PART ONE: THE FACTS
The first Conditional Use Hearing for Valhalla Brandywine was held last night at the Wallace Township Building. The evening began with a brief introduction by the Township solicitor and moved onto registration for Party Status. Individuals, Groups, and others affected by the proposed Resort may register at the beginning of each Hearing for Party Status, which allows them to cross-examine (or ask questions of) consultants presenting information on the project. (*This corrects the previous understanding that you had to register at the 1st Hearing for all of the Hearings, so if you were not able to attend last night's meeting and wish to register please come to the next!) It is important to note that you have to wait until the end of the entire presentation to make comments, and that questioning the individual consultants won't be allowed until the whole series of presentations is over. Last night's meeting included an introduction by the developer, Mr. Albert M. Greenfield III. This was followed by presentations by Chuck Dobson, Civil Engineer who touched upon some density and "greenway" allowances, and by Mr. Evans of LRK Architects who spoke about '6 principles' being used in the development plans. The room was more than filled to capacity and a great number of residents and others filed for Pary Status, including the Guardians of the Brandywine and Trout Unlimited.
PART TWO: THE OPINIONS
Hold on just a bit longer while I write them down-in the meantime, don't be shy and give us your own opinion!
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
4 comments:
Check out the Wallace Twp Newsletter you'd thing the zoning amendment was the best thing that ever happened to Wallace. The opinion of the newsletter is never stated, but it is that of John Miller who writes the newsletter.
(This comment was posted under the heading 'September, a New Month, a New Beginning, but it goes with our most recent topic so I have printed it here as well)
Blogger sarah said...
I agree that all residents ought to be concerned about the impact of Brandywine Valhalla. I just want to remind people to be realistic and to understand and accept the fact that the so called "rural character" of the township has been eroding over the past twenty years or more, ever since the first developers purchased farmland here (land which protected the wildlife, the woodlands and the streams, etc.)built houses on that land and then sold them to many of the current residents who are so up in arms over the proposal. The landowners at that time, some of them farmers, were greatly disheartened that these developments were destroying the rural nature of their township, something they had so avidly worked to preserve, and that, consequetly, they would have to put up with more traffic, less beauty, and the diminution of the rural nature of their township. These residents, some who still live here, had to accept the harsh reality that the only constant is change. It is not up to the people who have heavily invested in and cared for and preserved the majority of the land in the township to sacrifice a good return on their investment to protect the rural character of the township for those who participated in eroding it in the first place. No one can have his cake and eat it too. Let's look at the situation from all sides and ask ourselves truthfully what we are expecting of others and consider being grateful for what we have all enjoyed for so long at someone else's expense. No one is entitled to the beauty someone else has paid for and preserved. This is an indisputable reality. I make a motion we accept it.
September 24, 2008 9:52 PM
That is a very thoughtful comment, Sarah, I appreciate that you wrote. It has some very important aspects to it. As someone that moved to Wallace not that long ago, I can tell you that any controversial information on properties being sold is carefully hidden from potential buyers because ‘concerns’ drive them away. I do know that the residents in newer developments and opposed to the Resort came at least in part because of the rural character, access to the wonderful clean waters for drinking and recreation, and sense of community. They pay substantial taxes which support the schools, Township and County, and they themselves work at local schools and businesses. It was the sellers of the land that “participated in eroding” the farming community as it was. The idea of a return on one’s investment is appropriate, and no one is denying that a property owner has rights to develop his or her land. The greater issue here is when the development is not just one’s own property, when the proposed development is in an environmentally sensitive (read Headwaters of the Brandywine, here) area, and impacts the entire Township and neighboring Township as well. This project isn’t about creating homes and bringing in new residents or services that will improve and serve this community, this Resort is about outside investors and making money. Protecting your watershed and quality of life isn’t “having your cake and eating it too”, it’s being a responsible citizen and caring about the long term future of where we all live. And that’s worth fighting for.
I would like to correct something about the Wallace Township newsletter. The article praising the PCCC amendment was written by supervisor Bill Moore and he said from now on they will sign their names to these opinionated columns.
Post a Comment