lancaster County Tax Assessor's Office, vacant and agricultural land within the urban and village growth areas was identified. Floodplains were subtracted from the land area. The build-out land use category assigned to the vacant and agricultural land was determined by identifying the underlying zoning classification (commercial, industrial, residential). The build-out assumes that the vacant residential and agricultural land located in growth areas will be developed at the density target of 6 units per net acre inside the UGAS and 2.5 units per net acre in the Penryn Village Growth Area. The commercial and industrial density assumptions are based on typical development patterns in small towns and rural areas. All density assumptions represent an average for vacant land in each growth area, for which individual developments would include a diversity of development types and densities. Some vacant land within a growth area will be better * Kay suited for development at lower densities than 6 units per acre and other areas will be appropriate for higher densities than 6 units per acre. The acreage shown for the Donegal/Mount Joy Growth Area includes only land within the Manheim Central Region. * data-kod aro Wcko Sunge Goryly elmost 4 Chtwe perlineker of Lle Suocct trech Cosll be relgpably arqued tnet Suoiget < most appropriate Lounss re B p Manheim Central Region Comprehensive Plan Table 3.3: Build-Out of Existing Vacant and Agricultural Land within the Region's Urban and Village Growth Areas Source: Lancaster County Tax. Assessor; Revised by URS Growth Density Area Land Use Category Acres* Assumption Build-out Potential Squarefeet Vacant Commercial 37.82 30% 494,178 commercial Square feet Vacant Industrial 123.18 15% 804,827 industrial New residential Vacant Residential 311.16 6.00 1,867 units Vstablock 25a New oher A - residential Future Growth Area 94.82 6.00 569 units New residential Expansion Area 87,79 6.00 527 units Square feet Vacant Commercial 41.53 30% 542,738 commercial Square feet Vacant Industrial 155.07 15% 1,013,240 industrial New residential Vacant Residential 43.54 6.00 261 units New residential Future Growth Area 61.72 6.00 370 units Square feet Vacant Commercial 0.63 10% 2,732 commercial. - Square feet Goet > Vacant Industrial 0.00 0% industrial 2 New Loexrt hes WJhure's Enis a residential Soutin mep a 6 d Vacant Residential 96.48 2.50 units ATE && Square feet P712 Vacant Commercial 79.97 1,039,649 commercial Square feet poT Vacant Industrial 278.25 1,818,067 industrial 05 New residential Vacant Residential 623.65 3,835 units C Floodplains were excluded from the acreage and the acreage was reduced by 25 percent to M accommodate future roads and infrastructure needs Jhis 15 in-portat Analysis The Region's designated growth areas have the potential fors significant additional growth, lfthe municipalities meetthe average densily targets as assumed in the ouid-outanalysis. the urban a 16 *This 28 imporlart, soper rceompnds 261 ynz 3.54 Aeres le L - 2 - 92 Jecant on Sodpl & Cra + Manheim Central Region Comprehensive Plan village growth areas have enough vacantarea to accommodate 4,194 dwelling units, more thanone million square feet of commercial building space and 1.8 million square feet of industrial building space. Overall demandfor new development between 2010 and 2030isli likely to be significantiylower than the development capacity oft the Region. Residential capacity significantiy exceeds the 2030 target households set by Balance. The targets set in Balance seek to accommodate 85 percent of projected population growth and resulting residential development in the designated growth areas, For the Manheim Central Region, this is only an additional 542 households - or 13 percent of remaining development capacity. Table 3.4 below compares current estimated households with County targets for 2030. Table 3.4: Total Households 2000, Estimated Households 2008 and County Household Targets 2030 Difference between 2008 Total do a 2030 Target Household anstruction. Households? Estimate Total u 201 - Vacancy Estimate of (Lancaster and 2030 Househoids Rate Total County County 2000 Households Planning Target (US Census) 20081 Commission) Households Penn Township 2,606 2178 3,120 3,689 569 Rapho Township 3,075 4,158 4,065 (93) Manheim Borough 1,989 - 2,009 2,075 66 Region 7,670 1570 9,287 9,829 542 Households were calculated by collecting municipal building permit data for new housing unit construction between 2000 and 2008, and then assuming and subtracting the same vacancy rate as the 2000 Census. The estimate for households between 2000 and 2008 was added to the. 2000 households to create a total estimate of households in the region in 2008. 2 2030 target households represent the 85 percent of the Region's projected population that is expected to be accommodated inside a designated growth area. woul Cone Geepecpke ho tLe mast desralde locabons S Zorech butatht doe Dot Exeeed 4o Te Decde s neyplon E Manheim Central Region Comprehensive Plan Table 3.5: Residential Growth Rates from 2008 to 2030 ndicates that the entire Region is expected to grow by only six percent between 2008 and 2030. A six percent rate is a slow pace of growth for a 22 year period. However, during the years between 2000 and 2008 the Region and the nation experienced an unprecedented increase in housing development. The vast majority of growth is projected to occur in Penn Township, not surprising since most of the Region's vacant land inside a designated growth area is located there. Penn is projected to grow by about 18 percent. The number of housing units in Rapho Township is projected to decrease slightly, though as noted below that is unlikely. The Borough is projected to experience about three percent growth, nearly all of that through infill and redevelopment. The extremely low growth rate for the region, and particularly for Rapho Township, is likely at least partially an artifact of faster than projected growth between 2000 and 2008 than a real decrease in households or housing units between 2008 and 2030. However, the Region should not expect the fast rate of growth experienced in the 1990s through 2007 to continue By 2008 the amount of new housing development being permitted dramatically decreased. n 2010. when this Plan was prepared, the uncertainty in the real estate and financial markets/made: future projections difficuitto use. 15 - (e ars olet From a land use planning perspective, the important message is that the existing designated growth areas (DGAs) contain nearly eight times more land than will be needed to accommodate expected growth over the next 20 years. Even if growth significantly exceeds projections, the Region's growth areas would easily accommodatel The excess capacity is an important issue for the because excess capacity inefficient use of land with lower density et Region growth encourages development that is scattered throughout a growth area, rather than compact, contiguous development patterns. It: should also be noted that the capacity for new residential development alone far exceeds the permitted water for the Sah Sp supply capacity Region. For these reasons, the Region should not add undeveloped acreage to its designated growth areas - though it could consider adding already developed land that is adjacent to an existing DGA. Further, the Region's municipalities should consider reducing the amount of land in the DGAS. Dves - Ths wosch bavc a Residential & an Table 3.5: Growth Rates from 2008 to 2030 on - goal 2030 Target Lhat & D Households Difference between Percent Estimate of (Lancaster 2008 Total Change X Total County Household Estimate between Households Planning and 2030 County 2008 and a Se 2008* Commission) Target Households 2030 a &tp pu Penn Township 3,120 3,689 569 18% DE Rapho Township 4,158 4,065 (93) -2% Manheim Borough 2,009 2,075 66 3% 9,287 9,829 542 6% 0R Region Based on the Estimated Households 2008 and County Household Targets 2030 described in Table 3.4: borek Psva eyd ruplbarbod bS 30 - uaer Manheim Central Region Comprehensive Plan Land Use Recommendations Comprehensive Plan land use recommendations are llustrated in Map 3.3: Future Land Use Policy Map. The following goals, objectives and strategies - which are consistent with the Lancaster County Comprehensive Plan, the goals of the 1993 Comprehensive Plan and the 2000 Strategic Plan Update - provide details on implementation of map recommendations. Goal 3.1: Identify and strengthen distinctions between Designated Rural Areas and Designated Growth Areas in the Region, supporting prosperity and sustainability and the preservation of natural, agricultural and cultural resources. Objectives Discourage linear patterns of development contiguous to major roadways and country lanes, and encourage further development of existing crossroads and village-style pattems outside of the UGA Support further development of green building design and energy generation in land use regulations Limit development in the Turnpike nterchange area to that which capitalizes on its location, but does not require the extension of infrastructure such as water and wastewater services. Strategies 3.1.1. Adjust the urban growth areas to reflect recent development and future development plans Brookshire Development: Brookshire was developed after the completion of the 2000 Strategic Plan Update and includes a mix of single-family detached homes and twin homes. Itis currently zoned for residentiai development and is adjacent to, but outside of, the Manheim UGA. The development has public water and sewer service. Tobe consistent with the infrastructure service areas, the Urban Growth Area should be expanded to include this area. Future Brookshire Development: A developer is interested in developing an additional age-restricted community just north of Pleasant View on a parçel located just outside of the existing Manheim UGA. Adding this area to the UGA would help Penn Township to extend wastewater service to the Penryn Village Growth Area to address its failing on-lot systems as recommended in Penn's Act 537 Plan. Public water and sewer that would be provided to this area to serve new development would reduce the distance that the Township would need to extend lines to Penryn, reducing public costs. This area should be identified as a "future growth area" or added outright to the UGA. Concurrent with its addition to the UGA, zoning in this area should be revised to allow for multi-family housing, to require a minimum density of development and provide for compact traditional neighborhood design standards. Please refer to Land Use Goal 2 for more detail on zoning standards to support compact development within the UGA. 31 Manheim Central Region Comprehensive Plan 3.1.2. Designate Future Growth Areas Future Growth Areas are essentially "holding areas" for land not needed for - or desired to be - development in the short-term. Under the guidance provided in Balance, land inside the UGA should be zoned for development at intensities needed to meet density targets. Land designated as a future growth area can be zoned for agricultural or open space uses for the purpose of "holding" it for development until it is needed. Rapho Township currently has land inside the Mount Joy/Donegal UGA in the Triangle Area that is zoned for agricultural use. This land should also be designated as a future growth area. To offset the Brookshire expansion of the Manheim UGA in Penn Township, Penn should reduce land available for development elsewhere in the UGA. Penn should designate two "future growth areas" in the southern portion of the Manheim UGA as illustrated in Map 3.4: Recommended UGA Adjustments. Designating future growth areas provides flexibility in the timing of zoning land for future development. Sporting Hill: The Sporting Hill area is located at the crossroads of Route 772 and Colebrook Road in Rapho Township. Itis very near to Manheim Borough, but it is not served by public water and sewer. The Rapho Township Act 537 Plan identifies it as an area with failing on-lot systems and recommends either building a package wastewater water treatment facility or connecting to the Borough Authority to solve the problem. However, recent well tests have shown improving water quality, SO the 537 Plan's immediate recommendation is to pursue additional testing prior to implementing an expensive construction solution. This means that any action - including a potential connection to the Borough Authority - is not likely to occur in the near term. Since this area is not served with water and sewer and iti is not expected to be in the short-term, the Sporting Hill area should be designated a future growth area. 3.1.3. Use rural area strategies to designate Elstonville, Newtown and Mastersonville as crossroad communities and designate other rural areas. Elstonville and Newtown are identified as crossroad communities in Balance, while Mastersonville s shown as a village growth area. Given their respective development patterns, roles as centers to the surrounding agricultural uses and lack of access to water and sewer services, all three should be designated as crossroad communities as described in Balance. Balance defines crossroad communities as follows: Crossroad Communities are compact gatherings of generally 20 to 50 dwellings with a distinct identity in a rural area, typically located where two or more roads intersect. A Crossroads Community often has a central gathering place and may have a few supporting commercial, institutional, or public uses. Where appropriate these communities may accommodate a limited amount of new development. Only development that is compatible with the traditional character and small scale oft these communities, and which is feasible to support with rural infrastructure, should be permitted in Crossroads Communities. Crossroad Communities are not expected to have public water and sewer. 32 Manheim Central Region Comprehensive Plan Map 3.4: Recommended UGA Adjustments NEMPORT RD TOWN RD 72 UGA Expansion FAIRVIE BE PENN - UGA Expansion e floa accomodale existing Brookshire developmen!) & * Doe Run Corridor E KOZ 772 Long.term, Future 772 Growth Area Rt72 Corridor Long-term, Future Long-term, Growth Future Area Growth e Area 72) Future Land Use Policy Map Future Land Use Categories Residential Industrial Park Crossroad Communily Mixed Use Rural Mixed Use Rural Adjustments to Growth. Area Fulure Growth. Area Commercial Village Growth. Area (Growth expected only in the long-lerm) 33 Manheim Central Region Comprehensive Plan 3.1.4. Create a process and minimum standards for making adjustments to the Region's designated growth areas. The first three recommendations in this section address potential designated growth area adjustments raised during the comprehensive planning process. While this comprehensive plan update does not foresee a need for other designated growth area (DGA) amendments, iti is intended to be a 10-year planning document. Iti is possible that opportunities or issues could arise during that time that would warrant consideration of an expansion or contraction of the DGAS. Iti is the policy of this plan that any change to the DGA must be consistent with the goals of this comprehensive plan and rooted in sound planning principles. Designated growth areas support a regional planning approach. Allowing the expansion or contraction of a designated growth area by approval of one municipality does not achieve regional planning. Thus, any proposed expansion or contraction ofa DGA affects all the municipalities that are a part of that DGA; therefore, any changes in the defined area should be done at a regional levei or with input from the associated municipalities, authorities and school district. Prior to determining any changes to one of the designated growth areas, the Region should determine what percentage of build out of residential and non-residential development can be met within the DGA prior to any expansion or contraction to the DGA. At a minimum, any application for a change to the DGA must include: Any proposed expansion must include a potential contraction area of the DGA that is ofa similar amount of land area. Or the application may show that a similar amount of land will be permanently preserved through the transfer of development rights or preservation of agricultural land. Application must indicate the acreage, location and planned density per acre of the proposed development to be included in the expansion area. Application must show that the land proposed for expansion is not desirable for agricultural purposes. Any proposed expansion must indicate how this is not intrusive to any surrounding agricultural lands. Expansion proposals must indicate how they will be consistent with density, design, connectivity and other recommendations of this plan. Any proposed expansion must be contiguous with the existing DGA, as indicated in this comprehensive plan or amended in the future. Any proposed expansion must be served by public water and sewer, thus public water and sewer services must have the ability to serve and be adjacent to the proposed expansion site. Any proposed expansion must indicate how connections will be made to existing transportation facilities, including pedestrian, bike and transit facilities. Any proposed expansion must provide an analysis of traffic impacts and proposed traffic mitigation strategies. 34 Manheim Central Region Comprehensive Plan Any proposed expansion must provide an analysis of the potential the Manheim Central School District. impacts to Any proposed expansion must provide an analysis indicating that the actual population or projected population has changed from those stated in this comprehensive plan. Any proposed expansion or contraction of the DGA should include all other changes of the DGA that have occurred since the adoption of this plan, stating the resultant residential andlor non-residential comprehensive effects on the projected population, development and the DGA. transportation and community services of the 3.1.5. Develop a transfer of development rights program in Penn development within the Manheim Urban Growth Area and Township to support natural resource lands in rural areas. preserve agricultural and Penn Township is working with the Lancaster Farmland Trust, the Conservancy, the Lancaster Conservancy and the Lancaster Brandywine Board to develop a transfer of development rights County Agriculture Preserve applications of this strategy is included in the Economic program. Additional detail on potential Development Element. 