158 LOWER PAXTON TOWNSHIP BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Minutes oft the meeting held on January 14, 2025 A workshop meeting oft the Lower Paxton Township Board of Supervisors was called to order at 7:04 p.m. by Chair Lindsey on the above date at the Lower Paxton Township Municipal Center, 425 Prince Street, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania. Supervisors present in addition to Mrs. Lindsey, Chris Judd, Paul Navarro, Pamela Thompson, and Allen J. McCormack. Also in attendance were Bradley Gotshall, Township Manager; Sam Miller, Assistant Township Manager/Finance Director; Morgan M. Madden, Solicitor; Amanda Zerbe, Director ofCommunity Development; and Nick Gehret, Planning/Zoning Officer. Pledge of Allegiance Mr. Navarro led the Pledge of Allegiance. Public Comment Andrew Miller, MPL Law Firm, 96 S George St. York, PA, announced that he represents Zene Farhat of Farhat Excavating. Mr. Farhat has a property on the northwestern side ofthe Intersection ofI-83 and I-81; itis currently zoned R1. Mrs. Lindsey asked Mr. Miller to hold off until the item came up on the agenda. William Miller, 4311 Crestview Dr, thanked Tim Nolt, Director of Public Works, for proactively preparing for the snow. He mentioned that the Colonial Crest Homeowner's Association met last night and discussed some options to dispose of all the branches in the neighborhood and he offered to use his dump truck to load the waste and take it to the Compost Facility. 1 159 Doug Brown, Chief of Staff for State Senator Patty Kim, announced that he and Senator Kim are making rounds, and he has worked with many ofthe Township staff while employed at Dauphin County's Community and Economic Development. Senator Kim serves as the Chair of the Local Government Committee, and their goal is to be engaged in Municipal Management and make their services available to both the Municipality and constituents. He introduced Abe Kittle, a Legislative Analyst who works on the Local Government Committee, Appropriations Committee, and Aging and Youth Committee. Ms. Thompson announced that March is Women's History Month, and she and Mrs. Lindsey are history-makers regarding the Board. She asked Mr. Brown ifthey could be placed on Senator Kim's schedule for Women'sl History Month. Mr. Brown stated that Senator Kim would meet with Mr. Gotshall to discuss some things happening in the Township and how they can help. Mrs. Lindsey noted that the Township is hosting a Legislative Roundtable Discussion with the Senators, State Representatives, and Supervisors, and they look forward to the discussion. Cheryl Thompson, 110 Memorial Dr., asked to be put on the Hodges Heights Committee as she's been attending the Board meetings off and on and has monitored how the Supervisors handle business. Mrs. Lindsey explained that there's no committee; a group of residents from that area meet. Ms. Thompson noted that she has been attending the Board meetings off and on, and Mr. Gotshall was supposed to plan for a playground; he showed the residents a playground, and she was waiting to hear what happened. Mrs. Lindsey indicated that the Hodges Heights residents will be attending the Parks & Recreation Board meeting on March 3, 2025, at 7:00 p.m. Ms. Thompson wanted to know the process oft becoming a member of the Board. Mrs. Lindsey directed her to the Township's website to obtain an application. 2 160 Stanley Smith noted that the Parks & Recreation Board would meet on Wednesday, March 5, 2025. Ms. Thompson said that Doug Brown mentioned that he knew everyone, and she noticed that all the Dauphin County Commissioners attending Martin Luther King Jr Day and the Supervisors should attend. She sees a disconnect and would like the Supervisors to make a more positive interaction with people in the community, Mrs. Lindsey said she knows Doug Brown because he attended the Capital Region Council Government (CapCOG) meetings representing Dauphin County. The CapCOG networks with Supervisors from all over the state and collaborates with other townships. Ms. Cheryl Thompson said she thinks the Supervisors need to connect with the people in the community. She wasn't aware of the meetings until Ms. Thompson rang her doorbell, and she began attending them. Then, she realized there was a disconnect between the Board and the people living in the community. Announcements Mrs. Lindsey announced that the Supervisors had met in an executive session before the meeting to receive information from the Solicitor and Township Manager and would meet again afterward. Public Comment Vincent Gaeta, 3215 Vanessa Dr., wanted to know if there would be an announcement about Penn Waste service. Mr. Miller reported that there are three major haulers within the region, and two of them canceled services on Saturday, January 11, 2025; they were Republic Services and Penn Waste. Penn Waste covers 71 municipalities within the Central PA region. 