Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Stormwater topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Supervisor faults engineer and developer over Municipal Campus stormwater easement; Board to seek alternatives
Summary
Supervisor David Lenker criticized engineering plans that rely on a stormwater discharge easement across adjoining Spring Meadows property, asked that his criticisms be recorded verbatim and pushed staff to pursue purchase or alternatives; the Board will continue discussions with the property owner and consultant.
A dispute over stormwater design for the Silver Spring Township Municipal Campus took center stage at the Feb. 25 meeting, when Township Engineer Jonathan Robinson explained that construction of a required sediment basin will likely require either an easement or purchase of roughly 6,000 square feet on adjacent Spring Meadows property.
Supervisor David R. Lenker expressed strong objections to the plan as presented by the project engineer HRG and pressed staff and the developer for alternative approaches. Lenker repeatedly questioned the legality and timing of designing a discharge onto private land and directed that his comments be entered in the minutes verbatim. "I'm kind of lost on this because why would we design it to go on another property? ... I don't think it's kosher," Lenker said in a lengthy exchange recorded in the meeting transcript.
Robinson told the Board the design had been reviewed by the Cumberland County Conservation District and the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection and that HRG had indicated Spring Meadows might be willing to grant an easement. Manager Raymond Palmer said staff would continue negotiations with the property owner to explore purchase or easement options and would return to the Board with alternatives.
The episode also included an itemized expense approval request tied to the easement/purchase decision; the Board asked staff to prepare recommended terms and valuation for Board consideration. Lenker proposed HRG accept responsibility if the design proves faulty; HRG acknowledged the concerns.
The Board did not vote on a final easement or purchase at the meeting, instead directing staff to continue negotiations and return with recommended next steps and contract terms.