3.1.6. Rapho should explore the potential for a regional transfer of program to assist in its ongoing protection of development rights lands. agricultural and natural resource Rapho has successfully used effective agricultural zoning and the purchase of development easements to preserve-agricuitural land. Its should work with Borough and/or Mount Joy Borough to determine the potential for a Manheim transfer of development rights program to provide additional resources mult-municipal to agricultural and natural resource lands while encouraging reinvestment protect inthe Boroughs. and redevelopment 3.1.7. Analyze and modify zoning in the Turnpike infrastructure capacity. Interchange Area to be consistent with The 2000 Strategic Plan Update recommended as a growth area. The area today contains designating the Tumpike interchange area oriented to opportunities some commercial development - most lacks presented by its location at a Turnpike exit. public water and wastewater However, the area the need for private systems. infrastructure, SO its development potential is limited by As a policy, the Township is not ready to extend public assume the considerable infrastructure costs infrastructure, nor is ity willing to Given this, Rapho should not designate the associated with development in this area. instead a "rural business area, . interchange area as an urban growth area but should also evaluate reflecting its rural infrastructure capabilities. The Township its rural designation existing zoning to ensure that permitted densities are consistent with water and that the code does not give property owners the and wastewater infrastructure wouid be provided the impression that in the Tumpike interchange area. A by Township or local authorities appropriate without an infrastructure zoning overlay to limit development to what is extension should be explored. 35 Manheim Central Region Comprehensive Plan 3.1.8. Analyze and modify zoning where needed to linear roads or waterlwastewater infrastructure discourage development along extensions. Most existing zoning in the Region allows for higher density and sewer are available. The higher densities development if public water inside a designated are permitted for land outside as well as growth area. Such a policy can serve to encourage linear development along rural roads or along water and wastewater lines UGA. To avoid this, Rapho and Penn townships that extend beyond the specify that higher densities for land should revise their zoning ordinances to permitted within a served by public water andlor sewer are only designated growih area 3.1.9, The Region should consider creating a regional review regional impact and significance process for developments of Large developments, including as large shopping centers, industrial and related activities. office/business parks, major parks, mines entertainment and recreational large residential developments, regional facilities create impacts far complexes, hospitals, airports and other transportation beyond the boundaries of the located. It is important that when a municipalities in which they are community. the other municipalities. development with regional impacts is proposed in one the Schooi District and local service authonities opportunity to comment upon it and determine whether the are given the Objectives of this Plan. proposal IS consistent with - 15 gpt s The Srow Manheim Central Region should define what types of densr A developments of regional impact and significance development will be consideled that facilitates review of such (DRIS) for the Region and a process Chargel Ccontains model standards developments by other members of the Region. Appendix 29 create to consider in amending zoning and a regional review process for DRIS. subdivision ordinances to Neporha 3.1.10. Create a process and minimum standards for growth areas. permitting development in future Ppc The future growth areas designated in this plan contain land that is not for development in the short-term. Prior to needed or desired the Region should determine the need for permiting development in a future growth area, and impacts of such development. At a minimum, any application for development in a future growth area must include: Application must indicate the acreage, location and planned proposed development to be included in the density per acre of the expansion area. Any proposed development must indicate how this is not intrusive to surrounding agricultural lands. any Development proposals must indicate how they will be consistent with design, connectivity and other recommendations of this plan. density, Any proposed development must be served by public water and water and sewer services must have the to sewer. thus public proposed expansion site. ability serve and be adjacent to the Any proposed development must indicate how connections will be made to existing transportation facilities, including pedestrian, bike and transit facilities. 36 Manheim Central Region Comprehensive Plan Any proposed development must provide an analysis of traffic impacts and proposed traffic mitigation strategies. Any proposed development must provide an analysis of the potential the Manheim Central School District. impacts to Any proposed development must provide an analysis indicating that the actual population or projected population has changed from those stated in this comprehensive plan. Any proposed development of a future growth area should consider to the designated growth areas or other future any changes since the adoption of this growth areas that have occurred and/or comprehensive plan, stating the resultant residential non-residential development and the effects on the projected transportation and community services of the designated population, growth areas. Goal 3.2: Focus development inside formally adopted growth sufficient areas where there is infrastructure to create compact neighborhoods and economic centers. thriving Objectives Provide new tools to encourage and require compact new development, infill, redevelopment and reinvestment in growth areas Promote innovative site design and residential choices in building types and materials to support compact development types Encourage the revitalization of Manheim Borough to ensure its the the Manheim Central Region place as urban hub of Manage adaptive reuse and infill development in the the Doe Run Road commercial corridor and State Route Keystone Opportunity Zone (KOZ), 72. Strategies 3.2.1. Revise zoning of vacant, residentially zoned land within the urban be consistents with the average densities in the build out growth areas to analysis The concept of compact single-family, multi-family and clustered is a part of the three municipalities' overall land use and residential development ) purposes. In addition to goals, this serves a number of need for extensive and preserving farmland and limiting sprawl, this approach limits the costly infrastructure improvements. d For development inside urban growth areas, each municipality should changes that ensure that the density target of an average of six units adopt zoning met. Iti is expected that a range of per net acre can be will permit development densities will be permitted - some districts densities than u less the target and others wil require densities that reach an average of six units per net acre. Each are higher to minimum municipality should consider the role of a average density fore each of its residential zoning districts to ensure that development potential is not lost to subdivisions that are built significantly below maximum permitted densities. 2 Thue Cp Plan Was pD 2014 37 050D Zomn1 change woas a Manheim Central Region Comprehensive Plan Penn Township: Much of the vacant residential land in the Manheim UGA in Penn Township is zoned as R-2 or R-3. R-2 permits single-family detached maximum residential densily under R-2is only four units houses, and the family detached dwellings, per acre. R-3 permits single- to six units per acre, duplexes and townhomes by right at densities ranging from five depending on unit type. A recently added permits development of up to eight units per acre in the R-2 and density R-3 bonus provision written today, the only way to develop at residential densilies zones. As the zoning is under the density bonus provisions. higher than six units per acre Penn Township is currently rewriting its Zoning Ordinance to create a that wil provide the toois to provide compact walkable, form-based code sustainable development that meets established attractive and environmentally Penn Township shouid ensure that it is possible to density achieve targets. Through this process, right development process. density targets through a by- Manheim Borough: The Borough does not have large tracts of vacant, land. The Borough could revise zoning to provide minimum densities residentially zoned residential zoning to ensure that redevelopment and infill in much of its existing development Strategy 3 addresses the need to facilitate development is denser than the remove barriers to infill development in the Borough in more detail. reinvestment The and listed under Strategy 3 will also help the Borough to meet recommendations density targets. Rapho Township: Almost all of the vacant residential land in that is wohyls growth area falls within the Mount Joy/Donegal UGA. Most of Rapho located in a Mixed Residential, though a portion is the land is zoned R-2 - detached zoned R-1 - Residential. R-1 permits dwellings. The minimum. lot size for single-family LR7 abast R-1 district is 10,000 square feet parceis with water and sewer service In the whst acre. The R-2 permits providing for a maximum density of about four units per Muli-lamily single-family detached dwellings. dupiexes and townhomes dwellings and some commerciai uses are permitted in this by right. & provisions of a Village Overlay Zone. district under the rs units per acre. Under the By right, the R-2 Zone permits a net density of five Village Overlay, the 0447 which maximumg Is 8 translates to approximately X10.7 units per grossdensity units per acre, streets, stormwater acreoy nelung out 25 percent of - % N 15 660 and other infrastructure, as was assumed in the build out land for - Ity would be analysis. d ex possible for new future Sers b units per net acre under development in Rapho to be built at densities of six: 2w 2 meets the current zoning: however, if the Township wishes to ensure that AN density target, it will need to make some adjustments to its it Changes to consider zoning Te aralysis include: ordinance. 3 Shs - - Shifting some land currently zoned R-1 to R-2 to increase the amount of doore S available for higher intensity development land vas rwhy not 0S0D P Setting target density ranges for the Vilage Overlay Zone - this would entail al6o 2014.T setting a minimum as well as a maximum residential density for development Increasing the maximum density and setting an average minimum for development in the R-2 density Bowt Zone when not developed under the R-2 permits a mix of unit types - single-family detached, Village Overlay. The a The minimum lot sizes for duplexes and townhouses would duplex and townhouse. net densities greater than six units however permit development at a7 per acre; the current ordinance a - language limits by-right development in the R-2 to five units per acre. Removing - Mulen Dvar 38 Ca Gasechon 0502 Manheim Central Region Comprehensive Plan the density limitation for duplexes and townhouses would permit a development mix that could achieve development intensities of six or more units per net acre. All Municipalities: To move from corrective to proactive solutions, each could consider requiring rather than simply encouraging - compact community municipality elements such as flexible roadway widths, build-to lines, front porches and design alleys. 3.2.2. Review and revise residential zoning standards to ensure that they permit multi- family housing, infill development and redevelopment. A variety of multi-family units, accessory residential units, compact lot sizes and attached housing should be permitted throughout the urban growth areas. Permitting these types as uses-by-right in the ordinances is the first step to this strategy. Barriers to housing building multi-family housing in the Region include excessive parking, lot size or setback requirements and limitations on live-work units and accessory apartments. These and potentially other provisions in the ordinances can effectively eliminate the possibility for dk- developing compact or multi-family housing units. Tam Multi-family and higher density residential infill development will help each municipality meet its density target ofs units net acre for 2 six per new Dat importantly, it will help to address the shortage of development in the UGA: More Please quality rental housing available in the region. see the Background Analysis of Section 4: Housing for a discussion bku Region' s needs for rental and affordable housing options. of the Each township should review bhos its zoning and subdivision ordinances for potential barriers the development of to barls le multi-family and infill development. See Strategy 3 below for a more detailed analysis of steps the Borough should take to address infill and redevelopment 3.2.3. Revise downtown Manheim zoning and development standards to facilitate reinvestment in downtown homes and businesses and support redevelopment within the Borough The Borough should evaluate its ordinances and update as needed with regard to the following issues. Density limitations: A significant portion of the Barough's deveiopable area is zoned R-1, which requires a minimum lot size of 12,000 square feet - in excess of one-quarter acre. While "village cluster development is permitted, this options is not widely utilized or effective for allowing infill development in the Borough. The Borough should revise its zoning in these areas to allow for smaller lot sizes where appropriate stormwater management, parking and access to the lot exist. Development limitations in the Conversion Office Apartment (COA) District: Lot coverage in the COA district, located at the edge of downtown, is limited to 45-60 which is not achievable for most development in this area. Also, "by right" percent, restrictions - for example COA does not permit commercial, office or development could be limiting development options for this apartments by right - should important area in the Borough. Manheim consider revising these ordinances to provide opportunities for infill development or redevelopment. Any redevelopment or infill should provide needed stormwater infrastructure, exemplify stormwater best management practices and provide for adequate parking. 39 Manheim Central Region Comprehensive Plan Multi-family development: Regulation of multi-family development in the Borough's Zoning Ordinance may be limiting redevelopment options in some cases and substandard units in others: resulting in New multiple family dwellings buildings are permitted only in the R-4 district are restricted to 16 units per building with a minimum lot size of one acre. Less and restrictive requirements could encourage new, high-quality, multi-family development. Other districts that could be considered for some type of multi- family development include R-3, COA and CBD. Any redeveiopment or infill should provide any needed stormwater infrastruciure, exemplify stormwater best management practices and provide for adequate parking. COA, CBD, R-3 and PC-1 allow apartment conversions in existing Stakeholder interview participants raised concerns about the quality buildings. of the resulting units. The Borough should consider how these regulations could be adjusted to create higher quality residential units, while still large older homes. One way to address these encouraging reuse of apartment conversions to have units that concerns might be to require rentable floor are more than 800 square feet in area. Outdoor dining - Outdoor dining is permitted by special exception in the C8D. The Borough should consider whether there are other districts where this use could be appropriate as a part of a redevappmentinevatizaion Strategy. Outdoor associated with adding vitality in town center areas and dining is typically development. Specific regulations of hours of operation, contributing to economic configuration of outdoor to type of dining and appropriate to seating ensure pedestrian and vehicular flows could be adopted encourage this type of use. Retail limitation in the downtown - The CBD zoning district limits most of the retail establishments permitted by right to be a maximum of 2.000 square feet. This be limiting forr retail uses and the Borough should consider might establishments. allowing larger retail Subdivision and land development ordinance - Manheim does not own subdivision ordinance. It processes Borough have its ordinance and review process. An ordinance development of its applications through the County's S needs of the such own could be tailored to the specific Borough as infill development, streetscape, stormwater access and other factors that could provide economic development infrastructure, improve the overail appearance of downtown. The opportunities and own ordinance. The Borough should work with Borough should consider adopting its such an the County and explore the benefits of approach as well as what staffing and technical capacily it would needed to effectively develop and implement its Own subdivision and land development ordinance. 