3 161 Mr. Miller noted that when Penn Waste cancels services, it is across the Board for those areas. The Township staff, as were the Supervisors, were surprised by the closure, and the staff received many comments and phone messages left over the weekend; the Township received over 1000 calls. In relation to that closure, the Township staff contacted Penn Waste and have been in discussion with them as well as members of Silver Spring Township. They had a joint discussion call this afternoon and a subsequent private call with representatives of Penn Waste. Also, Penn Waste held an operational meeting internally related to the subject matter to stress the need for stronger communication, not only with Municipal partners but also with the Public Works Directors, to ensure that everyone had cell phone access for connection to ensure there was regular discussion about weather events and concerns before any cancellation efforts occurred. Secondly, they addressed the Friday customer issue. Any time there's a holiday schedule or change in the week, the Friday collections will move to a Saturday and this was the second, if not the third time Saturday collections were impacted. The default response from Penn Waste was double collection the following week, which may work for some residents but not for others. That discussion opened lines of communication for Penn Waste to look at an alternative arrangement that would allow them to service those Friday customers within the work week with minimal disruption to the rest oft the collection week cycle. Lastly, they discussed the concern for a lack of pickup, translating into a credit for service. Penn Waste has not done this in the past; however, they did appreciate the request and will consider it, but they do not have an answer now. He hopes to hear back from Penn Waste by the end of the week to know if they will give any concession to the customers whose pickup schedule is on Friday that is essentially pushed out, and they aren't getting the full month of collections, yet they're billed and paying for the service. 4 162 Vincent Gaeta, 3215 Vanessa Dr., stated that he made four phone calls throughout the day to find out what could be done for the overflow of trash because he'd reached capacity at two weeks. Especially since he has a lot of diapers to dispose of at this time, and it's overflowing; the trash can is in the garage because the HOA requires residents to keep the trash cans inside and covered. The recyclables are a big concern because they are at capacity after one week, and he wanted to know what Penn Waste or Township could do SO they could receive an extra trash can that week. The last person he spoke to at Penn Waste was Sarah Lafever, Route Supervisor. Before he talked to her, he called two other employees and was told to place the overflow of recyclables inside a box and place it beside the bin. Still, that option doesn't work because his house is at the top of a hill, and whenever it's a breezy day, all the recyclables end up in his backyard and the woods behind the house. Two Penn Waste employees told him that bagging the recyclables was not an option. He spoke with a third employee, Sarah Lafever, who told him he could place the recyclables inside a bag. Some bags made for recyclables disintegrate faster when taken to the landfill; however, that's not the bag Ms. Lafever referred to, which caused some concern. Mr. Gaeta stated that placing recyclables into a plastic bag is counterproductive to what should be going on. It shows negligence in what Penn Waste is conducting, in addition to having no resolution for being in breach of contract for not picking up trash a week that they are contracted to pick up and just telling residents they'll pick up double. He provided an analogy demonstrating how Penn Waste is negligent for not refunding money to residents after failing to pick up the trash. He feels the Township should push more ifthey are not getting full credit for the week. He doesn't expect that to happen without litigation, but he expects some resolution with double pickup for large items to make some amends to the customer. 5 163 Mr. Gaeta continued saying the Township should push for the recycling bags. There are situations where the weather will cause these situations, but they should provide the affected customers with recycling bags. He noted that Sarah Lefever was the only person with any resolution and was willing to schedule an extra recycling tote for overflow. However, that wasn't an option for him because the wind would have blown it all away. He is frustrated because Penn Waste's policy is not to take the recycling bins ifthe lid is not closed because of trash blowing away, but now they're instructing residents to put it in a cardboard box beside the trash can. He reiterated that the Township should push for some resolution because it shouldn'tl keep happening and then affect everyone; the trash will blow into the green area behind his home. Mr. Gaeta said just a few months ago, he attended a Board meeting to express his concern regarding new apartment buildings being built behind his home in the Blue Ridge Development. Chairman and Board Members' Comments Ms. Thompson announced that some may have seen the Hodges Heights Compost Facilities issues per the residents. She read aloud, "The issues are unsightliness, noise, dust, and hours of operation.' 