Environmental controls added to Benner Township zoning law, but concerns remain

Since opponents to a proposed Benner Township zoning ordinance voiced environmental and infrastructure concerns, township supervisors have taken steps to add environmental protections and lessen the opportunity for dense development.

But some critics are saying that’s not enough.

The February draft of Benner Township’s proposed zoning ordinance would have allowed much denser development on agricultural and forested conservation areas with access to public water and sewer, repealed the Spring Creek Canyon Overlay adopted in 2010 and taken away significant environmental controls to protect the Spring Creek Watershed from industrial and agricultural runoff.

Due to public outcry and opposition from municipal government and environmental groups, the supervisors are in the process of making changes, said Supervisor Randy Moyer.

“We’re putting in all the overlays — the original overlays — (and) the environmental engineer is drafting the environmental controls,” he said.

Supervisors are planning to re-insert Zone 1 of the Spring Creek Canyon Overlay District Ordinance, which aims to protect and conserve the Spring Creek Canyon by minimizing site disturbance during land development; add back an environmental section detailing the use of riparian buffers and other practices in agricultural zones; and increase minimum lot sizes in agricultural and forested conservation areas to curb dense development, according to Moyer and documents on the Benner Township website.

“(The supervisors) are working with the public and they are trying to make some compromises but there is still some concern that they’re throwing out conservation,” said David Roberts, a Benner Township resident.

The proposed ordinance removes the Spring Creek Canyon Overlay stormwater management and infiltration requirements — opting instead to comply with Act 167 stormwater management — and removes Zone 2 of the overlay, which would absolve the University Park Airport and other land parcels from complying with certain environmental controls, said Kevin Abbey, land conservation manager at ClearWater Conservancy.

“There are some private farms in that zone, and I know some of those farm owners are concerned about the impact of their property values for development,” Roberts said.

Moyer and the township’s engineer said removing the UP Airport from Zone 2 does away with certain restrictions and red tape that are already covered under existing Act 167 legislation. For example, he said, the airport wouldn’t be required to plant certain vegetation intended as buffers that could attract unwanted animals to the property.

“Their view is that (the Zone 2 overlay) just goes too far and complicates things at the airport, where they’re under all kinds of local municipal as well as state and federal aviation requirements for anything that they do,” said Abbey, who has been in close contact with the township and its engineer.

John Elnitski, manager of the Bellefonte Airport in Benner Township, said the removal of the UP Airport from the Spring Creek Canyon Overlay changes the airport from a nonconforming, conditional use to a permitted use.

“By removing it from that zone it removes the hoops that the airport has to go through,” he said.

He has argued with the supervisors to have his airport restrictions loosened in a similar manner to UP, saying that permitted use land gives landowners who meet the requirements of their zoning category the legal right to the use or structures they want to place on their land. On the other hand, a landowner of conditional use land — like the Bellefonte Airport — must apply for a permit, a process that is subject to review by the local government, he said.

Dorothy Blair, a member of the Nittany Valley Environmental Coalition, is concerned that UP Airport’s removal from Zone 2 could cause environmental problems.

“Considering the highly toxic chemicals used at the airport and the uncontained and substantial runoff from the Airport directly down Rock Road into Spring Creek or into Buffalo Hollow drainage area into Spring Creek, this action seems particularly ill advised,” she wrote in an April 1 letter to the township.

In a March 28 letter to township supervisors and the planning commission, ClearWater Conservancy said the Spring Creek Canyon Overlay should be kept in place with both zones as adopted in 2010 and that public input and review from the canyon’s Technical Advisory Group should be included in any discussions to rewrite or change the overlay ordinance.

“I think from ClearWater’s standpoint what’s important is the overlay makes an important statement about the importance of the canyon and its value to the community as an ecological gem and we want to see that preserved,” said Abbey.

Roberts said the whole zoning ordinance process has been “very confusing” for residents and those with environmental and lot size concerns. They are waiting for the new draft to publish “so that we can have a clear proposal for comment,” he said.

Moyer said the supervisors hope to have an updated draft of the zoning ordinance prepared by June for review by the township’s attorney. From there, the township must advertise a public hearing to adopt the ordinance 30 days before it’s scheduled, according to state municipal code.

The next supervisors’ meeting is Monday and the planning commission meets May 9.

This story was originally published May 4, 2019 at 3:16 PM.