3.2.4. Develop a conceptual plan for the KOZ and Doe Run Road area that redevelopment, takes advantage of rail access, identifies a encourages relief route and improves stormwater potential truck/freight management for the area. These areas are important to the economic development of the Region and should be well- planned to maximize their potential. By planning for al high quaiily environment, Manheim Borough and Penn Township can attract a wide variely of businesses and retain businesses. At a minimum, the Borough and Township should review their existing current zoning 40 Manheim Central Region Comprehensive Plan and development standards for this area to ensure that they are consistent with the development of a high-quality industrial and commercial development. The ordinance should establish standards for wide sidewalks, street trees, landscaping, high-quality business signage and coordinated public signage. Al longer-term, more aggressive strategy could even include the development of a specific plan for the area, 3.2.5. Create a new traditional neighborhood (TND) zoning district in Penn Township adjacent to the Borough and Doe Run Road. Penn Township should revise its zoning to implement a TND to support compact residential, mixed-use development adjacent to the Weis Shopping Center located on Doe Run Road. This area is within walking distance of the shopping center, Manheim Central Junior High School, the Township Building and other neighborhoods. Ith has ample water and sewer infrastructure capacity and is located near the area along Doe Run where pedestrian improvements are planned, which will better connect the area to the downtown Borough shops and attractions. Goal 3.3: Preserve and enhance the Region's valuable agricultural and natural resources. Background This goal is a broad reoccurring theme throughout this Plan, and iti is addressed in more detail in a number of Plan sections, including economic development, natural resources, housing, transportation and community character. The following strategies address the general land use and zoning based opportunities to support and enhance agricultural and natural resources within the Region. The Economic Development section and the Natural Resources sections of the Plan provide further specific strategies to address this goal. Objectives Limit new development outside the designated urban growth areas Limit water and wastewater service extensions outside of the UGA to areas that have imminent public health concerns and where site-specific, decentralized options are not feasible. Strategies 3.3.1. Revise regulations for farm-based businesses to maximize their potential to preserve farming and farmland During this planning process local farmers were interviewed and they expressed concern about how farm-based businesses are regulated. In some cases the regulations are too restrictive - for example limiting a farm-based business to three family members. In other cases there was concern that some farm-based businesses are not really farm-based at all, but are businesses that happen to be located on farmland. Each Township should evaluate its farm-based business regulations in the context of its goals for preserving farmers and farmland and revise as needed. 3.3.2. Review zoning designations and regulations in rural areas to maximize protection of farming and farmland 41 Manheim Central Region Comprehensive Plan Area farmers have suggested that zoning seiback requirements for to agricultural uses should be variable based on the type of development adjacent of operation of the farm facility. The neighboring uss and the type determine whether Townships should review their zoning ordinances to setbacks for development located immediately adjacent to an agricultural zone provide adequate protection for the relatively high-intensity animal feeding operations and other farming practices that are typical of the f the ordinance should be amended to increase setback Region. not. located adjacent to agriculturally zoned land. requirements for non-agricuilural uses 42 Manheim Central Region Comprehensive Plan Section 4: Housing Background The Manheim Central Region has two distinct natures with respect to housing - the first is the urbanized Borough with its quarter acre and smaller lot neighborhoods and The other is the suburban, single-family detached or multi-unit structures. single-family partially attached home style on one-half to one acre lots that is prevalent in the two townships. In the last ten (win) the Region and willing developers have made a significant effort to buiid on smaller lots in new years, developments such as Elm Tree in Rapho and Brookshire in Penn Township. Since the 1970s, most housing construction in the Region has been single-family detached dwellings, most of which are owner-occupied. t: should be noted that the construction of the 1970s is now years in age, increasing maintenance needs and approaching forty emergency repairs. Another trend in the Region is the development of senior housing and age-restricted developments. It is expected that this type of housing will remain in demand and continue to in the Manheim Region. Senior housing developments are relatively compact compared with grow the average lot size in the townships; however, they could be more compact, walkable and to convenience retail development than recent projects have been. Brookshire and Pleasant connected View developments are two examples of new senior and age-restricted housing developments in Penn Township. In Rapho, Elm Tree's Four Seasons subdivision is dedicated to age-restricted housing. According to ESRI, a national vendor of demographic and economic data, the Region's home values increased by about 60% between 2000 and 2008, and these increases have the affordability concerns expressed in earlier studies and plans. Despite the recent exacerbated the real estate market, affordability remains a concern. However, the remains siowdown in location and growth pressure will return as the economy of the area and Region the nation an attractive recover. The Region has only a small amount of rental housing and demand for more. Predicted trends indicate the need to provide housing for seniors and lower-income families, growth laborers and Auto Auction employees, positions that typically do not pay well. Both including the Lancaster farm County 2006-2010 Consolidated Plan and the Analysis of Impediments to Fair indicate that there is a need for below market rate rental housing. However, an assessment Housing of the of the Region's rental units indicates that prices are affordable, at least at the median income pricing There appears to be no developer response to the perceived need for rental housing, further level. indicating the current lack of a market for rental units, either market rate or below market rate. The Land Use Section of this Plan recommends zoning changes to increase the and improve the design of economic feasibly multi-family housing in the Region - regardless of cost or structure. The Housing recommendations focus on ways to encourage the development ownership of new housing units affordable to a wide range of residents and tools maintain investment in older structures and rental housing to support high-quality, moderate-income and rental These recommendations seek to broaden housing choices for residents of all income opportunities. levels meet the goals and objectives of Choices, the Lançaster County Comprehensive Plan and Element. Housing In addition to the guidance provided in Choices, the Municipalities Planning Code requires municipalityi in the Commonwealth to provide for its fair share of multi-family housing. This every provision is generally interpreted as providing a fair share of affordable units. The amount of multi- 43 whtols Te Zoz5 Manheim Central Region Comprehensive Plan date show family housing in the Region and each ofits municipalilies shouid be percentage of units that are availabie county-wide. As seen in Table generally 4.1 consistent with the data reveals that thepercentage of below, 2000 US Census housing in the Region thati isin multi-family units iS about two percentage poits iower thanthe County S percentage. Itis expected that with the new multi- family housing development in the municipalities since 2000, the 2010 US Census. As discussed in the Land Use Section, it will be percentage might increase in the to review their ordinances and ensure that important for the municipalities right in they are permitting multi-family housing as a appropriate areas within the designated growth areas. use-by- Table 4.1: Percent of Total Housing Units that are Multi-family 7 Housing Units 2025 Percent of Housing Units that are Area Multi-family (2000) Penn Township 18.1% Rapho Township - 18.1% - Manheim Borough Jim 15.6% Region 18.5% gee Sy Lancaster County 20.6% Pennsylvania 20.8% ber Nation 22.0% Srr2 Multi-family housing includes three or more units and Mobile Homes Housing Recommendations Goal 4.1: Provide high-quality housing choices in current and future residents, appropriate areas to meet the needs of income. regardless of household size, age, ethnicity or Objectives Maintain, preserve and revitalize Manheim Borough's S residential and mixed-use neighborhoods Provide high-quality rental housing options throughout the Region Provide affordable housing options for residents of all ages and income levels needs of current residents and ensure the Region is able to attract a diverse to meet the the future. population in Strategies 4.1.1. Stabilize older residential housing stock through effective code regulations and other programs to encourage enforcement, zoning ongoing investment As noted above a significant portion of the Region's housing stock is older, resulting in additional repair and maintenance needs. Each municipality should consider whether changes are needed in its zoning ordinance to encourage ongoing investment in the existing housing stock. This could include provisions for flexibility in setbacks for house 44 Manheim Central Region Comprehensive Plan additions or other strategies that would facilitate investment in older structures not be in full conformance with current ordinance that may requirements. In Manheim Borough the conversion of older, single-family residential family rental units is becoming an issue of concern. The structures into muiti- issue by amending its zoning and building codes Borough should address this discussed in more detail in the Land Use pertaining to such conversions (as stringently. There Element), as well as enforcing those codes more are a number of avenues to address this issue, such as building codes, parking regulations and prohibitions of certain types of conversions. permitting, The Borough should also consider implementing a homeowner rehabilitation program. Such programs are typically funded through Community assistance Grants and are available to low- and moderate-income Development Block include those that address structural and home owners. Eligible repairs repair and replacement reduction safety issues, such as heating and plumbing, roof of lead paint hazards and repairs needed to property up to code. Assistance can include low to no interest loans bring the loans, depending on income levels. The City of Lancaster as well as forgivable Program is a strong model of such initiatives. A Homeowner of Rehabilitation Appendix B to this Plan description this program is included as 4.1.2. Revise local ordinances and regulations to ensure the provision of workforce housing in the Region adequate Affordability for owner-occupied units is a concern for the region. Prior to the recession of 2008-2009, housing prices had increased across the Region. economic were not as great as in many parts of the Commonwealth and The increases housing price increases outstripped income gains for most nation; however, local decreased somewhat as a result of the economic slowdown, households. While prices enough to erase the the price reduction was not affordability gap between prices and regional incomes. There are a number of ways for the municipalities to encourage the workforce housing. Each municipality shouid explore development of building workforce housing. Each requirements or incentives for municipality should consider the potential for incorporating workforce housing provisions into its development code. Such could include: strategies Providing density incentives and other incentives for size to include a specified percentage of the developments over a certain pay a fee in lieu of providing affordable project as affordable housing units or housing units. Abating local taxes for development of affordable workforce and senior housing 4.1.3. Develop a rental registration and occupancy license to for and maintenance of rental housing stock in the program facilitate planning Region A rental registration program requires rental properly owners to register their provides good information to the municipality to property. It public safety, infrastructure help inventory its rental units and plan for and maintenance issues. Under such a program, an occupancy license is required for rental units every year to certify that the unit meets basic habitability and safety requirements The Borough has had the most issues with rental housing and should proceed with adopting a rental registration The might want to consider adopting programs as well, in light of the program. new Townships multi-tamily rental 45 Manheim Central Region Comprehensive Plan housing projects being built. A regional rental registration program would ease the administrative burden of such a program. The City of Lancaster and Elizabethtown Borough have rental registration programs that can be used a potential models in developing local ordinances in the Manheim Central Region, 46 Manheim Central Region Comprehensive Plan 5.2.2. Develop a corridor plan for Manheim Borough and the Doe Run corridor Though the two areas are different in nature, they do have common overall attractiveness, active uses, traffic concerns and problems - thati is Borough's downtown overall is attractive, but needs sidewalk consistency in appearance. The repair and street improvements, as well tools to address traffic volumes and flow. The Doe Run less pedestrian-oriented than the Borough and is in need of safe corridor is shopping, the businesses located in the Keystonè walkways to link downtown, consistency in Opportunity Zone (KOZ), and the signage and appearance and some improvements to traffic flow. Penn Township has received funding for a streetscape plan for the North Doe Run Road corridors under Lancaster County Penryn Road and The plan should consider sidewalk Municipal Transportation Grant Program. signage and design, bike access and landscaping as well as would development standards (building heights, position on the lot, uses, enhance the physical appearance, economic attractiveness and etc.) that oft the Doe Run and Penryn corridors. Penn multi-modal access on transition areas from the into Township should coordinate with the Borough Borough the Township. This is not to say that each community needs to have exactly the same design, but the transition should and comfortable for drivers, pedestrians, cyclists and transit be attractive users. A streetscape plan alone will not transform this area to connect the Borough and Penn Township; the zoning must also be evaluated to encourage appropriate, serving retail and office uses. neighborhood As discussed in more detail in the Transportation and Land Use Elements, consideration should be given to evaluating proposals for some type of a truck special that the business community is not adversely affected by a diversion of traffic. by-pass SO Goal 5.3: Promote continued investment in the jobs, provide access to goods and Region's commerce and industry to attract tax base. services, and support a strong, diversified Objectives Encourage commercial infill development along Doe Run Road Continue to encourage new development in the Rapho Triangle Area that and supports that in the adjacent Mount Joy Borough complements Coordinate provision of jobs, housing and transportation infrastructure to sustain the Region in the future Create a local tourism draw, building on the 250th anniversary of the the Borough's historic district, agri-tourism, natural Borough's founding, attractions. resources.and other regional Background The Keystone Opportunity Zone (KOZ) has béen successful and opportunity for the Borgugh and thè Région to become home to a represents of firms an excellent than average jobs and wages to area residents, Thè impact is range that offer better truly regional, in that it benefits the 51 oonhay he M welade dasthnty Manheim Central Region Comprehensive Plan aras blen hgk WC Appendix C: Guidance for Creating a Regional Review Process peet of for ceE Developments Regional Impact and Significance Large developments, such as large shopping centers, major industrial activities, office/business parks, parks, mines and related entertainment and recreational storage facilities, large residential deveiopments regional complexes, sa which meet those thresholds listed below hospitals, airports and other transportation facilities, o 0S (or any others that the regional determine) shall be regarded as Developments of Regional planning agency may shall require special care and consideration Impact and Significance (DRIS) and during their review and approval process. The host municipality shall effectuate this heghtened attention ordinances toinclude the policies below and by amending ts development determine. These policies shall any others that the regional planning agency may that neighboring municipalities and require extra circuiation and notification by the host municipality sO - understanding of how the DRIS other agencies may thoroughly evaluate and have a better 125 land-use, social and impacts their concerns over budgetary. economic, environmental, transportation issues. Municipalities within the Mianheim Central Region shall amend their Rre land development andlor zoning ordinances to include the following respective subdivision and policies a Before regarding DRIS: a any municipality considers and approves a DRIS for new or expanded land development, subdivision or rezoning, the host municipalily's least one public meeting. This meeting may be combined with governing other body shall hold at required by other provisions of a