|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Letter of March 26, 2004 |
|
|
|
|
1768 Pebbledash Drive Hershey, PA 17033 March 26, 2004 The Sun Attn: William Jackson 115 South Water Street Hummelstown, PA 17036-0197 Re: Rezoning of Agricultural/Conservation Land in Derry Township Mr. Jackson: In last week’s paper, the principal landowner in the Nye-Hart rezoning matter decided to use his opportunity for public exposure on this issue to attack several of us who are involved in raising awareness about important land use issues in Derry Township. Because several of the statements in that report were misleading, I feel compelled to write this letter in an effort to correct them, for myself and members of the Concerned Citizens group I am helping to lead. Despite the personal nature of his attacks, I will stick with the facts, some of the most important of which follow: Q. Is the land that is the subject of the rezoning request private property? A. YES. We have made that clear at all our meetings, in all our mailings, and on our website. Q. Does the fact that land is privately owned mean that a landowner can use the property for whatever he or she wants? A. NO. Land use is subject to the laws of the Township. In this case the Comprehensive Plan and our zoning ordinances are that law. Such laws are in place to protect all residents of the Township, not just a particular landowner. Q. Can the landowners construct houses on this property right now, as it is currently zoned? A. YES. The land is zoned as agricultural/conservation, which means that one house may be constructed for each 5 acres of land. Q. Is the Concerned Citizens group trying to stop the landowners from building houses on this property? A. NO. We are urging our Township Supervisors to reject the requests that a developer has filed to amend the Comprehensive Plan and to rezone the land as residential. As noted above, the landowner can construct houses on the property as it is currently zoned. Q. Has the Concerned Citizens group represented that there are only two options—the proposed development or open space? A. NO. In fact, we have consistently stated that part of the reason why we oppose this rezoning is because the landowners can build homes on the land right now—about one house for each five acres—something that would retain the character of the land and minimize the impact on the rest of the community. Apparently this type of development is unsatisfactory to the developer and principal landowner. Q. Would the developer’s rezoning proposal change the Comprehensive Plan? A. YES. That is specifically what the developer has asked for. Q. Would the developers’ request result in more concentrated development on the property than is allowed under current zoning laws? A. YES. Q. Does the Concerned Citizens group believe that changing the law to help two landowners and a developer benefit the current residents of Derry Township? A. NO. Amending the Comprehensive Plan and changing a zoning ordinance is a very serious matter, because it invites other owners of agricultural/conservation land to seeking a rezoning of their property, too. It is a slippery slope that leads to overdevelopment (commonly referred to as sprawl). In addition, adding a concentrated, 70-house development like the one described by the landowner adds traffic to the roads, undermines water quality and runoff, and further burdens an already crowded school system. Q. Has the developer proposed to set aside some of the land as a park? A. YES. Q. Could this “park” land be used to build houses? A. As a general matter, NO. The land in question is steeply sloped (some hills exceed 100 feet in elevation) and could not be used for residential development in any case. Most of this “park” land could not be developed with homes or other structures. Q. Is there any assurance that this “park” will ever exist? A. NO. Once the Comprehensive Plan is amended and the zoning changed, the developer is not bound by the proposal. In fact, they could turn around and sell the land to another developer, who could build up to 109 homes on the land and decide not to have any park or other public access. John Memmi, the chairperson of the Township Planning Commission, expressed a very similar concern in explaining one of the reasons why he was voting against the proposal to allow this rezoning. Once a rezoning decision is made, circumstances can change and the developer cannot be required to meet its commitment. Q. Why can’t the Township hold the developer to this commitment? A. Because “contract zoning”—in which a developer makes certain promises to a community in exchange for zoning changes—is illegal in Pennsylvania. If such arrangements were permitted, a community’s zoning laws would essentially be available “to the highest bidder.” Q. Can anyone else currently purchase the property from the landowners? A. NO. As I understand it, the landowners are under an exclusive contract to sell the land to the specific developer and have been for nearly three years. Q. Would a conservation or other group pay the same amount that the developer is proposing? A. NO. The developer is only going to pay an inflated price for the land if the land is rezoned so they can build a concentrated residential development. The fair market value of the land (as agricultural/conservation land) is much lower than a developer would be willing to pay. Perhaps the more appropriate question is whether a landowner should feel entitled to receive a “residential” price for “agricultural/conservation” land? Q. Have the organizers of the opposition to this rezoning “known for years this property would ultimately be developed”? A. Virtually every resident of Wellbeckon, where I live, were told when they bought or built homes here that the field and huge forest area nearby was zoned as agricultural/conservation land, and that under such zoning only one home could be built for each five acres. That is still our understanding today. Q. Is the Concerned Citizens group acting in “self interest”? A. Obviously, each member would have his or her own answer. Many live nowhere near the Nye/Hart property. As for me, my interest is in maintaining a high quality of life in this community: safe roads, good schools, acceptable levels of taxation, quality water, and a balance of land uses. So I suppose stopping this rezoning is consistent with my interests. If this were a matter of economic interest—it is my understanding a high-end residential development nearby would increase the value of my home (statements at the 2002 rezoning hearing were made to this effect, and real estate agents commonly make such statements about home values). So, I guess by opposing the rezoning request, I am acting against my own economic interests. Let me respond to one personal item asserted by the landowner. He asserted that I was involved in an attempt to “form a predecessor [to the Derry Township Land Trust] as a combination of the Wellbeckon and Meadows Homeowners Associations.” I was involved in no such attempt, nor was I aware of any. My work in this area has been to raise public awareness about the harms that come when a Township abandons its Comprehensive Land Use Plan and changes its zoning ordinances. Such changes may benefit two or three community members, but they harm the rest of us. We lose control over how land is developed and the quality of life for current residents suffers. If, as he says, the landowner “wants to do the right things for our neighbors,” one wonders why he is threatening to put up a “chicken farm” with “buildings, odors, lights and noise.” Readers can decide for themselves who has the Township’s best interests in mind. Despite the negative tone of the landowner’s comments and the personal nature of his attacks, I am pleased that the Sun published them. I believe that our Township leaders can make better-informed decisions when these issues are discussed openly among community members. Every time this rezoning proposal has been debated in a public forum—twice before the Dauphin County Planning Commission and twice before the Derry Township Planning Commission—it has been rejected. Concerned Citizens to Preserve Zoning believe that a full airing of the issues before the Township Supervisors will lead them to reject the proposal as well. In conclusion, I believe that members of this community want facts, not name-calling. In my experience, people only use distortions and fabrications when they don’t have the facts to back them up. If the residents of this community want to hear a discussion of the facts, I urge them to come to the hearings on the developer’s request to amend the Comprehensive Plan and rezone the land: April 22 at 6:00 p.m. and April 28 at 5:30 p.m. at the Derry Township Building. Then all residents can decide which position represents their interests. A full copy of this letter and more factual material related to rezoning are available on our website: www.PreserveHershey.org.
Sincerely,
Joseph Miller
|
|
|
|