March 8, 2001 Maidencreek Supervisor's Meeting:
The public hearing on the conditional use of the Rajah Temple was held at 6:30.
The testimony included the following points:
Their organization is suffering from the lack of volunteers which affects similar organizations (i.e. Fire fighters, Coast Guard Auxiliary etc.)
As a result of point 1, it is likely the large Temple contemplated earlier will not be built.
Phase I will include a Soccer field (for use of community organizations as well as Shriners) and Recreation area as well as parking, fences etc.
Later there will be stables, and a horse show ring added. Phase I is expected to cost $4,000,000
During the regular business meeting, the Rajah was granted the conditional use. There was discussion of storm water management on the site. A resident, who is also an engineer raised the concern that using the existing quarry to trap surface water run off may harm the quality of the water in lake Ontelaunee. It may be that storm water technology has passed by our township's ordinances, although these ordinances were fine in their day. The current opinion is to reduce impervious surface area through "porous" paving, and not to rely on those ponds to trap water run off. This is arguably better for the ground water, and is better use of the land as the area used by the ponds becomes available for more productive uses.
Regular Business Meeting:
The big news is the decision to purchase the land at the intersection of East Wesner Rd. and Park Rd. near Seidel's crossing. This is 2.745 acres and will round out the park as it is contiguous with the land the township already owns. I voted for the purchase. I have mixed feelings on this vote. The park will be much nicer with the addition of this land, but I remain concerned about this park. I have expressed these concerns in the July 13th meeting and previous meetings.
The other two supervisors would not consent to having a specialist perform a design review of the stream. The engineering firm that did the original work did a design review of their own and concluded that the relocated channel is likely to be a maintenance problem. The township's design makes an effort to maximize the number of fields in the park land. As a result, the stream is allowed to run straight for quite a while. This will cause quite an increase in water velocity. The result will be erosion in the high velocity area, and silting in the down stream areas. The channel will require maintenance. It wouldn't surprise me if we end up with a channel lined in places with rip rap in galvanized steel wire bags.
The advantage to buying the additional land is: at least this is land that is not affected by the stream relocation. The disadvantage is the cost of $103,000 for this nearly 3 acres of commercial land. This land may not be available in the future, and I was afraid if we didn't buy it we would regret it in the future. The plan is to finance the land with a 5 year 4.55% loan of $100,000.
I am in favor of retiring this debt with existing taxes and paying
as we go for the park. This will give the stream relocation a chance
to stabilize. I don't want us putting improvements on land that may
sprout sink holes.
Sewer Fees:
Pat Donovan, from the water authority, was present. He said that the old plant is not capable of being expanded to meet the NEW mandated discharge requirements. The construction of a new plant is necessary regardless of additional development. The new plant will be capable of 4,000 EDUs 2000 existing and 2000 for future hook ups. Some of these new hook ups will be used by Ontelaunee Township.
I asked about the tapping fees. The tapping fees are calculated according to Act 203. The Act 203 allows four ways of calculating the fees. The fees depend on capital investment etc. and are intended to represent the true cost of a new hook up. The Water Authority has chosen the calculation that yields the highest tapping fee. Some of you have e-mailed me concerned that the sewer for the new homes was being subsidized by the existing home owners. Since we are charging the highest fee allowed by Act 203, it is not likely we are subsidizing new development. If the Act 203 is not high enough, it would be a non-trivial matter for us to remedy. We would have to get the state legislature to change Act 203.
Farm Land Preservation:
Robert Kopfer took me up on my offer (made in my essay on the 2/8/01 rezoning vote) to contribute $200 to farm land preservation. In the essay I said I would be willing to donate $200 to a private trust to preserve farmland. Such a trust would be similar to the Nature Conservancy. Mr. Kopfer approached me about the Berks County Agricultural Land Preservation Board. This is not a private solution, the board obtains money from the government to preserve farm land. The board also accepts private contributions, and such contributions are tax deductible. Although this is an inferior solution to a private solution, I decided to contribute $200. If you want to get involved in this program call (610)-378-1844. If a private program is started on the model of the Nature Conservancy, that takes NO government money (because the government can not be trusted; it can change at any election cycle) I will make an additional contribution to that organization.
Noise Ordinance:
We have a draft of the Noise ordinance. It is not in electronic
form. It is more expansive than I hoped for. It will most likely be
voted on at the 4/12/01 meeting.
Candidates for Township Supervisor's Race (in alphabetical order):
Republicans:
Edward Carlson
Thomas Evanosky
David Hunsberger
Samantha Wesner
Democrats:
Karl Bolognese
Robert Kopfer