municipality's ordinances. meetings as may be The governing body of the host municipality shall determine if the DRIS to be (1) circulated for informational municipality wants the on by the Regional Planning Until purposes only or (2) reviewed and commented Agency. the Regional Planning Agency is municipality would send materials to adjoining municipalities. operating the Regional Planning Agency such agency shail notify the Upon establishment of the (ten) days of receipt of any information adjoining municipalities within 10 regarding a DRIS. Ifthe host municipality decides to request review and comment then it shall circulate notify, in writing, the Regional Planning Agency (until such agency is established and municipalities and the Manheim Central School District shall be individually individual county planning agency, ofits intention to consider a DRIS. A complete notified), and background documents and plans shall be provided to the package of that an evaluation of the DRIS and its potential Regional Planning Agency SO DRIS application or proposal shall also impacts may be determined. Notice of the newspaper of general appear in the legal advertising section of a local and approval circulation, once, a minimum of 30 days prior to the consideration by the host governing body. In considering and reviewing a proposed DRIS, the governing of the host shall consider the comments of the Regional Planning body the municipality general public. These comments shall Agency, county, as well as the decision of the host governing merely be advisory, and in no way binding on the body. Those Regional Planning Agency (until such agency is established the municipalities and school district) and agencies who receive the complete adjacent background documents and plans shall be afforded 30 days from receipt of package the of package to 132 Manheim Central Region Comprehensive Plan return comments to the governing body of the host municipality in The host municipality shall not officially approve a DRIS application until such writing. received. If, however, comments are not returned within 30 comments have been the host municipality may take action. days, the governing body of The Regional Planning Agency reviews the proposal and either decides that it will not make comments, and then notifies (1) makes comments or (2) other municipalities of that decision. If the the host municipality and the comments, those comments shall relate to the Regional Planning Agency decides to make Regional DRIS' general consistency with the Comprehensive Plan, and to traffic/roadway improvements, locations capacity, and other items to mitigate the impacts of the DRIS and to utility and neighboring lands in a manner that is consistent with the foster the use. of Comprehensive Plan. In conducting its review, the Regional Manheim Central Region with the Lancaster County Planning Commission Planning Agency may consult The Regional Planning Agency shall be or other parties with relevant expertise. and "consistency" in the guided by the definitions of "general consistency" Pennsylvania Municipalities Planning Code. DRIS shall include those uses that involve any of the initial or ultimate cumulative phases: following thresholds, either in the by the regional planning (these may be altered, added to, or subtracted from agency, when established) DEVELOPMENTS INSIDE DGA USE THRESHOLD Airport New or runway addition CommercialRetail 150,000 gross square feet Entertainment, Recreational Facilities, Gathering 100,000 Spaces and/or Attractions gross square feet or 500 seating capacity or 100 acres or greater Hospital and/or Health Care Facilities 150 new beds or more Hotel/Motel Greater than or equal to 200 rooms or 100,000 gross square feet Industrial, Wholesale and/or Distribution 200,000 gross square feet or 400 employees or 100 acres or greater Office 100,000 gross square feet Quarries, Asphalt & Cement Plants, Mines 25 acres or greater Residential 100 new lots or units Schools 500 or more students 133 Manheim Central Region Comprehensive Plan Mixed Uses More than 400,000 gross square feet or 100 acres or greater Sanitary Landfils, waster handling facilities, prisons, All new juvenile detention facilities developments or expansions Other uses Any development causing more than 100 acres of earth disturbance, projected to have more than 500 vehicle trips during the peak hour, projected to have more than 100 truck trips per day, and/or deemed by the host municipality to be a DRIS DEVELOPMENTS OUTSIDE DGA USE THRESHOLD All uses listed within developments inside UGA and All VGA requirements above, except for those listed below. Residential 25 or more new lots or dwelling units Other uses Any development with more than 25 acres, more than 25,000 gross square feet, more than 100 parking spaces, more than 100 vehicie trips during peak hour, and/or deemed by the host municipality to be a DRIS. NOTE: Gross square feet shall mean a structure(s) with that amount of roof. gross square feet under The applicant of a DRIS and/or host municipality utilize municipalily and adjacent may a per-review consuitation with the host types of municipalities and agencies to help expedite the consideration of plans through the approval process. The burden shall be on the these and provide all necessary documentation. applicant to coordinate The host governing body shall ensure that the DRIS is reasonably consistent comprehensive plan, as well as other planning documents for the with its significant inconsistencies are evident, an amendment municipality and region. Where the DRIS application. application shall also be included as part of The host municipality shall provide copies of any action taken by the host Regional Planning Agency (or the individuai municipality to the established.) The Regional municipalities and school district until such agency is municipalities. Planning Agency shall provided copies of the action to the oiher 134 DOELAL TREZD Come pm ) J 3 1 D 8 € o R, @ FH Msad & A a & - E a & / A PB ampiN9 PH pag a I : 9 S 1 $ - 1 - - # S 3 3 I / - - B - 5 E Cb E - - Bs w - 3 - / - % - p 2 6 % 3 a A S. A 2 : bo ORGILKL Semisoug! PaED DERN OJEpLa a 8 I 2 : B - 5 S & 3 u a & a s2 3 44 a 3 : a I € E a 1 5 * a - - 4 1* u: 0 - d E uue 15 MVRYA nw 22: a ) % >wes Allowsle rsky Comptahens CHIQUES CROSSING Allowable Unit Count per Density Analysis The below analysis is based upon the initial Conditional Use application submitted by the developer, which has since been withdrawn and is in the process of being revised. This analysis will be recomputed based upon any revisions made to the original submission, and the conclusion will likely change as a result. An adjustment may also need to be made once an appropriate deduction of all public right-of-way areas associated with the revised design are taken, which could include public street rights-of-way, private street rights-of-way and access drive cartway areas as public rights-of-way as defined by the Rapho Township Ordinance provisions. Ordinance Criteria $350-405.D.2)b) "Maximum permitted number of dwelling units on any tract proposed for an open space design development shall be calculated by multiplying the lot area of the traci proposed for an open space development by the density multiplier stipulated for the applicable base zone. 97 Table 4-5.4 Zone Max. Permitted Density Multiplier R-1 121 (for Tract Area 15 acres or>) 'On tracts with lot areas of 15 acres or greater, where buildings for multi- family dwellings are proposed, the maximum density may be increased to 15 units per acre (or 3 additional from the 12 normally allowed for units other than apartment units) on that portion of the tract devoted to such dwellings. Lot Area (Area, Lot) is defined as: "The area contained within the property lines of an individual parcel of land, not including any area within a street right-of-way. Interpretation Question: Is the density calculation based upon lot area as it exists prior to development (i.e. w/Route 772 R.O.W. as it pre-exists) or based upon lot area after the PennDOT R.O. W. is expanded to allow traffic circle, etc.? This calculation assumes that both the existing" and the proposed" right-of-way are subtracted. Interpretation Question: Must acreage in Mount Joy Borough and Mount Joy Township be excluded from Lot Area and subsequent density calculation because it is not in the Rapho Township R-1 OSDO Zoning District? Point of note, the ground in Mount Joy Borough is zoned LDR - Low Density Residential and the ground in Mount Joy Township is zoned R-1 - Low Density Residential. This calculation assumes non-Rapho acreage is not to be used when calculating the required open space nor when calculating the allowed maximum density First Question: What is the lot area of the tract proposed for the open space development? This is what the developer said on his original Conditional Use Cover Sheet Site Data (no revised information has been submitted to the Borough concerning the proposed density): Gross Property Area - 25.28 Ac Rapho Township Area - 22.92 Ac Mount Joy Borough Area - 1.49 Ac Mount Joy Township Area = .87 Ac Developer took gross area 25.28 Ac Times 15 DU/acre x15 379 Units They originally proposed 378 units for a density of 14.95 DU/Ac per their site data, and are now proposing 343 units. Miscalculations: MJ Boro (1.49 Ac) and MJ Twp (.87) is not eligible for Rapho Twp OSDO benefits Tract area (lot area) is specifically defined as excluding any area within a street R.O.W. Site data on applicant' S plan says .50 Ac proposed R.O.W. So minimum open space required is 50% oflot area ("gross acreage" - specifically listed as such in the Ordinance) but density is based upon gross lot area less street R.O. W.) of tract proposed for Open Space Design Development, as stipulated for the applicable base zone. The presumption is that the developer cannot propose an OSDO design on land in Mount Joy Boro and Mount Joy Township which is not zoned appropriately for that use, even though they may own it. So the gross acreage available for the proposed OSDO Development is 22.92 Acres as stated on the Conditional Use Plan Site Data. So this means 50% or 11.46 acres must be provided as open space. This then means 11.46 (the other half) gross acres or less can be used for development (the actual area used for development should be delineated on the plan and an acreage should be provided). The allowable 12 acre density is based upon tract "lot area" which is defined as "excluding" street R.O.W. So that portion oft the overall tract devoted to development ofa any kind (apartments or otherwise) may not exceed 11.46 acres minus the.50 Ac street right-of-way (from developer's Site Data), or 10.96 acres. So the maximum allowable density should be as follows: Total "Lot Area" in Rapho Township excluding proposed R.O.W. (22.92 -.50) - 22.42 Ac @ 12 du/ac x12 269.04 - plus - That portion of the tract devoted to all apartments = 10.96 Ac @ 3 additional dw/acre x3 (15 du/ac on this portion instead of 12) 32.88 Max. Allowable Unit Count = 302 units (not 378) (not a guaranteed number as mentioned in Zoning Ordinance Sestion30-5D.2X0) - FOSSIBLE ALTEENATE SEWER DEGINS 5 C - a 423S a25 aNnoivw % % d * a - % 2 - - 3 : : 22 e k 3 * à S 1 : i : - : : 31 6y - - i: : : I a : 1 I - 53 R - Ft a : 5 E - - a a 5 . - 5o - - . - I 8 Dv V 03 35 Be - 5 9 : A N 9 6 S - : : 6 : : : : : 5 3 & 5 : 5 5 : - & $ - 5 3 c - C A : VA G1335 339 + ( 3 Su : 8 1 - S - - 9 - 5 15 : 53 6 I - 5 s - : - - 5 9 - 5 17 > 1 - 2 15 8 3 4 :: 1 1 3 i - 2S 331 i - à 3 - 1 e - : I : E - Aa wPV SNIHOIVN 09 L 1B3S 335 - 96 : - : E 3 ET 2 D - s - P - A E B : Popto SuDo Township of Rapho, PA Sunday, March 16, 2025 Chapter 295. Subdivision and Land Development Article VI. Design Standards & 295-612. Public dedication of park and recreation land. In accordance with the recommendations of the parks and recreation provisions of the 1993 Manheim Central Region Comprehensive Plan, all residential subdivisions and land developments shall be provided with park and recreation land that shall be dedicated to the Township. The developer may request that the Township not require the dedication of land, and any such request shall be accompanied by an offer to pay a fee in lieu of dedication of the land, computed in accordance with the regulations provided herein, an offer to construct recreational facilities and/or an offer to privately reserve land for park or recreation purposes. A. The land reserved for park, recreation and open space usage shall be a single lot which shall comply with the requirements of this chapter relating to length to depth ratios and which shall be accessible to the public. No more than 15% of the lot shall consist of floodplain, wetlands or other features that shall render the lot undevelopable. No stormwater management facilities designed to retain or detain water from other portions of the development shall be permitted on such land reserved for park, recreation and open space usage. (1) In the event that the tract contains natural features which are worthy of preservation, the developer may request that the Board permit the provision of recreational land configured in such a manner as to best preserve natural features. (2) The park, recreation and open space land shall be accessible to utilities such as sewer, water and power that are provided with the subdivision, and if sO requested by the municipality that will accept dedication of the land, the developer shall extend such utilities to the park, recreation and open space land. (3) If the adjoining property has previously been developed and recreational land has been provided at the boundary of that previously developed property, the Board shall require that the recreational land required of the development shall be located adjoining the previously provided recreational land. 10-29A2xcs 343 x,03 B. A minimum of 0.03 acres ofland shall be reserved as park or recreational land for each residential lot created in a subdivision or each dwelling unit created in a land development. Notwithstanding the foregoing, in all cases the minimum area of land reserved as park and recreation land shall be equal to the minimum lot size in the district in which the subdivision or land development is located. C. The developer may request that the Board permit the provision of park and recreation land other than through public dedication of land as set forth above. The developer shall set forth, in writing, the means by which he will fulfill this requirement which may include the payment of a fee in lieu of dedication of all or a portion of the amount of land required to be dedicated, construction of recreational facilities, the private reservation of land, or any combination of dedication, fees, construction of recreational facilities, or private reservation. (1) If a fee in lieu of dedication is proposed by the developer, said fee shall be the fair market value of the land required to be dedicated under S 295-612B above. (2) This fee shall generally be $2,600 per unit or lot, unless an appraisal prepared by the developer, and determined to be acceptable at the sole discretion of the Township, indicates that a different fee is more appropriate. 343 x +zb0o * 891,900 (a) The developer shall provide the Board with all information necessary to determine that fair market value of the land, including, but not limited to: [1] A copy of the agreement of sale if the developer is an equitable owner and has purchased the land within the past two years; or [2] An appraisal of the property conducted by an MAI appraiser acceptable to the Township. (b) Fair market value shall be computed by dividing the total price for the tract by the number of acres within the tract and then multiplying that number by the amount of land required to be dedicated. - 000,000/25 280, o0o/acec of all such fees Ray- (3) Payment shall be a condition of final plan approval, and no plans shall be signed by the Board until such fees are paid. 2808 000X2.5 = 3,500,000 (4) All fees shall be held and used by the Township in accordance with the requirements of Article V of the Municipalities Planning Code. (5) If the developer proposes to construct recreational facilities, the developer shall present a sketch plan of such facilities and an estimate of the cost of construction. (6) If the developer proposes the private reservation of land, the developer shall provide for the maintenance of such land through either the inclusion of such land as common elements of a condominium or the creation of a homeowners' association which shall meet the requirements for a unit owners' association contained in the Pennsylvania Uniform Condominium Act, 68 Pa. C.S.A. S 3101 et seq. (a) Such documentation shall be recorded, shall provide that the land cannot be further developed and shall give the Township the rights to maintain the land as set forth in Article VII of the Municipalities Planning Code dealing with the maintenance of common open space in planned residential developments. (b) Notwithstanding the foregoing, the developer may request that the Board approve transfer of the land to an organization dedicated to the conservation of natural resources with deed restrictions preventing further development acceptable to the Township Solicitor. D. The developer shall enter into an agreement with the Township setting the fees to be paid, the facilities to be constructed, or the land to be privately reserved and the method of its maintenance. All such agreements shall be in a form satisfactory to the Township Solicitor. Ppao Dosig Township of Rapho, PA Sunday, March 16, 2025 Chapter 350. Zoning Article IV. Overlay Zones S 350-405. Open Space Design Overlay (OSDO) Zone. A. Purpose statement and intent. (1) Within the UGA, it is the intent of the Township Board of Supervisors to: (a) Provide an opportunity for flexibility in lot designs and building arrangement not afforded by conventional lot-by-lot development. (b) Provide for a more varied, innovative, and efficient development pattern. (c) Promote new development which complements existing uses, landscapes, and community character. (d) Preserve unique, sensitive, and important natural features and landscapes on the site by