|
On this page you can follow the battle that residents in Pennsylvania are currently fighting ... and WINNING! We have provided the very beginning steps that were taken here on this page. For more updates and victories, see your table of contents on the right and click on the desired item to be taken to that page.
|
|
ORIGINAL LETTER
|
AND THE RESULTS EXACTLY ONE MONTH LATER.......
North Londonderry says no to regional comprehensive plan The township supervisors have withdrawn their interest in the plan with Palmyra and South Londonderry
By BARBARA WEST
For The Lebanon Daily NewsUpdated: 12/17/2012 09:44:54 PM EST
PALMYRA - A regional comprehensive plan with neighboring municipalities is a no-go - at least for North Londonderry Township. The township supervisors, upon the recommendation of the Planning Commission, announced Monday night that they have withdrawn their participation in a regional comprehensive plan, citing public resistance and a lack of funding.
The proposed plan, meant to serve as a guide to future land use and development in North Londonderry and South Londonderry townships as well as the borough of Palmyra, has been a source of public criticism and opposition.
The Planning Commission, which met before the supervisors' meeting Monday night, fielded further concerns and questions from residents about the plan, according to township manager Gordon Watts, who admitted the plan hasn't been a popular concept for some residents of the municipality.
"The residents just don't want a comprehensive plan," he said. "They're opposed to the idea. In addition to that, the state has pulled the plug on the funding."
The proposed plan was written by planner Harry Roth of Lancaster. In it, each of the three municipal entities would have its own zoning ordinance, which would be written and controlled by that municipality.
The North Londonderry board's decision comes only days after South Londonderry residents approached their supervisors to object to the plan. Township manager Thomas Ernharth said another public hearing on the plan is expected to be held in South Londonderry in February before the plan would be given final approval by the board.
This is the first, but major, victory for the residents of Pennsylvania, and it was done with just a few people, approaching the right officials, with the right plan of attack. It set a precendence and will, hopefully, set the standard for the many battles that lay ahead with this specific area in Pennsylvania.
It does no good to stand and accuse electeds and staff of being communists, socialists, UN-sympathizers ect. For the most part, these people have NO clue of the system that they have bought into. The marketing of this type of redistribution of wealth has been around for decades. Putting these people on the defensive makes our job even harder. While they can be called socialists, communists ect, remember they are turning right around and calling the accusers gadflys, conspiracy theorists ect. It is not productive, and the job that needs to be done is not getting done. We all must remember that we are in this fight together, they just don't realize they were drafted by the wrong side. As the saying goes, you can catch more flies with honey than with vinegar. We must remained informed, rational and supportive. When presented with the facts, hearts and minds can, and will, change.
It does no good to stand and accuse electeds and staff of being communists, socialists, UN-sympathizers ect. For the most part, these people have NO clue of the system that they have bought into. The marketing of this type of redistribution of wealth has been around for decades. Putting these people on the defensive makes our job even harder. While they can be called socialists, communists ect, remember they are turning right around and calling the accusers gadflys, conspiracy theorists ect. It is not productive, and the job that needs to be done is not getting done. We all must remember that we are in this fight together, they just don't realize they were drafted by the wrong side. As the saying goes, you can catch more flies with honey than with vinegar. We must remained informed, rational and supportive. When presented with the facts, hearts and minds can, and will, change.
THE RIGHT QUESTIONS AT THE RIGHT TIME
SAMPLE QUESTIONS FOR THE
PALMYRA AREA REGION COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
SMART GROWTH PRINCIPLES: 20-YEAR GUIDELINES
The residents obtained a copy of the regional plan and sent it over to us. We then went through the plan and pulled out the key elements to ask the questions, that we felt, would resonate with the staff and electeds looking at this plan. They are thought provoking questions, which then help them to see the "bigger picture" of these plans. This is precisely what happened in North Londonderry.
The text in RED is from their plan. The text in GREEN is our input
and questions
B. COMMUNITY PLANNING GOALS
The following questions are structured to focus on the planning goals found in section B of Chapter II, starting at page 7. This section briefly summarizes most of the key points out of the plan, so it is a good section to focus on for questions.
|
Goal 22. “Encourage the … development of new housing in and adjacent to the Downtown Area.” ---------------------------------------------------------------- Goal 30. “Allocate and coordinate land uses on a regional basis” ---------------------------------------------------------------- Goal 32. “Coordinate Planned growth areas….” ---------------------------------------------------------------- Goal 33. “… relieve development pressures in outlying rural areas.” ---------------------------------------------------------------- Goal 34. “Provide potential “additional” residential development that relieves development pressure on nearby communities that possess more valuable natural features and productive farmlands.” ---------------------------------------------------------------- Goal 35. “Provide for a variety of housing types to serve … those of varying economic wealth on a regional basis.” ---------------------------------------------------------------- Goal 37. “Provide for alternative forms of residential development designs as an option to suburban style neighborhoods.” ---------------------------------------------------------------- Goal 56. “Devise a technically competent and legally defensible strategy to accommodate a regional fair-share of growth.” ---------------------------------------------------------------- Goal 57. “Structure the plan and its policies to enable a regional allocation of various land uses through the future development of one regional or individual zoning ordinance.” ---------------------------------------------------------------- Goal 58. “Devise a pro-active land use policy that eliminates the need for incremental rezoning and development reviews that lack coordination and overall vision.” ---------------------------------------------------------------- Goal 62. “Prepare this comprehensive plan in an unbiased manner that reflects direction from local officials and avoids undue influence from special interest groups.” ---------------------------------------------------------------- Goal 104. “Promote transportation alternatives to the use of the private, single- occupancy vehicles.” |
Question: What type of housing? Would this be mixed use, low income, high density or other that would require major rezoning? ------------------------------------------------------ Question: What is meant by “Allocate and coordinate land uses?” Is this to be done by a regional land use administrator or would it be done on a local basis? How would the regional coordination be administered and how does that affect local control over land use decisions.? ------------------------------------------------------ Question: What does this mean in practical terms? Who does it and is it local? ------------------------------------------------------ Question: Is this another way of saying “restrict” or “prohibit” or “limit”? ------------------------------------------------------ Question: What is meant by “additional” development? Where and how? ------------------------------------------------------ Question: Is the intent here to mix income levels regionally as a response to “Social Equity” or “Economic Justice” concepts to address economic disparities? ------------------------------------------------------ Question: Is this essentially a rejection of the suburb or so-called “urban-flight” or “sprawl?” Also, is this intended to provide a reduced carbon footprint in reaction to global warming or climate change? ------------------------------------------------------ Question: What does this mean? Is the strategy borderline legally or constitutionally? What is meant by “regional fair-share of growth?” How is it implemented? Who makes the decisions of what is “fair- share?” What would make it “technically competent” vs. technically incompetent? Who will implement it regionally? ------------------------------------------------------ Question: What is meant by “regional allocation of various land uses?” Would this mean a central planning agency would dictate local land uses over the entire region? How would this impact local land use decisions and local control? ------------------------------------------------------ Question: Who or what determines that the policies are “pro-active?” What is implied or intended by “incremental rezoning?” What is meant by “overall vision?” Who’s vision dominates? ------------------------------------------------------ Question: What determines “unbiased” if some groups are not included, especially if the interests are stake holders? What would constitute “undue influence” and who determines if the line has been crossed? ------------------------------------------------------ Question: Is this a reaction to global warming or climate change? Is this implying changing the behavior of drivers and commuters? |