99 She surveyed the audience, noting that she hadn't done it before, but going forward, she will be more vocal. She asked, "How many people, by show ofhands, would be okay or happy to have a landfill and compost site in your residential community?" She noted that it's a big nimby issue. Ms. Thompson announced an issue with her, specifically asking for documents. Since she came on the Board last year, she started asking for documents, even before the inauguration. She said, "Now, there's a memo that came out on January 6, 2025, and I will address it.' 77 Ms. Thompson wanted to know what triggered this memo because she had been asking for and receiving documents since she was elected last year. 6 164 Ms. Thompson brought some oft the documents to the meeting, noting that she asked the director ofthe department or Township Manager for information because she was trying to prepare, learn, and understand her duties as a new Supervisor. She met with Sam on the morning ofJanuary 6, 2025, the reorganization day, as she was finishing asking questions about the different check registers that she would have to approve and pay. On the way out, she asked for revenue data for the Compost Facility when people get day or week passes,, just for 2023 and 2024. Ms. Thompson read a formal response: To fully serve the residents of this Township and uphold my duty to be transparent and comply with the sunshine laws, I would like to review and make public the revenue that the Compost Facility has generated. I will take a moment to read from the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania Second Class Township Code Article 7, Treasurer, which I was elected to that position on January 6, 2025, during the reorg. I sat in an executive session with the other Supervisors for just over a year, and in one of those sessions, someone commented that Lowman Henry, former Chair of the Board, was in the building all the time. I'm falling down on the job because I'm not in the building frequently. Once I started coming into the building, I was confronted about why I was in the building and asked who I had talked with and what I was told. I responded, well, did you ask Lowman these questions? Why am I getting different treatment for coming into the building? Why was I being treated differently? What is SO different about me? Between how Lowman was treated coming into the building doing different things, and I don't want to share everything, but why was I being treated differently? What is SO different about me? This Board was founded in 1767, and I am the first person who looks like me. So, I don't know what the problem is. I can't get into somebody else's head. Still, according to the Second-Class Township Code Article 7, the Township Treasurer's Duties are to receive all monies due to the Township and keep distinct and accurate accounts of all sums received from taxes and other sources. The Compost Facility, my reading as an attorney, even though I'm not barred here in Pennsylvania, I practiced law for ten years in Chicago. Once I graduated from Northwestern University School of Law, my reading of other sources is the fees paid to the Compost Facility, payout all monies of the Township only in the direction of the Board of Supervisors, SO that's when we pay our bills. Annually state the accounts and make them available to the Board of Auditors for séttlement. Preserve the account books, papers, documents, and other records and turn them over to the successor in office. That's all I'll 7 165 share with you for now, I'm going to be a lot more vocal. I've kept a lot of how I've been treated to myself, but it's not been helpful. I suggest you go to the website because you can find this Second- Class Township Code online. Look for article 7 and focus on section 701 of the Township Code that addresses the Treasurer's duties. I don't really have anybody. I work with Sam to go over the check registers but I'm finding my way in terms of how to do this job to the best of my ability to represent the 16,000 plus Democrats registered here in the Township, plus the 15,000 plus registered Republicans. Everyone here is my constituent; I want to do my best to represent them, and I'm learning. First Presentation of Ordinance 2025-01; Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance Amendment Mr. Gotshall announced that Ordinance 2025-01 is being presented to benefit the Board and is slated to go before the Planning Commission again for another public session before returning to the Board of Supervisors for another workshop session and then another meeting at which time the Board would adopt the Ordinance. Tonight's presentation will be of a high level and will be an opportunity for the staff to present the Ordinance as it stands today to the Board and the public. Still, the Ordinance is not set to be adopted, and tonight will be the only chance for the Supervisors to ask questions or have any changes made. Mrs. Lindsey clarified the timeline, noting that the Ordinance will go before the Planning Commission on February 5, 2025. Then, the Supervisors will have it on their Workshop meeting agenda in February; it will come before the Board of Supervisors in March. Mr. Gotshall indicated that he doesn't have the exact dates, but the dates sound consistent. Mrs. Zerbe announced that the original Ordinance was provided with the number 2024- 07, and the Solicitor had asked for the Ordinance to receive a new number reflecting 2025. So, the new number moving forward will be Ordinance 2025-01. With that said, Ordinance 2025-01 repeals and replaces the existing zoning ordinance that has not been comprehensively updated since its adoption in 2006. Typically, the Board receives a redline version ofthe Ordinances. 