locating new building sites in areas removed from such features and landscapes. (e) Retain and protect the unique, sensitive, and important natural features and landscapes in public open space land within, near, and connected to residential development and other park, recreation, and open space areas. Querag 0.0 0nus A Provide E (f). for the orderly, appropriate and compatible preservation, growth, and dèvelopment in Rapho Township, by incorpgrating the overall dbjectives and principles of, as well as seeking to implement portions 9, the most recent version of the Comprehensive Plan, any regional open space, recreation, and greenway plan, or other applicable plan adopted by the Township of Rapho. (2) While many of the following standards, criteria, and regulations deal with issues that typically transcend zoning jurisdiction, such standards, criteria, and regulations are provided as an optional set of "overlay" regulations for additional residential density bonuses in exchange for a larger portion of the site be preserved as public open space land, and are, therefore, considered voluntarily self-imposed by prospective developers, but enforceable by the Township of Rapho. (3) Relationship to other ordinances of the Township of rapho and sections of this chapter. The (OSDO) Zone has different use and design requirements from those contained in other sections of this chapter, the SLDO, and other ordinances of the Township of Rapho. Except for those requirements contained within Article V of this chapter relating to Floodplain Overlay (FPO) Zone (S 350-402), to the extent the regulations, standards, and provisions of the (OSDO) Zone differs (is more or less restrictive) from other Township of Rapho requirements, those within the (OSDO) Zone shall govern. However, all other provisions of this and other ordinances of the Township of Rapho shall remain in full force. B. Eligibility. (1) Minimum size. The lot area of the tract proposed for an open space development shall be no less than 10 contiguous acres. the (OSDO) Zone, including conceptual graphic architectural elevations of the principal buildings. [41 An analysis of the suitability of the potential layout, design, uses, facilities, and activities of the public open space land which is to be created as part of the open space design development, as shown on the Conceptual Public Open Space Land Plan. [5] A traffic impact study prepared in accordance with Article V of this chapter relating to traffic impact study and street classifications (S 350-533), if applicable. [6] A request for modification in accordance with the subsection below relating to modifications of standards, criteria, and regulations [S 350-405C(4), if applicable. (3) Revisions to approved development. The plan presented in support of the conditional use is an official part of the record for said conditional use. Such plan may be changed as part of approval under the SLDO, without the need to obtain conditional use approval of the plan change, provided that: (a) To the extent that such change requires additional modification set forth in the subsection below relating to modification of standards, criteria, and regulations [S 350-405C(4)), conditional use approval of such modification is obtained prior to approval of the preliminary or final subdivision and/or land development plan, whichever applies. (b) Such change does not increase the maximum density limitations set forth in the (OSDO) Zone. (c) Such change does not decrease the minimum required percentage of public open space land set forth in the (OSDO) Zone. (d) Such change does not increase the maximum lot coverage limitations set forth in the (OSDO) Zone. (e) Such change does not increase the overall density beyond the density contemplated under the conditional use plan. (f) Such change does not decrease the overall percentage of public open space land by more than 5% of the total percentage contemplated under the conditional use plan. (g) Such change does not increase the overall lot coverage beyond the coverage by more than 5% of the total lot coverage contemplated under the conditional use plan. (h) Such change does not alter the layout, location or design of the circulation system (streets, access drives, and bicycle, pedestrian and other similar pathways), residential uses or nonresidential uses, such that the revised layout is fundamentally different from the approved conditional use plan. (i) The conditional use plan, as modified or changed, complies with the standards, criteria, and regulations set forth in the (OSDO) Zone fexcept to the extent that any modifications are granted for such changes set forth in the subsection immediately below relating to modification of standards, criteria, and regulations [S 350-405C(4))- (4) Modification of standards, criteria, and regulations. The Township Board of Supervisors, by conditional use approval, may permit the modification of the standards, criteria, or regulations set forth in the (OSDO) Zone in order to encourage the use of innovative design. A developer desiringb obtain such conditional use approval shall, when making application for conditional use approval for an open space design development as required by the standards, criteria, and regylations of the (OSDO) Zone, also make application for conditional use approval under this subsection [S 350-405C(4). The Township Board of Supervisors shall consider both conditional usé approval requests simultaneously. Any conditional use approvai permitted for modification ST Oler opplablc Zon V <1N D - / 7 Drak DPF Torueria of any of the standards, criteria, or regulations set forth in the (OSDO) Zone shall be subject to the following standards: (a) Such modification of standards, criteria, or regulations better serves or serves equally but in a different manner the intended purposes set forth in the (OSDO) Zone. (b) The design and improvement of buildings, lots, or public open space land which shall contain the modifications hall be in harmony with the design and improvement of other lots or public open space land within the open space design development and shall not, through the use of the modification, be obviously different from, or inferior to, other lots within the open space design development. (c) Such modification would not result in adverse impact to adjoining lots, nor future inhabitants within the open space design development, including but not limited to endangering the public health, safety or welfare by: [1] Making access by emergency vehicles more difficult to dwellings; [2] Violating the other purposes for which zoning ordinances are to be enacted under Section 604(1)oft the MPC. [1] Editor's Note: See 53 P.S. S 10604(1). (d) Such modification will not result in configurations of buildings, lots, public open space land, or circulation systems (streets, access drives, and bicycle, pedestrian and other similar pathways) which shall be impractical or detract from the appearance of the open space design development. (e) Such modification will not result in an increase in the maximum density limitations permitted for the site set forth in the (OSDO) Zone. (f) Such modification will not result in a decrease in the minimum required percentage of public open space land for the site set forth in the (OSDO) Zone. (g) The extent of such modification provides the minimum amount of relief necessary to ensure compliance with the subsection above relating to modification of standards, criteria, and regulations [S 350-405C(4) (h) Screening and landscaping, beyond the minimum required in Article V of this chapter relating to screening and landscaping (S 350-526) may be required to be used to ensure the privacy of the future inhabitants of the dwellings within the open space design development and to attain the proposed use of the public open space land. [Amended 9-15-2022 by Ord. No. 2022-4] D. General open space design development standards. (1) Permitted uses. (a) See Table 4-5.2 in this subsection below for the types of uses permitted in the (OSDO) Zone as part of an approved open space design development set forth by this chapter: Table 4-5.2 Permitted Uses - Open Space Design Development logins - Residential Uses Conversion, muiltiple-family NP P Conversion, two-family NP P [CI Office, medical. Other use which the Township Board of Supervisors determines during the conditional use approval process is substantially similar to the permitted uses in the subsections above (S 350-05D(10)0.a): [b] The applicant may list a proposed range of uses that will be allowed. If such range of uses is approved as part of the conditional use approval, then each such use shall become permitted by right, provided the use and development conforms to the conditional use approval. [cl Maximum size. The neighborhood center shall not exceed 5,000 square feet of gross floor area. (2) Area and bulk requirements. (a) Minimum required public open space land. See Table 4-5.3 in this subsection below for the minimum required percentage of public open space land of the lot area (gross acreage) of the tract proposed for an open space design development, as stipulated for the applicable base zone. The public open space land shall comply with all standards, criteria, and regulations for the public open space land established in the subsection below relating to public open space land standards (S 350-405F). Table 4-5.3 Minimum Required Public Open Space Land - Open Space Design Development (R-1) Zone 50% (b) Maximum permitted density calculation. See Table 4-5.4 in this subsection below for the maximum permissible number of lots or dwelling units on any tract proposed for an open space design development which shall be calculated by multiplying the lot area of the tract proposed for an open space design development by the density multiplier stipulated for the applicable base zone: Table 4-5.4 Maximum Permitted Density - Open Space Design Development Trac! ctAret Bona (R-1) Zone 2 121 NOTES: debns Jon 1 On tracts with lot areas of 15 acres or greater, where buildings for multiple-family dwellings are proposed, the maximum density may be increased to 15 on that portion of the tract devoted to such dwellings, and the maximum permitted height for multiple-family dwellings buildings may beincreased)to not more than 45 feet. 7 458 Seet hmmm Alrtaday (c) Fractional resus of density multiplier. When determination of the amount of permitted density results in a fraction less than 1/2, the fractional result shall be rounded down and disregarded; and any fraction 1/2 or greater, the fractional result shali be rounded up and interpreted as one whole dwelling unit. (d) The applicant is advised that the maximum number of dweiling units calculated under the provisions in the subsection above relating to Maximum Permitted Density Calculation [S 350-405D(2)(b)) may not always be achievable while meeting the minimum requirements for public open space land and all other standards, criteria, and regulations set forth in the (OSDO) Zone. (e) Area and bulk requirements. Within an open space design development, no minimum lot area is prescribed; rather, the following lot, setback and yard area regulations shall apply to any principal residential building or any other building. At the time of conditional use application, the applicant shall indicate for each permitted use, including potential accessory uses, the limits of the building envelope within which compliance with these provisions is feasible: [1] Minimum building separations. See Table 4-5.5 in this subsection below for the minimum building separation distance: Table 4-5.5 Minimum Building Separation Distances - Open Space Design Development Mmmum: Suilding Sepapation Distance als any One Pora 33 - fFaet) Rear wall of principal building Another principal building 50 Front or side wall of principal Another principal building 20 building Accessory building Principal building to which it is 20 accessory (e.g., on the same lot) Accessory building Principal building to which it is 50 not accessory (e.g., not on the same lot) [2] Where any portion of a building wall is located less than five feet from any lot line, the placement and design of windows and doors on such building wall shall ensure privacy for adjacent properties. Privacy is maintained by orienting windows and doors away from sight lines (e.g., above or out of view into adjacent yards or opposing windows or doors of adjacent buildings) or by using obscure glass. [3] Where any portion of a building is located less than five feet from any lot line, a perpetual easement shall be provided for maintenance of such building, and measuring no less than 10 feet in width from the affected walls, which may be provided on the adjacent lot as applicable. This provision shall not apply to any lot line which separates two-family, single-family attached, single-family semidetached, or multiple-family dwelling units on the interior of the same principal building. [4] Except as provided under the subsection immediately below for principal buildings [S 350-405D(2)Xe)5), there shall be a minimum and maximum front build-to line, in which no principal building shall be closer than 15 feet nor farther than 20 feet from the street right-of-way or the outside edge of the curb for an access drive. Additionally, no less than 70% of a building's front facade (including the front facade of any covered or uncovered porches) must be located on the front build-to line; except, however, no less than 50% of any single-family attached or multiple-family dwelling building must be located on the front build-to line. Front build-to lines shall be measured between the street right-of-way line or the outside edge of the curb for access drives and the closest facade of the building, including porches. No part of any building shall extend closer to a street or access drive than the minimum front build-to line. [5] All proposed buildings and dwelling units in an open space design development shall be situated SO that they are set back a minimum distance from the predevelopment (10] While conformance to these area and bulk regulations set forth in the subsections above [S 350-405D(2)(e)l is not dependent upon any specific minimum lot area or dimensions, in the course of conditional use approval, the applicant shall be required to demonstrate to the satisfaction of the Township Board of Supervisors that any lots established under the standards, criteria, and regulations set forth in the (OSDO) Zone are of appropriate size and shape relative to the following: [a] Establishment of suitable private yard areas for all residences; but no private yard area, exclusive of buildings, shall be less than 400 square feet per dwelling unit for single-family and two-family dwellings; [b] The proposed use of and activities upon any adjacent public open space land; [c] All principal buildings shall comply with the architectural design provisions of the subsection below relating to architectural design [S 350-405E(1)- E. Additional building and development design standards. (1) Architectural design. It is not the intention of the Township of Rapho to govern specific architectural design nor to link conditional use approval to any specific architectural design criteria. Where the Township Board of Supervisors determine that architectural design as presented by the applicant is an essential means by which the open space design development complies with the objectives set forth in the (OSDO) Zone, the Township Board of Supervisors may require, as a condition of approval, legally binding assurances in a recordable form acceptable to the Township of Rapho that ensures ongoing and future compliance with these architectural design requirements. F. Public open space land standards. The location, layout, design, uses, facilities, and activities of the public open space land shall comply with the following standards, criteria, and regulations sO as to serve Township residents adequately and conveniently and to promote conservation of the unique, sensitive, and important natural features and landscapes. (1) Consistency with adopted plans. The public open space land shall be generally consistent with the most recent version of the Township Comprehensive Plan, any regional open space, recreation, and greenway plan, or other applicable plan adopted by the Township of Rapho. (2) Unique, sensitive, and important natural features and landscapes. The public open space land shall be configured to promote conservation of the following unique, sensitive, and important natural features and landscapes, to the extent feasible. It is not the intention of the Township of Rapho to require the preservation of all of the following unique, sensitive, and important natural features and landscapes: (a) Natural watercourses and riparian corridors. Natural watercourses, and riparian corridors as set forth in Article V of this chapter relating to riparian corridors (S 350-524); (b) Floodplains. Floodplains as set forth in Article IV of this chapter relating to Floodplain Overlay (FPO) Zone (S 350-402); (c) Wetlands. Wetlands delineated by the National Wetlands Inventory (NWI). (d) Karst topographical hazards. Lands adjoining and within 100 feet of karst topographical hazards. Karst topographica hazards are limited to: [11 Sinkholes; [2] Closed depressions; [3] Lineaments in carbonate areas; [4] Fracture traces; [5] Caverns; amenities: [1] Walking/bicycle trail; [2] Playground facility; [3] Picnic table and bench; or [4] Any other amenity as requested by Township Board of Supervisors and agreed to by applicant. (8) Perimeter parking and street frontage and access. Where deemed appropriate by the Township Board of Supervisors, the required public open space land shall be provided with sufficient perimeter parking, and with safe and convenient access by adjoining street frontage or other rights-of-way or easements capable of accommodating pedestrian, bicycle, maintenance, vehicle, and other traffic, and containing appropriate access improvements. (9) Coordination: with SLDO park and recreation land dedication requirements. Open space design developments providing the minimum amount of required public open. space land as required by the (OSDO) Zone shall not be required to provide additional park and recreation land or fees in lieu of in accordance with the SLDO. (10) Development in phases. Where an open space design development is planned to occur in two or more development phases, all of the required public open space land shall be offered for dedication, and permanently recorded the first phase. (11) Analysis and required public open space land plan, (a) In designing and providing for the public open space land and associated facilities, in addition to the need, adequacy, and feasibility of the proposed location, layout, design, uses, facilities, and activities, the following shall be considered: [1] Compatibility with the public open space resource protection objectives set forth in the subsection above relating to public open space land standards (S 350-405F); and [2] The park and recreation facility needs of the Township, and the area adjacent to the proposed open space design development and the public open space land. (b) Any application for an open space design development shall contain a conceptual plan for the long-term management of the public open space land which is to be created as part of the open space design development. [1] At a minimum, such a plan shall include a discussion of the: [a] Manner in which the public open space land will be owned and by whom it will be managed and maintained; [b] Conservation and land management techniques and practices which will be used to conserve and perpetually protect the public open space land, including a conservation plan in accordance with Article V of this chapter relating to conservation plans (S 350-506), where applicable; [cl Professional and personnel esources that will be necessary in order to maintain and manage the property; [d] Nature of public access that is planned for the public open space land; and [e] Source of money that will be available for such management, preservation and maintenance on a perpetual basis. [2] The adequacy and feasibility of this conceptual management plan, as well as its compatibility with the open space resource protection objectives set forth in the subsection above relating to public open space land standards (S 350-405F) shall be & a : 2 - 5 3 5 3 - E 5 - 0 E - a a 0 L - * taz 3 - dR 2 0 - 1 S à a 00 e 5 AC 22 - - - : 2 a C ONT 1 S Ltte ? Ay R VYENTE HIBON : 222 > x >ves es 5 - a - E * 0 : - I 1 - a - 4 > 133H5E 33S GNI HOIVA 5 L 8 / - - R 3 9 : E 3 I S: 1 1 S 1: 21 E 3 K5 1 9 B * - - 63 accwws da : à. i - E E 3 3 & 2 à - - 5o A I 4 - I 8 33H48 w - is E9 e E38 N * S I 4 a ac M Eic HyewE aves 2vn ls hg Aees soes2x MwowA-w-wN pal 25 a E a :: - : El 4 e S : a 3 : a 5 : - s 5 39 : 5 3 - 1 1 : 6 a 5 - & : A e o - 5 DIV : E 39HS 35 a CVeE 3 e A - dad 5 6 - a S 3 E 3 a : E - P - 5 - 9 * - % a S - - 3 5 6 - 4 56 : a - 3 5 3 : 1 7 E E a :: E a 2 2 E 3 - o 3 Y - * : 6 0 E - 3 : . 4 a : a o : IARa s6a? 2 . a SNTHOIVI de - aHS 138 I E : . E d1 - ASAICCOL e F cauDle EPAAwANSsr 35 e1 ces CyPnt sfnaivara 02 CAv VIPEAXAA-V ML SM M 33 1 35 a : 0 - I 1 3 - 0 y à - a ( 6 - 5 9 : E s6 laalt 3 a : a 1 - LAL 4 1hg THE FLORIN HILL PARTNERSHIP 322 North Arch Street Lancaster, PA 17603 March 25, 2025 Mount Joy Borough Council Mount Joy Borough 21 East Main Street Mount Joy, PA 17552 Re: Florin Hill Recreation Fees - Phase 3 Dear Borough Council Members, The prior conditional use decisions for Florin Hill require the developer to pay a recreation fee in the amount of $1,000 per home. With respect to the prior two phases of Florin Hill, we historically paid this fee with each building permit submitted to Mount Joy Borough. The developers agreement that we signed for Phase 3 reiterates the requirement to pay the $1,000 recreation fee for each dwelling shown on the Phase 3 land development plan. However, Section 1(F) of the developers agreement modifies our prior practice and requires that the entire fee be paid as a single lump sum "prior to final approval of the Plans". Simply put, we missed this provision when reviewing the developers agreement. Had we noticed this language, we would have raised it as an issue before signing the agreement. Given our oversight, we are requesting that the Borough enter into a simple amendment to the developers agreement to make it clear that the $1,000 recreation fee for the homes in Phase 3 will be paid at the time each building permit is submitted. We would further ask that Borough Council authorize the Solicitor and Borough Manager to prepare and enter into this amendment on behalf of the Borough, respectively. Thank you for your consideration of this request. Sincerely, THE FLORIN HILL PARTNERSHIP Anthony Faranda-Diedrich 4q RETTEW BUDGETARY CONSTRUCTION COST OPINION Mount Joy Borough Pickleball Courts Project No. 029612004 March 14, 2025 COMPUTED BY: KMK CHECKED BY: AMJ RETTEW ASSOCIATES, INC. LANCASTER, PA UNIT TOTAL ITEM DESCRIPTION UNIT QUANTITY COST COST A Moblizaton/Demob/Tainte Control 1 Mobltatom/Demoelimaton LS 1 $ 7,500.00 $ 7,500.00 B Site Work 1 Erosion & Sediment Control Measures LS 1 $ 5,000.00 $ 5,000.00 2 Earthmoving- Excavating and Grading LS 1 $ 15,000.00 $ 15,000.00 3 Temporary / Permanent seeding LS 1 $ 1,500.00 $ 1,500.00 C Pickleball Courts/2) - 60' x 60' 1 6" PA: 2A Stone SY 400 $ 7.00 $ 2,800.00 2 2" Superpave Base Course SY 400 $ 19.50 $ 7,800.00 3 1.5" Superpave Asphalt Course SY 400 $ 15.50 $ 6,200.00 4 Line Painting LS 1 $ 2,000.00 $ 2,000.00 D Site Amenities 2 Chain-Link Fence -8' High LF 240 $ 87.00 $ 20,880.00 3 Court Divider Fence -4' High LS 1 $ 3,500.00 $ 3,500.00 4 Sound absorbing Blanket (3 Sides) SF 1,440 $ 16.00 $ 23,040.00 Construction Subtotal $ 95,220.00 E Construction Contingency (10%) $ 9,522.00 Construction Total $ 104,742.00 F Engineering, / Construction Administration LS 1 $ 10,000.00 $ 10,000.00 Grand Total $ 114,742.00 RETTEW Associates, Inc. isr not a construction contractor and therefore probable construction cost opinions are made ont the basis of RETTEW's experience and qualifications as an engineer and represent RETTEW's best judgment as an experienced and qualified design professional generally familiar with the industry- This requires RETTEW to make a number of assumptions as to actual conditions which willl be encountered on the site; thes specific decisions of other design professionals engaged; the means and methods of construction the contractor wille employ; contractors' techniques in determining prices and market conditions at the time, and other factors over which RETTEW has no control. Given these assumptions which must be made, RETTEW states that the above probable construction cost opinion is a fair and reasonable estimate for construction costs but cannot and does not guarantee that actual construction cost will noty vary from the Probable Construction Cost Opinion prepared by RETTEW. 1Hb From: pasquale scorzetti eTET2DAENON Sent: Wednesday, February 19, 2025 8:29:38 AM To: Barry Geltmacher ar@mountopaop Borough oruhemauntiopio Subject: Memorial Park St. Lukes Episcopal Church is requesting use of Memorial Park on) June. 291 from 10AM1 till noon. Please let me know when the! borough council willy vote oni it. Pat Scorzetti j4e RETTRW We answer to you. 3020 Columbia Avenue, Lancaster, PA: 17603 Phone: (800) 738-8395 E-mail: rettew@rettew.com: e Web site: rettew.com M EMORANDUM TO: Mount Joy Borough Council FROM: Mike Knouse, PE COPY: DATE: February 26, 2025 PROJECT NAME: 2025 Roadway Projects Contract 2 PROJECT NO.: 029613000 SUBJECT: Bid Results and Recommendation We have reviewed the construction bids for the 2025 Roadway Projects Contract No. 2 that were received on February 25, 2025. We received seven bids for Contract No. 2 Walnut St. Paving. Attached you will find a bid tabulation of the solicitation and a summary of the bid totals. We have also reviewed the documents submitted as part of the bids and find them to be in accordance with the requirements. Contract No. 2 - Walnut St. Paving Based on our review, the lowest responsible bidder for Contract 2 - Walnut St. Paving is Pennsy Supply, Inc. with al base bid of $130,760.72. We recommend awarding Contract 2 for the base bid only to Pennsy Supply, Inc. If you have any questions, please contact me. SMwAPpRCOISIAIRIRO Annual Road Project)2025/09 Construction)15 Bids-RFS/Contract. 2MJB Memo-Bid! Results_ 2025-02-26.docx RKITEW 2025 Roadway Project-Contract2 2-Paving we answe OL Mount. Joy Borough, Lancaster County PROJECT NO, 029613000 PROJECT MANAGER: MIKE KNOUSE February 25,2 2025 240CTarabrve Penraysply MGroup,l Ine. ConstrutionMiasters SeIiEs c ErubickerE Inc. ER KeidertSon, ne. IBEGro. Ine lawrences Skec Comtractors 7051 OMHamisbigs ad 150Grings Road Gakeiderlane POBo136 Road - SuiteiA Vocks PA17372 PCBoES 523 SSAGibertwiles Harri rihuryPA1710 Springs. Sinking Sprins. PA 19608 Jow Alle. PA1 17507 Mankeim, PA 1s45 Skippack, PA 19474 Gibertill, PA 19525 UNIT TOTAL UNT TOTAL UNIT TOTAL UNIT TOTAL UAT TOTAL UNT TOTAL UNIT TOTAL ITEM DESCRIPTION Nr PRICE PRICE PRICE PRICE PRKE PRICE PRICE PRICE PRICE PRICE PRICE PRICE PRICE PRICE 2 984. I6 9BS 4 KOORCO 5. 00000 503.00 S97 $9.7 753.9 52 105.00 59. $7. 5712357 515,0 EmAe EFECTT 0435 1 4E5 3950 00 51 s 7,331.5 - 57B315: Lo0000 6 90 $9,022.5 9 512 09aD9 00.0 0 515.00000 19 SY 00 $ Bm Mia-Fde 0 164 $12 2.00 - 23, G40.00 $10 25 $2 SII 59 0 S 520.25 5394925 s0 8251 10 So E 5228523 52733 54, 625.00 00 - PAZASEMEED Depth ON 46 76.00 00 24, 0200 5: E - Ls 35 0 10 518.150.50 s 430 - 5510 000.00 & 520A40.00 54500 Subbuse Repait- depth, 0 52432 51,24100 $600 00 53,00000 $71 $3,57500 $478 32 $2,391 00 551 52,562.50 569 2 53,436 00 52400 00 $12,000.0 00 - plceana. E AASHTO Na ln na. binder 450 TON $A3.54 E AiphltMitureD Deigab 587591.00 593.00 $44,85400 $89.45 540,25250 S4B.0 $39,670.00 $107,00 $48,150.09 SEL05 $3647250 5100.00 563,90000 PG6 6152 22,0 0.31030 Milion 25 mm. 4"depth, completei in E place 7 170 TON $10300 $17,510.00 5136.00 51312000 $128.75 $73.58750 514062 573,905.60 $150.00 $25.500.00 $11442 $19,451.40 $23600 $10.120.00 0 EALK 95 mm, depth, SRL M, einplace E Topsoks seedi andmulehs alongedpeol oF S45 SY $10.59 $5.77155 $IL0O 55,995.00 $10.50 55,722.50 512.17 54,741.65 515:50 55,447.50 $2255 512,45325 $1200 56,540.00 newp ain.cmpleteaphce WECOIWARL Line, 52 561: $321.36 $600 $312.00 5630 $327.60 $9651 51,368.64 $11.00 5572.00 525.63 51,332.76 $20.00 $1,010.00 - inplace 10 Mankeleln lmes andcoverre replacement A 51.58691 5819382 $1,300.00 52,600.00 5125000 52,503.00 51,413.69 5282735 $3.303.09 56,606.00 $3,01327 56,058.54 $5,00200 51000209 civute E eseton, EnNOver = andac adpstments, gradea all Plase E Bnder Z5mm, PG E E 3tos 30MilionE ESALS, B depih 11 valvet bors swrvs, EA $455.05 $1820.24 $140.00 $550.00 $555.00 $2,260.00 5596.7 70 52,38680 51,100.00 55,200.00 $486.49 $1,915.96 $2,002.00 $8,000.00 E provided tensien, binder Coure. P66 E a3t9c3 3oMition e ercavated area E 12 liorplinndswal 10 - 52561 51236.10 $153.00 $L.580.09 - 5375.00 5750.00 523656 5236540 $25100 $251000 $2110 $.1090 $552.00 - $5.50200 13 50 IF 51794 5897,00 $24.00 $179000 - $110.00 55500.00 - $24.67 5128350 58.00 $4,150.00 5439 5119350 - 5150,00 150200 BASEBD 5134.76072 $1B3.557.00 $15411260 513X40156 $12.05.50 $17,37215 5156315.00 15 TON $323.50 $4452.50 5365.09 55.,475.00 5373.00 55679.49 $13427 $357405 $4D500 $6,075.00 $347.02 $5,205.30 $275.00 $4,125.00 Cousei o 9.5 ESAL,9 Snm, SAL Lcemplete E npiace 15 mhermoistes SpeedT Table Pavesent 101 $12.30 $1,279.20 $1200 $1,248.00 $12.50 51,300.00 $1474 51,532.96 $2375 57,418.00 $14.35 $1,49240 $22.00 $1.285.00 Marting, 12" inew wideh 16 Thermopls lastic WieCermakU line, 6 64 LF $618 5185.52 $6.00 $384.00 $635 StOE. 40 $7.37 5171.62 $11.00 $704.00 571: $459.52 $20.00 $1,28000 auiells compleleimphee 17 Traliesgn w171 d V13 1P. 225 $1,41650 531,A71.25 S60.00 $1,350.00 $65.00 $1462.50 $40.00 5900.00 $12000 $2,70000 536.95 $876.33 $46.00 51,035.00 cmmpketeinplare TOTAL AITEAATEIDNO.1 $3R39847 58457,00 51.533.30 $64769 $1L897,00 $8,033.60 SR726:09 TOTALE BID $160.15119 $142,01400 5142,55150 $145.87925 513.94.50 1$15,40578 $265.653.09 n jtd RMTTEW We answer to you. 3020 Columbia Avenue, Lançaster, PA1 17603 Phone: (800) 738-8395 E-mail: rettew@rettew.com Web: site: rettew.com MEMORANDUM TO: Mark G. Pugliese, Borough Manager, Mount Joy Borough FROM: Kara M. Kalupson, Project Manager COPY: DATE: February 26, 2025 PROJECT NAME: Compost Facility (200 S. Jacob Street) PROJECT NO.: 0296101216 SUBJECT: Proposal for: Stormwater Management Design RETTEW Associates, Inc., is pleased to submit this proposal for site improvements to the Mount Joy Borough Compost Facility at 200 S. Jacob Street including expanding the existing paved area and stormwater management facilities. SCOPE OF SERVICES A. TOPOGRAPHIC: SURVEY FOR MJB COMPOST FACILITY (PHASE 901) RETTEW will: 1. Notify utilities through the Pennsylvania 811 system. A Design Notification shall be submitted with request for a field mark-out of utilities. At the request of facility owners, RETTEW shall provide a plan or aerial of the project site for mark-up, facility locations, and types. a. The Client and/or Owner is responsible for providing information and/or mark- out for on-site private utilities. 2. Perform a topographic survey of a portion of the subject property as shown below, the topographic survey shall include locations and elevations of the following existing features: a. Pavement edges, centerlines and pavement markings. b. Driveways and parking spaces. C. Fences and signs. d. Individual trees in open areas, edges of wooded and brush-covered areas. e. Retaining walls and rock outcroppings. f. Other visible, accessible and pertinent features. Page 2 of 8 Mount. Joy Borough February 26, 2025 RETTEW Project No. 029610216 3. Prepare a survey base map in AutoCAD Civil3D at an appropriate scale and showing the following: a. Existing features noted above. b. Site benchmark(s), with vertical datum NAVD 88. C. Contours with one-foot intervals and spot elevations, as deemed necessary. d. Mapping features shown beyond the survey limits shall be based on available public GIS data or derived from available aerial mapping and/or record plans. e. Horizontal datum Pennsylvania State Plane Coordinates, South Zone, NAD 83(2011). f. Locations of above ground and/or underground utilities which are visible or are identifiable from utility markings and/or best available plan information. Locations of underground utilities are approximate for design purpose only. This proposal DOES NOT include subsurface investigation and/or confined space entries into manholes or storm structures. B. SITE EVALUATION FOR STORMWATER INFILTRATION (PHASE 357) To evaluate soil and geologic conditions and complete infiltration testing in the area of the proposed stormwater basin located at 200 S. Jacob Street, Mount Joy, Pennsylvania. RETTEW will: 1. Review available geologic oublications regarding bedrock geology and carbonate features at the site. 2. Review available historic aerial photographs for carbonate features; conduct a fracture trace analysis utilizing the aerial photographs. 3. Obtain published soil information to determine on-site soil type and limiting factors for development (i.e., seasonal high water table, clay content, hydric soils, etc.). 4. Prepare a site-specific Health and Safety Plan (HASP). 5. Visit the site to survey and stakeout test pit locations with a Trimble Pathfinder GPS receiver accurate to <1.0 meter. Process the data for incorporation into the site plan. 6. Notify the Pennsylvania 811 system for utility marking/clearance on the public right-of- way at least three days in advance of excavating activity. The client will be responsible for the location and marking of private underground utilities on the property. 7. Observe the excavation of up to three test pits. Complete test pits to determine the depth to bedrock, the depth to the seasonal high groundwater table and/or actual groundwater table, and subsurface soil characteristics. The test pits will extend to a depth of five feet, bedrock, water table, refusal, ort to equipment depth limitation, whichever is encountered first. RETTEW Page 3 of 8 Mount. Joy Borough February 26, 2025 RETTEW Project No. 029610216 8. A RETTEW geoscientist will describe the soil profile, bedrock type (if encountered) and identify limiting zones in the test pits. The soils will be classified according to the USDA method. All field data will be reviewed and analyzed by a RETTEW Senior Soil Scientist. 9. Perform a maximum of six falling head infiltration tests (two infiltration tests pertest pit excavation) ati the Site. The time period forinfiltration: testing should be precipitation free. a. Conduct the infiltration tests by a double ring infiltrometer at each selected testing location. Placement of each test will be based on field conditions, such as coarse fragment content within the soil, backhoe refusal, indications of seasonally high-water table, etc. Infiltration testing will be completed in accordance with methods described in the Pennsylvania Department of Environmenta Protection (PA DEP) Stormwater BMP Manual. b. A maximum of eight water drop measurements per test will be obtained at a time interval which is appropriate fort the site. 10. Calculate infiltration rates based on the water drop measurements collected. 11. Provide a written report, which will present our findings, conclusions, and design and construction recommendations, based on the investigation. Deliverable: Site Evaluation for Stormwater infiltration Report and Carbonate Hazard Study. C. STORMWATER MANAGEMENT PLAN (PHASE 612) RETTEW will: 1. Consider design constraints such as stormwater management, zoning, and land development regulations, slopes, existing stormwater features, and infiltration rates of the native soils. The design will meet East Donegal Township's Stormwater Management Ordinance to the greatest extent possible. 2. Prepare Stormwater Management Plans utilizing the AutoCADD Topographic Survey prepared by RETTEW as our base. The plan will include layout, grading and other information as necessary for review and approval by East Donegal Township. 3. Prepare and submit Erosion Control Plans to the Lancaster County Conservation District for their review and approval. 