FORKS TWP., Pa. — Forks Township Zoning Hearing Board on Monday blocked plans for a new warehouse along Kesslersville Road, saying zoning rules don't allow construction in floodplains.
Township Zoning Officer Shawn McGlynn previously determined plans for a 473,000-square-foot warehouse at 605 Kuebler Road. were incompatible with township floodplain restrictions and subject to steep slope and woodland preservation requirements.
The zoning board voted 4-0 to uphold those rulings. In the process, the body affirmed that, aside from improvements to existing properties, township rules forbid building in a 100-year floodplain.
Seeking the appeals was the “very, very first step” toward realizing the planned warehouse.Shawn Gallagher, a lawyer for developer Hillwood
Board members also rejected the developer’s argument that rules limiting construction on steep slopes or in wooded areas do not apply to any site with an approved subdivision or land use plan.
Seeking those appeals was the “very, very first step” toward realizing the planned warehouse, said Shawn Gallagher, a lawyer for developer Hillwood.
Without them, he told the board, the project would not be economically viable.
Current plans place part of the warehouse’s northwest corner in the floodplain; working around it would mean a smaller building.
The site’s former inhabitant, a factory making paper for Dixie Cups, was demolished this year. All that remains is the building’s foundation and parking lot.
Hillwood can appeal the hearing board’s decision to the Northampton County Court. Even if an appeal succeeds, the developer still would need to go through the rest of the land development approval process.
‘Trying to get out the front door’
Hillwood’s appeals centered on what, exactly, the language of the township’s zoning statute means.
At issue was a section that forbids most construction in a 100-year floodplain, “unless the use, activity or development complies with [the township’s floodplain management ordinance] and all other applicable codes and ordinances.”
Gallagher argued that the statute allows development, provided the project complies with relevant regulations and procedures prescribed for building there.
“All we're trying to do is get out of the front door,” he said, “and be able to show that we're going to comply — this development is going to comply — with the floodplain management ordinance.”
Where Gallagher focused heavily on the word “unless,” Jim Preston, the attorney representing Forks Township, came back again and again to the word “and.”
Proposed development, Preston argued, must adhere to both the township’s requirements for building in a floodplain and other relevant rules — in this case, a section specifying that 100% of floodplains should be protected.
His case was bolstered, Preston said, by a stipulation that the most restrictive of the township’s floodplain rules apply.
‘We have to sort of interpret’
In arguing that the project is not subject to a provision restricting construction on steep slopes and woodlands, Gallagher pointed to a provision in the township zoning code stating that they “do not apply on a lot-by-lot basis, provided that the lot or lots in question have been the subject of a prior site plan or subdivision approval.”
Because the township approved a subdivision plan for the Kuebler Road property in 1999, he argued, neither limit applies to the planned warehouse.
Preston countered that the exception instead allows developers to account for requirements to preserve part of the wooded area or steep slopes over, say, an entire subdivision rather than on each individual lot.
“You can't just say just because something was subdivided at some point in history that the ordinance doesn't apply. It makes no sense. You’re gutting the ordinance. Everything would have been subdivided at some point.”Forks Township Zoning Officer Shawn McGlynn
“You can't just say just because something was subdivided at some point in history that the ordinance doesn't apply," said McGlynn, the township zoning officer.
"It makes no sense. You’re gutting the ordinance. Everything would have been subdivided at some point.”
The rules of interpreting legislation dictate that “if the suggested interpretation leads to an absurd result, you should avoid that interpretation,” Preston said.
“That interpretation, that any parcel that was created by a subdivision is exempt, that’s an absurd result.”
During their deliberations, members of the zoning hearing board said the competing interpretations made for a difficult decision.
“It’s difficult to make a clean decision,” board member Chris Karfakis said. “We’re playing a game to see what's best for the township."
Member Robert Kimmel said, “While the zoning had a reasoning to it, it might not have been written the best. We have to sort of interpret our zoning laws as to what was meant.”