8 166 Still, this Ordinance is a complete repeal and replace due to the significantly different organization oft the information as it pertains to section placement. Specific sections were identified to be updated, and they are as follows: administration, definitions, zoning districts, overlay districts, environmental protection, and supplemental regulations. By updating and amending these sections, the Ordinance being provided is a comprehensive update that reflects the current zoning standards. Mrs. Zerbe summarized the updated sections ofOrdinance 2025-01, noting the sections and sections and Community Development Objectives that have been updated to reflect the goals oft the adopted Comprehensive Plan. She said the key difference with the revised Zoning Ordinance is that each supplemental regulation has its own section with specific criteria. Having each regulation as its own section allows for a more comprehensive explanation of a specific process or requirement, in addition to standard language and article consistency with the current Pennsylvania Municipalities Planning Code. See the attached memo. Mrs. Lindsey asked Mrs. Zerbe ifthere was a specific meeting with the homeowners affected by the Zoning Map changes or just the Planning Commission meeting. Nick Gehret explained that he introduced the Zoning Ordinance and proposed changes to the Zoning Map at the Planning Commission meeting on June 6, 2025. There was a large turnout for discussion regarding the proposed changes. Mrs. Lindsey announced that she had asked Mr. Gotshall to expedite the Planning Commission meeting minutes SO the Supervisors would have them from all the meetings. Ifthe public is present at the board meetings, the Supervisors will have read all the Planning Commission meeting minutes. 9 167 Mrs. Lindsey noted that the Zoning Ordinance doesn't say anything about Airbnb; she asked Mrs. Zerbe if an Airbnb or Vrbo would fall under short-term rentals. She mentioned that they have never been allowed in the Township Township. She asked Mr. Gehret what districts allow short-term rentals. Mr. Gehret explained that the short-term rentals would not be permitted in any ofthe Township's Residential Zoning Districts, R1, R2, or R3. The mindset behind the Planning Commission's decision to go with short-term rentals is the areas where this use would be permitted, which should be in areas where there would not be any conflicts with residents. So, the Planning Commission is looking at having short-term rental permitted in the Conservation District and Agricultural Residential District, which would be permitted via Special Exception and go before the Zoning Hearing Board. Also, the Village District would be a Special Exception for a short-term rental. Mrs. Lindsey asked Mr. Gehret ifhe referred to the Village of Linglestown. Mr. Gehret explained that the Village ofLinglestown allows bed and breakfast, and given the current definitions, that's the closest they could come to identifying short-term rentals. Under the current Ordinance, Bed and Breakfasts are permitted in the Village District and Business Campus District because they are closely aligned. However, they will not be treated as the same use going forward; they're different. Mrs. Lindsey inquired about Section 405 in Traditional Neighborhood Development (TND), under F. (1.) a. (ii), where it says, two regulation-sized tennis courts are allowed.' I She noted that they're putting in two pickleball courts in the Cider Press Station development, a carryover from the Shadebrook Development. She wanted to know ifthe pickleball courts should be added to the Ordinance under the TND section. Mr. Gehret agreed, stating that adding the pickleball courts as an additional use in the future is a good recommendation. He explained that from the perspective of a Zoning Officer, they could permit a pickleball court in lieu of a tennis 10 168 court even without changing the definition in the Ordinance. Still, he could add it to the Ordinance. Mrs. Lindsey referenced section 507 Temporary Uses B (3), which says Chief of Police, noting that she feels it should be changed to Public Safety Director and Deputy Fire Chief. She also referenced Section 302 Zoning Districts, noting that there were no listings for TND. Mr. Gehret explained that the TND is listed as a separate Overlay District. She referenced section 1, 301, noting that the Zoning Hearing Board has five resident members, which is a five-year term, not a three-year term. Public Comment William Miller, 4311 Crestview Rd., asked for clarification about rentals. Mr. Gehret explained that the Zoning Ordinance doesn't contemplate whether someone rents their property. The Ordinance addresses short-term rentals in the Township, whether Airbnb or VRBO, but does not enter into a contract with a homeowner where someone rents their house. Mr. Miller asked if homeowners in the Township can rent out their homes. Mr. Gehret indicated that it is permitted. Mr. Miller stated that the owners of two properties near Turkey Hill on Devonshire Rd. don't remove the snow, and many kids are walking there. He said that when you rent something out, the renters don't take the ownership and pride of ownership that a normal resident does. Mrs. Lindsey said that sometimes, the renters aren't responsible for the snow removal; the landlords are. Bob Baker, 626 Lancaster Ave., stated that supposedly notices were sent out to residents in June 2024, and he didn't receive any information on the Ordinance. He inquired with multiple neighbors; some received the information, including those whose homes are at the back end where the changes will occur. 