4. Prepare stormwater profiles, details and calculations as necessary. 5. Prepare a stormwater management plan application to East Donegal Township. Submit and provide administration of the application to the Township for staff review and approval. This will include attending one meeting with staff to review the project and addressing one round of comments. 6. Provide administration of the project with the Borough. Deliverables: Stormwater Management Plan and Erosion Control Plan. RETTEW Page 4 of 8 Mount Joy Borough February 26, 2025 RETTEW Project No. 029610216 D. CONSTRUCTION PHASE SERVICES (PHASE 613) RETTEW will: 1. Prepare the Contract Documents. a. Prepare the advertisement for public bidding of the project. b. Prepare bidding documents in accordance with Public Bidding Laws, including insertion of Wage Rates, Contracts, Bid Forms, and Bond Forms (Bid, Payment, and Performance). C. Prepare all applicable technical specifications. 2. Assist the Borough in receipt and review of the bids and awarding of the Contract. 3. Issue the Notice of Award, administer the signing of the Contract, receipt of bonds, certificates, and other required documentation. 4. Coordinate a pre-construction meeting. Attendees at this meeting should include the client, RETTEW, general contractor, all sub-contractors, all affected utility companies, and possibly interested impacted residents. 5. Issue Notice to Proceed. 6. Provide an engineer on-call to review work progress, answer any questions during the construction, and orovide as-needed consultation throughout the construction. 7. Observe the construction, resolve conflicts, and verify quantities. This will serve to assure the client that work is progressing generally in accordance with the Contract Documents. The amount of time that the inspector will be on the project site will depend on the construction activities. Additional visits by the Engineer will be made when critical activities require it. Observation reports of the site visits will be sent to the client as well as other communications with the contractor to help in maintaining consistent communication on the project. 8. Provide construction administration, including review and recommendation of payment requests, change order reviews, and issuance of contractor directives. 9. Perform construction observation necessary to complete a Certificate of Substantial Completion and a Certificate of Final Completion. Deliverable: PDF files ofthe Contract Documents including one hard copy. E. FUNDING (PHASE 625) Rettew will: 1. Assist the Borough in required grant administration activities including preparing reports and reimbursement requests. RETTRW Page 5 of 8 Mount. Joy Borough February 26, 2025 RETTEW Project No. 029610216 ANTICIPATED PROJECT SCHEDULE RETTEW shall commence the topographic survey (Phase 901) work within ten business days of receiving notice to proceed. The scope of work as outlined shall be completed within approximately 20 business days after commencement. The final deliverable date is contingent upon favorable weather and timely receipt of information requested from utility and/or other companies. Field work for Phase 357 can commence within two weeks of notice to proceed, weather-permitting. Phase 612 can commence after the completion of the Phase 357 field work. The final Phase 357 report will be issued to the client prior to submittal of Stormwater Management Plans. COMPENSATION RETTEW proposes to provide the aforementioned professional services on a Time and Expense basis in accordance with our standard hourly rates in effect at the time the services are being performed. RETTEW will bill you for the actual time, portal to portal, and expenses incurred in the performance of the Scope of Services outlined above. Although RETTEW may provide an estimate of fees and expenses for your guidance, the actual fees and expenses that you will incur during the course of your project may varyfrom the estimate. Accordingly, any estimate given by RETTEW does not constitute a guarantee of the final amount of fees and expenses that you will incur. The estimated costs are provided below for your convenience. PROFESSIONAL FEES A. Topographical Survey (Phase 901). .$4,900.00 B. Site Evaluation for Stormwater Infiltration (Phase 357). $6,800.00 C. Stormwater Management Plan (Phase 612).. $16,200.00 D. Construction Phase Services (Phase 613). $11,800.00 E. Funding (Phase 625). $1,500.00 Expenses such as reprographic services, equipment fees, mileage, and overnight travel that are directly incidental to our professional services shall be invoiced to you at our standard rates; expenses from our vendors shall be invoiced at 1.15 times our cost. Expense costs will be in addition to the Professional Fees stated above. Estimated expenses for the above services associated with the project: $1,200.00 TOTAL PROPOSED FEES $42,400.00 ASSUMPTIONS Phase 901 1. This proposal does not include additional surveys which may be required for a detailed flood study or Highway Occupancy Permits (HOPs). RETTEW Page 6 of 8 Mount Joy Borough February 26, 2025 RETTEW Project No. 029610216 2. It is assumed that RETTEW will be given permission to access adjacent properties by property owners for purposes of performing the field surveys. Notice of Intent to Enter (NOIE) letters are not included in this scope of services. 3. Compost piles will be surveyed at ground level only, tops of piles will not be surveyed. 4. All meetings not listed in the scope of services above shall be attended, as requested, and billed on a time and expense basis. 5. Survey base mapping will be prepared using RETTEW CAD standards unless otherwise specified by the Client, prior to work commencing. 6. This proposal does not include any on-site safety training or orientation that may be required. Phase 357 7. Up to six hours of excavation services track-mounted mini-excavator) have been included, and one mobilization and one demobilization have been included based on conducting the field work on one business day. 8. The site is accessible with a four-wheel drive pickup truck carrying equipment for infiltration testing and a rubber-tired backhoe. 9. The location of test pits is assumed to be in open areas that are free of paved surfaces, active utilities, and legacy utilities. If any ofthese or similar obstructions are present, additional costs may be incurred. 10. RETTEW is not responsible for damages to underground utilities. Pennsylvania law requires notification of the PA-One Call (811) system three working days prior to excavating or construction phase activities. However, 811 will only provide public utility locates; private utilities will NOT be located through the 811 process. At your request, RETTEW's Subsurface Utility Engineering (SUE) group can provide private utility locating services and/or verify the accuracy of locates for public utilities completed through 811. 11. Excavated test pits will be closed, the area smoothed to match existing topography as much as possible prior to demobilization. Test pits scars will be seeded and stabilized with straw blankets. 12. The soils at the test pit locations and site characteristics may not be compatible with implementing infiltration. If the infiltration rates are too slow or too fast, or other soil and/or site limitations are identified, additional areas can be investigated, and other stormwater management options can be evaluated on a cost-plus basis. 13. A desktop carbonate hazard study is included in this scope of services. Additionally, a field reconnaissance will be conducted to identify any surface-expressed carbonate features. Based on the results of the desktop and limited field reconnaissance, additional carbonate investigations may be warranted and are not included in this scope of services. An addendum will be provided to the client if any additional investigations are required. RETTRW Page 7of8 Mount. Joy Borough February 26, 2025 RETTEW Project No. 029610216 Phase 612 14. The limit of disturbance will be less than one (1) acre. A General or Individual NPDES Permit will not be required. 15. Evidence of an approved Erosion and Sedimentation Control Plan (E&S Plan) from Lancaster County Conservation District (LCCD) will be required by East Donegal Township. 16. The Borough will be responsible for any application fees. 17. Involvement with AMTRAK will not be required. 18. The proposed design solution will expand upon the existing stormwater basin and will not negatively affect downstream conditions or properties. ADDITIONAL SERVICES Services not included in the scope and fee described herein may be provided by RETTEW upon your request. We will perform these services as an addendum to the Professional Services Agreement or mutually acceptable substitute agreement, should they prove to be necessary. Proper written authorization must be given prior to initiating any additional services. The following additional services are not included in this proposal but can be provided for an additional fee: 1. ALTA/NSPS Land Title surveys and/or review of title documents. 2. Boundary surveys. 3. Preparation of easement exhibits or legal descriptions. 4. Construction stakeout services. 5. RETTEW Field Services, Inc. (RFS), can identify and locate subsurface utilities and structures forincorporation into the survey plan deliverable. This includes existing public utilities, private utilities, abandoned utilities, and underground structures such as underground storage tanks (USTs), vaults, septic tanks, etc. 6. Any land surveying services not specifically described within the Scope of Services and Fees stated herein. 7. Construction stakeout services 8. Coordination with AMTRAK. BILLING SCHEDULE RETTEW will invoice you at the end of each monthly billing period for services pertormed to date. Invoices are payable per the terms of the enclosed Professional Services Agreement. RETTRW Page 8 of 8 Mount Joy Borough February. 26, 2025 RETTEW Project No. 029610216 PAYMENT SCHEDULE Payment is due upon presentation of invoice and is past due 30 calendar days from the invoice date. Unpaid invoices in excess of 30 calendar days will be cause to discontinue services until all outstanding invoices are paid. Work stoppages will impact the project schedule and may result in missed deadlines and/or increased project fees including remobilization. Mount Joy Borough agrees to reimburse RETTEW for anys special business or personal taxes imposed at the local, county or state level as a result of providing professional services by RETTEW to Mount Joy Borough under this agreement. PROPOSAL ACCEPTANCE Ifthis proposal is satisfactory and acceptable and fully sets forth all the items of our understanding, please signify your acceptance by signing the enclosed Professional Services Agreement and returning it to our office. We will forward a fully executed copy to you. This document will then constitute our completed agreement. f we are given verbal or written authorization to proceed with any portion ofthis work prior to receiving an executed agreement, or if we receive payment from you toward this project, the terms and conditions of the attached Professional Services Agreement will be considered to be in full force, as if it had been executed, until such time as another agreement is executed by both parties. RETTEW RETTEW We answer to you. Corporate Headquarters: 3020 Columbia, Avenue Lancaster, PA 17603 Phone (17,394-3721-Fax (717) 798-9879 E-mail: rettew@rettew.com - Web site: rettew.com PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT Project No. 0296101216 THIS AGREEMENT entered into on this 26th day of February 2025 by and between Mount Joy Borough located at 21 East Main Street, Mount Joy, Pennsylvania 17552 hereinafter called "CLIENT" and RETTEW Associates, Inc., hereinafter called "RETTEW" is as follows: THE AGREEMENT IS ENTERED INTO WITH RESPECT TO THE FOLLOWING PROJECT: Stormwater Management Design - Compost Facility (200 S. Jacob Street) located at: Mount Joy Borough, Lancaster County, Pennsylvania hereinafter called the PROJECT. THE CLIENT AND RETTEW AGREE AS FOLLOWS: A. Scope of Services to be Provided by RETTEW: As outlined in the attached Memo Proposal dated February 26, 2025. B. Total Fee to be Paid to RETTEW: As outlined in the attached Memo Proposal dated February 26, 2025. C. Schedule fort the Services of RETTEW: As outlined in the attached Memo Proposal dated February 26, 2025 and upon receipt of the signed Professional Services Agreement. D. This PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT shall include the PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT TERMS AND CONDITIONS as attached hereto. ACCEPTANCE AND EXECUTION OF THIS AGREEMENT: BY: BY: (Client Signature) (RETTEW Signature) Melissa Kelly (Printed Name) (Printed Name) TITLE: TITLE: Municipal Team Lead DATE: DATE: RBTTEW 0296101216 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT TERMS AND CONDITIONS 1. Scope of Services. RETTEW Associates, Inc, ("RETTEW") agrees to provide C. Neither party Group shall be liable to the other for punitive, exemplary, professional services set forth in the Scope of Services to the Client (the "Services") special, indirect, incidental or consequential damages (including, but not limited to, pursuant to these Terms and Conditions (the "Terms"). These" Terms, together with the lost profits, lost revenues, lost business opportunities, loss of use, fines, penalties, and Professional Services Agreement and its attachments, constitutes the entire agreement loss of or corruption to data) arising from or related to this Agreement, regardless of between the parties conceming the Services, Unless specifically included int the Scope the theory liability, and even if they have been advised of the possibility of such ofs Services, RETTEW shall not provide any constructionp phase services including, but damages or loss. not limited to, construction observation ofany other contractor's work, RETTEW shall d. RETTEW hereby advises Client that it is willing to negotiate higher not control, or be responsible for, the construction means, methods, techniques, limitations of liability than those set forth herein, subject to increased compensation sequences or procedures of any contractor and shall not be responsible for site safety. Client has chosen to enter into this Agreement subject to the above limitations of RETTEW shall not be responsible for procuring permits, certificates, and licenses liability after consideration ofthe totality ofthe proposal presented by RETTEW. required for any construction unless such procurement responsibilities or other 6. Relationship with Other Consultants and Contractors. RETTEW is not responsibilities are: specifically assigned to RETTEW in the Scope of Services, responsible for any errors or omissions by other and prior engineers, consultants, 2. Invoices, Client represents and warrants that it possesses the financial resources contractors or their respective subcontractors (collectively, "Contractors"), including, to fulfill its payment obligations hereunder and that such resources do not rely but not limited to, such Contractors' failure to adhere to Deliverables, regardless of significantly on contingent, third-party monies. Client agrees to maintain such whether or not RETTEW is observing their work. RETTEW owes no duty to Client or resources during the term hereof and that the failure to maintain such resources shall any Contractor to discover their errors, omissions or other defects ini its work or in the constitute a material breach hereof Unless otherwise agreed, Client will bei invoiced work of its subcontractors. Client will use reasonable efforts to include the following every 4 weeks for services performed to date andai final invoice will be timely provided language in its agreements with other Contractors on the Project: "To the fullest extent upon completion of the Services. Payment is due on receipt and is past due 30 days permitted by lav, contractor or consultant expressly waives any claims or causes of from invoice date. Interest will be added after 30 days at thet rate of 1.5% per month or action against the project engineer. for damages sustained in comection with the partial month overdue. Any right to withhold payment based on errors or discrepancies project, under any theory of liability, except to the extent that the damages resulted in the invoice is waived ifnot identified in writing to RETTEW within 10 days oft the from personal injury or properly damage. The project engineer is an intended third- date of invoice, Client will reimburse RETTEW's reasonable attorneys' fees and party beneficiary ofthis provision. litigation costs incurred in pursuing collection of any amount due from Client, in 7. Termination. In addition to any other termination set forth herein, this addition to amounts otherwise due hereunder. Timely payment to RETTEW is a Agreement may be terminated by either 7 rights written notice ift material consideration of this Agreement. RETTEW may suspend or terminate its party upon days the other work upon written notice if any Client invoice is not timely paid. Client agrees to party fails materially to perform in accordance with its terms. If the Project is defend, indemnify and hold RETTEW harmless from any damages that may arise due permanently abandoned, this Agreement may bet terminated by Client upon at least 7 such days written notice tol RETTEW. Int the event of termination oft the Project, Client will tos suspension or termination. compensate RETTEW for Services performed or provided up to its receipt of the 3. Standard of Care. RETTEW shall perform the Services in a manner consistent written notiçe of termination, for all reimbursable expenses incurred by RETTEW in with that degree of care and skill ordinarily exercised by members of the same furtherance of the Services (whether or not incorporated into the Services prior to profession currently practicing under similar circumstances: at the: same time and in the termination), and reasonable fees and expenses directly associated with the closing the same or similar locality. This standard of care shall exclusively be. judged as of the matter, the latter as