After nearly an hour of discussion and a 45-minute executive session Dec. 30, 2015 on the topic of the Kohler property, Upper Milford supervisors emerged from a closed session to make a statement on the issue.

But the statement, that the board’s current intention is not to condemn (take by eminent domain) the tract, still leaves open the possibility of the township buying it, or of it being developed for residential use by Kay Builders.

Supervisors Chairman George DeVault summed up, “nothing has been ruled out.”

The motion which supervisors approved after the executive session said the intention not to condemn the land is “contingent upon the developer providing suitable acreage for a neighborhood park in a location, size and with appropriate facilities and amenities to the satisfaction of the Board of Supervisors.”

The future of the 32-acre tract has become an issue ever since Kay Builders brought in sketch plans last April [2015] to develop the property with around 100 single family homes or townhomes. Residents of the adjacent developments of Mink Estates and Salem Ridge have urged supervisors to acquire the property for open space or recreational use, as it is designated on the township’s comprehensive plan.

They are concerned about the increase in traffic that would result from the residential development, as well as its potential impact on East Penn schools and on their own quality of life.

Since the issue has heated up, supervisors have asked both the open space and the recreation committees to review it and make recommendations.

If supervisors were hoping those recommendations would clarify the debate, they had to have been disappointed, because the two committees came down on opposite sides. The open space committee recommended acquiring the land and the recreation committee opposed it, arguing the cost would be too high and there are several other properties in the township which could be acquired for recreation.

The planning commission recommended Dec. 28, 2015 supervisors consider acquiring the land for future park land or recreation, saying it would be an asset to the community.

Approximately 30 people attended the meeting last week to express their opinions and hear what supervisors’ intentions are. Some of those in attendance were part of a group presenting a petition to the board, signed by 288 township residents, urging supervisors to acquire the land.

Supervisor Robert Sentner noted that while many of the signees were from the adjacent developments, there were a number from elsewhere in the township.

Lynne Sallash, one of the organizers of the petition drive, warned some surrounding townships are now looking into preserving open space, after much of their open land has already been developed.

Tracy Hausknecht expressed a similar opinion. “If we don’t start to consider this now,” she warned, “we become Lower Macungie Township.”

But resident Phil Casey expressed concern about the financial impact of purchasing the property, which he estimated would cost more than $2 million, plus the additional cost of developing and maintaining it as a park. He said the township has three parks already and using the land for soccer fields or other recreation would also increase traffic in the area.

At the very least, he said, the issue should be put up as a referendum for the entire township to vote on.

Recreation Committee Chair Phil Vanim also brought up the costs, and asked why the open space committee had suddenly been resurrected when this issue surfaced, after not meeting for several years.

Open Space Committee Chair Francis Caputo, who is also a resident of Mink Estates, responded the committee was set up only to be active when land becomes available.

Some speakers said they would be willing to pay more in taxes in return for keeping the land from being developed.

Jason Tapler of Citizens Fire Company, emphasizing he was speaking as an individual, not on behalf of the fire company, said, “You could double my taxes” if it would prevent the land from being developed with more than 100 townhouses. He predicted those additional residences would mean a substantial increase in the number of calls the fire department receives.

James Underwood predicted the proposed development would mean an increase in school taxes to handle the additional school children living there. He also countered Casey’s argument about recreational development leading to an increase in traffic.

“Traffic-wise, to compare a park to residences is lunacy.”

The major issue, Underwood said, is the financial implications of the township buying the property are not known, because no one knows what the exact price would be.

Sentner said the difference between this tract and others potentially used for recreation is Kohler property has access to water and sewer. This makes it more attractive to developers.

DeVault noted some of the petitions are calling on supervisors to “Save the Kohler tract.”

“There’s no ‘saving’ it,” he said. “It will be developed either as park land or residential. It can’t be preserved.”