11 169 Mr. Baker wanted to know the timeline and when the Board would vote on the Ordinance. Mrs. Lindsey explained that the Ordinance will go before the Planning Commission on February 5, 2025, and then the Supervisor's Workshop meeting next; she asked Mr. Gotshall ift the public hearing would be scheduled for March. Mr. Gehret interjected; the public hearing is scheduled for February 18, 2025. Mrs. Lindsey wanted to know if there would be enough time to change the Ordinance. Mr. Gotshall explained that the Supervisors would have the opportunity to amend the Ordinance, and it would just have to go back to the drawing board regarding whether or not it's a substantive change. Ifit is a substantive change, it has to be readvertised, and the entire process starts again; however, ifthere are commas or capitalization errors, those changes do not have to be readvertised; it depends on the scope of the changes requested. Mr. Baker said the Township advertised the Ordinance last June, and he just caught wind ofit four weeks ago. He wanted to know how the advertisements were being handled. Mrs. Lindsey asked Mr. Baker ifhis neighborhood was part of the zoning change. Mr. Baker explained that the zoning changes are under Claremont Plaza, number 12, on the Zoning Map. Mr. Gehret explained that the parcel specific to the Claremont Plaza is being proposed for up-zoning from Commercial Neighborhood to Commercial General; that is not rezoning the neighboring properties ofLancaster Avenue. The Community Development Department sent letters to neighboring property owners using a system that automatically generates the letters. There may have been some properties that did not receive the letter, but they tried to notify most oft the neighbors regarding the potential rezoning. As for the advertisements, they haven't issued aj public notice for the Zoning Ordinance yet. The Township sent the first round of draft ordinances to adjoining Municipalities and Dauphin County due to the substantial comments 12 170 received during the meetings and the fact that they had to go back and amend the proposed Zoning Map, then had to enter another draft version because the original draft Ordinance didn't have enough legs to move forward SO nothing has been advertised. Mr. Judd asked Mr. Baker what he was most concerned about. Mr. Baker explained that he's concerned about the Zoning Ordinance because he doesn't want a Wawa in his backyard. Mr. Gehret explained that Mr. Baker's concerns are legitimate, and his property would be zoned R1. The Zoning District is adjacent to Mr. Baker's property and is looking to be upzoned to Commercial General. Under a Comprehensive Zoning Opdate, there is no requirement to notify residents of a Comprehensive Zoning Update on a zoning map. Zoning Ordinance updates have been advertised on the Township's website and social media up to this point. Mrs. Lindsey noted that it would be a concern if she were to place herself there, as the buffer zone would not be big at all. Mr. Baker reiterated that he doesn't want a Wawa behind his house. Mr. Judd asked Mrs. Lindsey about the buffer zone. Mrs. Lindsey said the buffer zone isn't very big, and there aren't many trees. Mr. Baker referred to the Copper Pub, noting that it's the tree by the Copper Pub, and there's not a lot of space there to fit a Wawa or similar business; he has many concerns and will speak more about them at the next meeting because he just found out about this board meeting today. Mrs. Lindsey asked Mrs. Zerbe and Mr. Gehret if they had contacted PennDOT about rezoning the area to Commercial because Mountain Road is a state road, and many accidents are coming off I-81. A big store will be somewhere ifit's changed to Commercial General. Mr. Gehret explained that the Township wouldn't contact PennDOT with hypothetical questions or what-ifs. The generating factor for contacting PennDOT is a subdivision land development plan. When something is developed, the development would have to meet PennDOT's standards. 13 171 Mrs. Lindsey noted that it is a concern because of all the traffic in that area, and she is personally concerned about the zoning change to Commercial General because of all the homes in that area and the buffer not being very big. Who knows what may go in there ift the area is changed to Commercial General? Now, it's a commercial neighborhood (CN), and the definition for CN: is lighter commercial and compatible with nearby homes. Mrs. Lindsey clarified the meeting dates for the Zoning Update: February 5, February 11, and February 18. Mr. Gotshall suggested that Mr. Baker direct specific comments to the Planning Commission on February 5; that committee is the recommending body to the Board ofSupervisors. Mr. McCormack asked Mr. Gehret to clarify his statement when it was unnecessary to notify the residents. Mr. Gehret explained that when the Township has a Comprehensive Zoning Update, there's no legal requirement to send mailers to all the residents. Still, they've sent out letters, and that's the reason why they're in the second draft version of the Zoning Ordinance, due to the comments received from residents from the first meeting. Mr. McCormack said he thinks Mr. Baker's concerns are valid, and ifit's not legally required but it's going to have the kind of that Mrs. Lindsey has indicated, then the Township should be informing residents; they have a right to know and that could form their opinion as to whether or not they're going to go to the Planning Commission meeting. Residents ought to know that there's a significant difference between the zoning CG and CN. The Township should figure out some way to let them know. Mrs. Lindsey asked Mr. Gehret how they picked the residents included in the mailing list. Mr. Gehret explained that they run a radius, typically 500 to 1,000 feet back, to see who would be reasonably affected by any use in the area. Andrew Miller, MPL Law Firm, 96 S George St. York, PA, announced that he represents Zene Farhat of Farhat Excavating. 