approved by Client in advance. Timely payment to RETTEWI isa time thes services are rendered and nota according to later standards. RETTEW MAKES material consideration of this Agreement. Client's failure to make payments in NO EXPRESS WARRANTIES, AND EXPRESSLY DISCLAIMS ANY AND ALL accordance with this Agreement shall constitute substantial non-performance and a WARRANTIES IMPLIED BY LAW AS THEY MAY APPLY TO THIS cause for termination by RETTEW. AGREEMENT, INCLUDING THOSE OF MERCHANTABILITY AND FITNESS 8. Insurance.. During the term ofthe RETTEW FOR. A PARTICULAR PURPOSE Client agrees that neither RETTEW nora any ofi its Agreement, will maintain Workers' subconsulamtsowesany, fiduciary duty to Cliento or agency relationship between Client Compensation insurance, General Liability insurance, Automobile insurance, and and RETTEW and that, in any event, RETTEW's course of conduct during the Professional Liability insurance in commercially reasonable amounts. Client will performance of the Services shall not create ai fiduciary duty or agency relationship. maintain, or require its other contractors or consultants ont the Project to maintain,s such policies (ifa applicable) in commercially reasonable amounts. Except to the extent that 4. Indemmification. To the fullest extent permitted by law, Client agrees to such waiver would invalidate the applicable insurance coverage, the parties waive all indemnify, defend and hold the RETTEW Group harmless from and against any and rights against eachother andagainstt the contractors, consultants, agents and employees all manner of demands, claims, liabilities, costs and expenses (including, without ofthe other for damages to the extent covered by property insurance, except suchrights limitation, reasonable attorneys' and experts' fees and other reasonable defense costs) ast they may have to the proceeds ofsuchi insurançe. Client and RETTEW shall require (a) arising out ofa any negligent act or omission, or any breach of this Agreement, by similar waivers from their contractors, consultants and agents. Client or any individual or entity for whose acts Client is responsible; (b). arising out 9. Opinions of Probable Construction Cost. RETTEW's ofthe use ofor reliance on the drawings, sketches, specifications and other documents opinions of probable in any form provided to or for Client by RETTEW under this Agreement construction cost and other cost opinions or estimates are to be made on the basis of ("Deliverables") by any third-party; and/or (c) RETTEW's use or reliance on RETTEW's experience and qualifications as an engineer and represent RETTEW's drawings, sketches, specifications and information provided to RETTEW by Client or best judgment as an experienced. and qualified design professional generally familiar its Contractors (defined below). To the fullest extent permitted by law, RETTEW with the industry. However, because RETTEW has no control over the cost of labor, hold materials, equipment, or services furnished by others, or over the contractor" 's methods agrees to indemnify, defend and the Client Group harmless from and against any of determining prices, or over competitive or market RETTEW and all manner of demands, claims, liabilities, costs and expenses (including, without bidding conditions, limitation, reasonable attorneys' and experts' fees and other reasonable defense costs) cannot and does not guarantee that proposals, bids, or actual construction cost will not vary from opinions of probable construction cost prepared RETTEW or other cost act by arising out of any negligent or omission, or any breach of this Agreement, by opinions or estimates. If Client wishes assurance as to construction RETTEW or any individual or entity for whose acts RETTEW is responsible. With costs, greater probable Client shall employ an independent cost estimator. regard to any claims arising out of professional services, any defense obligation assumed by RETTEW shall be interpreted as an obligation to reimburse reasonable 10. Disputes. If a dispute arises from or relates to this Agreement or the breach defense costs, including but not limited to reasonable attorney's and expert's fees. As thereof, that cannot be settled through direct discussions, the parties agree to endeavor used in Paragraphs 4 and 5, a "Group" includes the identified party, its parents, first to settle the dispute by non-binding mediation administered by the American subsidiaries and affiliates, their agents, successors and assigns, or any of their Arbitration Association under its Construction Industry Mediation Procedures before shareholders, directors, partners, members, officers or employees. resorting to litigation. The parties further agree that they may initiate litigation 5. Limitations of Liability. regarding any dispute arising out of or relating to this Agreement, or breach thereof, if RETTEW for mediation does not result in a resolution within 90 days of initiation. Litigation a. Group's aggregate liability damages arising from or related to between the regarding this Agreement shall be in a court of this Agreement, under any theory ofl liability, shall not exceed the fees paid by Client jurisdiction located parties in the state where the work hereunder brought IS In the competent event for performance ofthe Services. RETTEW shall only be liable for such damages to the litigation, the prevailing party shall be entitled to collect its reasonable performed. attorneys' of extent caused by its negligence or breach of this Agreement. experts' fees and costs related to the litigation from the other This Agreement fees, b. IFRETTEW fails to include any required item or component of the Project shallbe governed by and construed under the law ofthe: state where party. the work hereunder from Deliverables, RETTEW shall correct such failure on Deliverables without charge is performed, without regard to its of conflicts of laws. The waive to Client and reasonable additional construction costs incurredby the Client due to the their right, to aJ jury trial principles parties omission, but shall not be responsible for the cost oft the item or component itself, or ifany, the cost of installation thereof Rev. 09/12/2024 RETTEW 11. Client Responsibilities. Client will provide access to the site as necessary for 17. Miscellaneous. There are. no third-party beneficiaries oft this Agreement There RETTEW's performance of the Services. Client will provide, in a timely fashion, are no understandings or agreements concerningt this Project excepta ase expressly stated complete physical information about the site that may be neçessary or desirable for herein, These Terms cannot be modified, altered, abridged, rescinded or supplemented RETTEW to perform the Services. Client will timely review proposals, schedules, by any unilateral statement or writing of either party. These Terms control over any plans, and specifications prepared by RETTEW, and cooperate with RETTEW so that subsequent writings, unless specifically and explicitly agreed to by both parties, in RETTEW may complete the Services in a timely fashion. Failure to provide such writing. If the Client directs RETTEW to initiate Services before execution of an timely review may adversely impact scope, schedule and budget related to the agreement, these Terms will govern the engagement, unless subsequently agreed by Services. Client will provide RETTEW with current and complete documents and the parties in writing: Neither party may assign this Agreement without the other information possessed by Client and its Contractors related to the site, the Projecta and party' s written consent, which shall not be unreasonably withheld, If any provision the Services. RETTEW shall be entitled to rely on information and recommendations hereof is deemed invalid or unenforceable, the other provisions shall remain in full provided by Client and its Contractors without independent evaluation or verification. force and effect, and binding upon the parties hereto. RETTEW may withdraw or 12. Notice of Defects. Client shall promptly report to RETTEW any defects or revisethep proposal ifthe Agreement is note executed by Client within 60 daysofreceipt. suspected defects in the Services, so that RETTEW may take measures to minimize 18. CONSTRUCTION: SERVICES (If included in Scope of Services) the consequences ofs such defect. Client will use reasonable efforts to include a similar 18.1 RETTEW offers construction observation and construction administration contractual requirement on its Contractors. Failure by Client, and/or Client's services, but does not offer construction management or construction inspection Contractors, to so notify RETTEW shall relieve RETTEW oft the costs of remedying services. RETTEW shall become generally familiar with the progress and quality of the defects to the extent of the additional costs resulting from the failure of prompt the work within the Scope of Services to determine, in general, if such work is notification, performed in accordance with the construction documents. RETTEW shall not be 13. Underground Utilities. Client will identify to RETTEW, in writing, the required to make exhaustive or continuous on-site visits to observe such work. locations of known or suspected underground utilities or other underground structures RETTEW's services do not include supervision or direction of the work of the or features at and near the project site that could affect the services to be provided contractor, its employees, agents or subcontractors. Client agrees to notify the (collectively, "Underground Utilities")a and will provide all drawings in its possession contractor accordingly. The contractor shall also be informed by Client that neither or control that identify Underground Utilities. RETTEW will be responsible for the RETTEW's) presence nort the observation by RETTEW shall excuse the contractor: for proper siting of underground utilities when provided with proper and accurate defects or omissions in its work. information regarding their location. Client agrees to defend, indemnify and hold 18.2 RETTEW shall not be responsible for any contractor's schedules or failure to RETTEW harmless from all penalties, claims and damages it sustains in connection carry outi the work in accordance with the construction documents. RETTEW shall not with: (a) Underground Utilities that are not identified to RETTEW as required, not have control over or charge ofa acts or omissions of any contractor, subcontractor, or properly identified, or not properly located by municipalities, authorities, or utilities their agents or employees, or of any other persons performing portions of the after proper notice (ie., after calling the applicable state utility locating hotline, ifone construction work: exists), and (b). construction schedules or practices out of RETTEW's control or 18.3 Client agrees that its contractor will be solely and for knowledge that violate state utility locating noticer requirements or invalidate otherwise working conditions on thej job site, including safety of all completely and responsible notification proper utility made by RETTEW. the performances ofthe work, and that these requirements persons will apply continuously property during and 14. Fees. not be limited to normal working hours. Any observation of the contractor' s a. Unless expressly stated otherwise in the Scope of Services, the "Total Fee" performance conducted by RETTEW's personnel will not include review of the above is RETTEW's best estimate of the cost of Services required to complete the adequacy of the contractor safety measures in, on or near the construction site. Project as RETTEW understands it to be defined and is not a cost-nol-to-exceed limit RETTEW is not responsible for any contractor' 'si failure to observe or comply with the onl RETTEW's compensation. For fixed fee projects, payment shall be made based on Occupational Healtha and Safety. Act ofl 1970,andr regulations or standardsp promulgated the percent of work completed for each phase of work, unless otherwise agreed. For thereunder, or any state, county, or municipal law or regulation of similar import or time and expense (cost plus) projects, billingsare! based on thel hours worked, including intent. travel time portal-to-portal, and reimbursable expenses. Overtime for non-exempt 18.4 Ifexpressly required under the Scope of Services to do so, RETTEW: shall review employees will be billed at 1.51 times the hourly rate. contractors' submittals within 10 business days of their submission, but only for the b. Client is responsible for RETTEW's out-of-pocket expenses incurred in limited purpose of checking for conformance with information given and the performing the Services, including, but not limited to, travel expenses, outside concept expressed in the construction documents. Review of such submittals design IS not consultants, approval and permit fees, and any supplemental insurance requested. conducted for the purpose of determining the accuracy and completeness of other Reimbursable expenses will bel billed at RETTEW's: actual cost, plus 15%, excepts sales details such as dimensions and or for instructions for cost tax will be reimbursed at and mileage will be reimbursed at the appliçable federal installation or performance ofequipment quantities or systemsdesigned substantiating by any contractor, all rate. of Hotels and meals will be billed as a per diem expense. which remain the responsibility of the contractor. RETTEW's review shall not 15. Additional Work. constitute approval of safety precautions or of construction means, methods, a. RETTEW shall be entitled to an equitable increase in compensation if it is techniques, sequences or procedures and RETTEW does not check or review the required to perform additional work due to changes in Client decisions or Client's methods by whichi the contractor intends to execute the design. A recommendation for failure to make decisions in a timely fashion. Services or tasks beyond those set forth payment shail not be construed as permitting any departure from the contract between int the Scope of Services (including but not limitedt to, revisions due to adjustments mn Client and the contractor or the construction documents, and the contractor shall thej project scope,9 quality, or budget) are considered "Additional Services" and will be remain responsible for any error in details, dimensions or otherwise that exist. billed at RETTEW's standard hourly rates, unless the parties agree otherwise in a RETTEW'sr review and acceptance ofshop drawings or submittals does not may constitute change order or amendment to this Agreement. approval or acceptance of design changes containedt therein unless the contractor has b. IfAdditional Services arer requested, RETTEW will provide Client with a change specifically informed RETTEW in writing of such deviation at the time of the order or amendment to this Agreement to memorialize the parties' obligations submittal and (1) RETTEW and Owner have given written approval to the specific regarding the Additional Services. RETTEW reserves the right to refuse to perform deviation as a prior change in the work, or (2) a order has been issued Additional Services until it receives written approval of the change order or authorizing the deviation. When professional change certification of amendment from the Client. IfRETTEW does not receive such written approval in characteristics of materials, systems or equipment is required by the performance construction timely manner, the project schedule could be impacted. documents, RETTEW shall be entitled to rely upon such certificationi to establish that 16. Work Product and Intellectual Property. Conditioned on full payment of the materials, systems or equipment will meet the performance criteria required by the amounts owed to RETTEW, RETTEW grants Client physical ownership of construction documents. Deliverables,anda ar royalty-free, nontransferable license to use Deliverables solely for 18.5 Ifthe Scope of Services includes RETTEW's1 review of contractors' requests for thel Project. RETTEW retains all other intellectual property rights in Deliverables and payment, then, unless otherwise agreed in writing, RETTEW shall, within 10 business the intellectual property rights m any other document reduced to tangible form by days from the date of receipt by RETTEW, review and evaluate such requests for RETTEW in furtherancec oft this Agreement. Deliverables may not be used on any other payment based upon RETTEW's observations and give Client its recommendations projects or by a third-party to complete the Project without RETTEW' S consent. Use regarding such request. RETTEW's recommendations shall constitute a statement to of Deliverables (or the data contained therein) in a manner that is contrary to this Client as of the date ofthe request, that: (a) the work has progressed as indicated; and paragraph, or any alteration or modification of Deliverables (or the data contained (b) that to the best of RETTEW's knowledge, information and belief, the work is therein), is at Client'ss solerisk: Client agrees to defend, indemnify and hold RETTEW consistent with the construction documents prepared by RETTEW and there are no harmless from any liability for damages arising from such use, alteration or known defects or deficiencies in the work for which Client should withhold payment modification. Payment of all sums due in: accordance with the terms ofthis Agreement under applicable law. The foregoing statements shall be interim only, shall be subject is a condition precedent to Client' s ownership or use of Deliverables. Client shall to an evaluation of the completed work compared to the construction documents, if consult with RETTEW before interpreting or clarifying Deliverables. requested by Client, and do not guarantee against minor deviations from the construction documents as of the date of the review. Rev. 09/12/2024 OM d MAISVONIVI dHSNWOL WO3NOO 15V3 AINTIOVJ ISOdNOO - H9NO808 Aor INNOW Ey INnON HOs Aor Moi HO13MS NVId lbs ne ose so MAAETE B. :: Ey a 9 B 3E - E - - 3 1 E 5 se Bi : I 2e 3 38 - - 4733 98 S e00 - : - - 3 & e - 3 a E e 8 € 8 8 % 2 5 - 2 4 11 6 o F 8 2 Co 5 6o $2 R