14 172 Mr. Miller said Mr. Farhat is a contract purchaser of a parcel on Crums Mill Rd, parcel 35-037-010-000000; this property is currently zoned R1. He asked the Board to consider changing the zoning on that parcel to Business Campus (BC) as part ofthe rezoning process. He presented a map to the Supervisors to provide a perspective ofthe parcel's location. Mrs. Lindsey asked Mr. Miller what the zoning around the parcel is. Mr. Miller noted that the surrounding properties are Business Commercial. Mrs. Zerbe pointed out that the surrounding properties are zoned R1, Residential. Mr. Miller said that is correct, but the properties are zoned Business Commercial on the other side of the parcel. Mrs. Lindsey asked if Mr. Farhat requested that one lot be rezoned to Business Commercial. Mr. Miller indicated that this is correct, noting that the 2018 Comprehensive Plan, the draft land use map on the third page oft the handout, shows the area as a business campus. So, that's consistent with what the Township's Comprehensive Plan shows for the future. Also, there was mention of the power lines running through that parcel and the fact that it sits right up against the Interstate; it is not a great parcel for Residential; it is more appropriate for Business Campuses. He noted that Mr. Farhat has no specific plans for the parcel but is looking to buy it as an investment. However, in the future, based on those approved uses, the Zoning District could develop something consistent with what is located across the street on Crums Mill Rd. Mr. Miller apologized for being late coming to the Board. He said they recently found out that the rezonings were going on, and they understand the process is well along the approval and review process. However, they were hopeful of still getting involved because, as stated, there's still a review, and there could be some other changes in the Zoning Map. Mr. Gotshall asked Mr. Gehret ifthe Planning Commission discussed rezoning the lot. Mr. Gehret explained that the Planning Commission never contemplated the lot. 15 173 Mr. Gotshall asked Mr. Miller ifl he and Mr. Farhat intended to attend the Planning Commission meeting. Mr. Miller said if the Board is willing to consider their request and potential changes to the map, then yes, they would want to participate fully in the process going forward. He noted that they are present tonight because of the time sensitivity oft the process. They don't want to get any further along and are not informed or made the Township aware of the potential change and how it relates to the Comprehensive Plan. Mr. Gehret noted that the 45- day review period has already started, and the map and Zoning Ordinance draft was delivered by December 26 to all the Municipalities in Dauphin County to start the clock for adoption on February 18, 2025. Ifthe Planning Commission were to move forward, the process would restart, and this request would substantially change the map and Zoning Ordinance. Mr. Gotshall asked Ms. Madden, Solicitor, ifthe request would be considered a substantive change, noting that it's not changing the general character of the Zoning Map, and it already abut against existing zoning. Ms. Madden explained that since it has not yet been advertised, SO long as these changes are made pre-advertisement, substantial or insubstantial is an irrelevant discussion point. Ms. Madden said she would look into it, noting that it could pass muster for not necessarily being substantial, given the proposed map and the parcel's size relative to the surrounding areas. Mrs. Lindsey added that if the process goes into March, it's just another two weeks. Mr. Miller noted that he agrees with Ms. Madden. He said there was discussion about other changes in the Zoning Ordinance, and they have a similar request. Mrs. Lindsey added that she is concerned about CN going to CG. Mr. Gotshall said to make the best case, it would be best for Mr. Miller and Mr. Farhat to appear before the Planning Commission. 16 174 Mt. Gotshall noted that the staff will present the case on your behalfto the Planning Commission, but your attendance would bolster your case. Mr. Miller said they would submit a formal request in a letter form to the staff that can be presented, and they would like to appear at the Planning Commission meeting to continue advocating for the change. Marissa White, 6702 Delana Blvd, asked Mrs. Lindsey how the Township goes about advertising for individuals not on social media. Mrs. Lindsey deferred the question to Mrs. Zerbe. Mrs. Zerbe explained that all advertising is done through the Sun and meets all public notice requirements. The Township also posts it on the website, and the Communications Director posts it on social media. Ms. White asked ifthe staff could post something outside the Township building for those who don't use social media, don't have Lower Paxton Township as a homepage, or may not be searching frequently. Mr. Gotshall stated that the meeting agendas are posted weekly on the bulletin board out front of the building; beyond that, no physical copies of agendas are posted anywhere else. Ms. White asked Mr. Gotshall if the staff could post something for the zoning changes for the neighborhood SO those beyond the 40 homes would be privy to it. Mr. Gotshall explained that moving forward, in a case where rezoning occurs, the posting requirements differ for those instances. In those instances, the properties are physically posted, and you may have noticed small yellow signs that indicate a zoning change afoot. The Township is redesigning the signs to be larger and clearer regarding their visibility. The new signs would have a more user-friendly channel to the website to read further details about that specific zoning request. Ms. Thompson asked Mr. Gotshall if the sign would have a QR code on it. Mr. Gotshall responded, "Yes, that's exactly right. Still, in this case, as Mr. Gehret mentioned regarding comprehensive zoning changes, it is not legally required because in a case like this, where the 17 175 entire Township is being rezoned at once, the posting requirements or any other legal requirements regarding specific homes would be quite onerous on local government to make that happen. 99 He noted that's S not to speak for the General Assembly. Still, it's assumed that the requirements differ for Comprehensive Zoning versus more spot zoning. Mrs. Lindsey asked Mr. Gehret and Mrs. Zerbe if they recall how many letters were sent to residents. Mrs. Zerbe said they mailed over 1,000 letters to the residents. Mrs. Lindsey added that the letters went out to residents where the zoning changes were being made, and as Mr. Gehret said, they went back 500 feet. Bob Baker, 626 Lancaster Ave., asked for clarification about the advertising. He asked Mr. Gotshall if the Township was using the Hummelstown Sun newspaper to advertise. Mr. Gotshall explained that with the closure oft the Paxton Herald and it being the Township' S local newspaper of record, the closest newspaper of record that hits most homes within Lower Paxton, relative to other publications, not speaking about Patriot News/PennLive, the Sun has the most subscribers. Ms. Madden added that this is one place where the legislature hasn't caught up to reality, and the legal requirement is that it must be published in a publication of general circulation, and it must be publication. She noted that specific Township notices are posted in the courthouse circular, which three attorneys over 87 read. It's just the reality of what the law dictates regarding where it's published. Mr. Baker wanted to know what social media outlets the Township uses to advertise. Mr. Judd said Lower Paxton Township on Facebook. Mr. Gotshall added the website, Twitter, Instagram, and Facebook. Mr. Baker wanted to know ifhe needed to check those outlets to determine what was happening. 18 176 Mr. Gotshall noted that the Township's website has a system that residents may register to receive automatic agenda updates. While you do not get a notice saying the Township is rezoning, you will receive a notice saying there's a new agenda for the Planning Commission if you register to receive the Planning Commission agendas. Mr. Gehret reviewed the proposed changes to the Township's Zoning Map. (See the attached memorandum and proposed zoning maps.) The properties to the north are under the Residential Cluster (RC) Zoning District. This use has been deleted as it is an option that they do not want to see utilized further due to being in favor of the Traditional Neighborhood Design District (TND) Zoning Ordinance. The RC Zoning District shared the same standards as the R2 District, SO the R2 replaced all the previously zoned RC Zoning Districts. Both allowed Single Family (SF) homes, Town Houses, and Duplexes; no new non-conformities were created. The properties to the east are the Neighborhood Design District (NDD) and two R1 Zoning Districts that were previously zoned Agriculture Residential (AR), which are recommended to be upzoned to R1 to account for the Neighborhood Design transfer. The two parcels to the east, shown as R1, account for the Neighborhood Design Transitional Development in the Neighborhood Design District. This zoning allows for R1, R2, and R3 ifthe development comes under one preliminary plan. Those areas shown would be able to utilize the same standards as the Neighborhood Design District without being zoned to the NDD. It could simply remain the R1 Zoning District and use those same standards. In the center oft the zoning map, the highlighted area in the Village District to the north was previously zoned R1. To the south, it was a Commercial Neighborhood. As per the Comprehensive Plan, the recommendation was to expand the Village District to the north and have that mixed-use available to properties that would benefit most. 19 177 The Commercial Neighborhood wasn't compatible with the Village and the R1 Zoning District. To the north, a church is situated on a large parcel ofland. There was interest from that organization in rezoning the area to Village to account for greater use, which they agreed with the Comprehensive Plan. To the south, the Commercial Neighborhood Zoning District was previously zoned Business Campus. It is located at the Aroogas at Colonial Rd. and Linglestown Rd. East, there are commercial properties and the Gilcrest property. The lots in this area were previously zoned Business Campus (BC) and are being downzoned to Commercial Neighborhood (CN). As per the current proposed Zoning Ordinance, BC is more intensely used. CN is more in line with that corridor and would be more compatible with the residential neighborhoods to the south. To the west, there was Office Neighborhood (ON), and the lots fronting Linglestown Road are going to remain ON. There is a dental office and residential homes that no longer carry commercial uses, and the entire section to the south that is shown as yellow was zoned Office Neighborhood (ON). This area is proposed to have an R1 designation, which is truly in the character of that Neighborhood, and that's s what the residents wanted to see in that section. Currently, the Stray Winds Farm development is zoned Residential Cluster Development and will be in the R2 Zoning District. Along Colonial Road, there are two properties; one is developed with two office buildings on the corner of Colonial Road and Earl Drive. This was previously zoned Office Neighborhood (ON), and the Planning Commission wanted to have the area up-zoned to a Commercial Neighborhood. The land shown as R2, a vacant undeveloped lot with RC designation, will be the Residential Medium Density designation in the future. Any parcel in that area on the map zoned as R2 carried the previous Residential Cluster Zoning District, a popular development option for developers in the late 90s and early 2000s. 20 178 The highlighted section ofOffice Neighborhood (ON) is currently zoned ON. Still, during the process, there was a desire to have the land zoned Business Campus (BC) due to the evaluation of the area and comments from the staff and residents; those areas will remain in the Office Neighborhood (ON). The section ofland labeled R1 Open Space Development also had a Residential Cluster Zoning District designation. This land has been designated R1 with the Open Space Development Overlay. Ifthis area were to be developed, they could have the same housing density as R1 but utilize lots within the R2 District, 10,000 square foot lots. To the right is another Residential Cluster Development, 14 lots, a small development, and a Residential Cluster Development carrying the R2 designation. The R2 and RC on the Use Table share the same designation and density. Along Union Deposit Road, there was a section that was zoned Business Campus (BC); the surrounding area is Commercial General; there was a desire to continue that Commercial General designation since retail uses and the Office Research Development are more to the south of using Union Deposit Road, not SO much along the cartway. This area on the map is Bishop McDevitt. For whatever reason, under the current Zoning Ordinance, the area was zoned R3, which carries an Institutional designation. The lot to the south was R3 as well, and it's s holding an R1 designation which is more in line with the character of the Neighborhood. Also, a small plot ofland is zoned Institutional, and it will be rezoned to R2 Residential. Mrs. Lindsey asked Mr. Gehret to explain why Mountain Road's S zoning changed from Commercial Neighborhood to Commercial General. During the planning process, the Comprehensive Plan outlined the Township's goal to look for development options in different areas. This section along North Mountain Road was identified as an area that could potentially use a boost with the up zoning to Commercial General. 21 179 The Township staff met the owners in the beginning the stages of evaluating the Zoning Ordinance, as they were looking for ideas on how to get visibility to the site. First, they started with signage and what other uses they could utilize on their property. They explained to the owners that the Township is going to evaluate the Zoning Ordinance, and down the line, one option could be changing the zoning to Commercial General since the Township has Commercial General zoning to the south, and it would be a contiguous zoning designation from I-81 along North Mountain Road. Bob Baker, 626 Lancaster Ave., commented about how the Zoning Ordinance had been advertised. First Presentation of Ordinance 2025-02; Amending and Clarifying Certain Provisions of the Police Pension Plan Documents Mr. Miller provided a brief overview ofOrdinance 2025-03, which amends the Police Pension Plan. The Ordinance has been advertised for action at the next Board meeting on January 21, 2025. There are no benefit changes, merely text revisions to clarify sections and incorporate additional law changes for those things that have been repealed and gone into place. The last time the Board adopted plan revisions was in 2012. Since that date, there have been minor amendments, but the plan wasn' 't rewritten; they just created addendums. To that point, they had just done the one-time mitigation stipends, which the Board approved in 2023, and there was unique language to write the stipends out of the pensionable wages. Mr. Miller noted that the revisions to the Ordinances kick-started a discussion about revisiting the plan since the Ordinances haven't 't been updated in a decade and a couple of law changes needed to be clarified. As part oft that revision, they clarified the language where benefits had been managed in a certain way. Still, it wasn't written clearly to provide guidance. 22 180 The case and point were short-term disability, long-term disability, and workers' compensation, determining when an employee becomes active and inactive. Most of the revisions were to provide some clarity regarding the application ofbenefits. The staff provided the Collective Bargaining Agreement Representatives with copies of each redlined plan, and they were given about a month to respond. The Police Union responded, and the staff responded in kind; now, the plans are before the Board. Unlike typical records, Mr. Miller noted that the Ordinances do not go through a public hearing. First Presentation ofOrdinance 2025-03; Amending and Clarifying Certain Provisions of the Non-Uniformed Employee Pension Plan Documents Mr. Miller presented Ordinance 2025-03, which amends the Non-Uniformed Employee Pension Plan. See above. Announcements There were none. Adjournment Mr. Judd motioned to adjourn the meeting. Mr. Navarro seconded the motion. Mrs. Lindsey called for a voice vote, which resulted in a unanimous vote of approval. The meeting adjourned the meeting at 8:47 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Approved by, ue flane M.f Shellie Smith, Secretary Recording Secretary 23