Haven Harrington
Saving Mechanicsburg from Downfall: Taking a Stand Against the Development of the Hempt Property
Introduction
On August 3, 2020, the Silver Spring Township Board of Supervisors conducted a virtual town meeting to decide the fate of the Hempt Property which rests on the highly trafficked Carlisle Pike across from the Cumberland Valley High School. Ultimately, the property’s owner, HSS Investors, LCC (HSS), won the agreement and will be able to develop the 451-acre agricultural zoned property into industrial and highway commercial zoned property, as well as create a residential district1. To many residents of Silver Spring Township, HSS will be tearing apart precious green space to build up warehouses, retail space, and a residential area that will sit empty because of COVID-19 related hardships and the fact that many commercial areas and warehouses currently lie empty along the Carlisle Pike. Not to mention the vast number of residential homes that are empty in the surrounding area due to the unaffordable cost of buying or renting them.
Additionally, the Carlisle Pike and the quality of the public schools attract more outsiders to move into Mechanicsburg, which is causing an increase in traffic; however, the development of the Hempt Property will not only attract more traffic, but it will increase the semi-truck traffic that is already too much for the comfort of our residents. Now, imagine a setting where you have high school-aged students driving during rush hour alongside semi-trucks and parents driving their young ones to school: it is cause for disaster. From 2010 to 2019, there have been a total 592 accidents in Silver Spring Township that involved a young driver, which is considered any driver between the ages of 16 and 202. With the addition of this development plan, this number will rise quickly.
At a time where parents are most considerate of their children’s future and Mechanicsburg is running out of space, it is crucial for residents to act on their discontent with this agreement and put an end to it. The development agreement between Silver Spring Township and HSS needs to be abolished or heavily revised before construction begins to improve the safety of our children and save what little green space we have left of the township, because the rush decision was forced upon the Township by HSS without much public opinion.
Concern for Road Safety
The proposal of a 102-acre Residential/Civic Core Area, a 25-acre Technology/Office Corridor Area, and a 186-acre Business Park Area will highly increase the amount of local traffic within Silver Spring Township3. According to the Settlement Agreement between the Township and HSS, the Residential/Civic Core Area will house a mix of townhome and multifamily dwellings. These housing types will not fail to bring in a considerate number of potential renters or buyers into the Mechanicsburg area, which will in turn increase the amount of traffic along the Carlisle Pike.
Moreover, the Technology/Office Area, if inhabited, could create a dangerous amount of traffic in the surrounding area during rush hour. The Technology/Office Area is across from the Cumberland Valley School District campus in which a high school, middle school and elementary school all call home. From 7:00am to 8:30am, parents are driving their children to school during the same time school buses flood the roads, teen drivers are texting and driving, and average residents rush to get to their workplace on time4. With the addition of yet another office building near the school, there will be an influx of traffic during rush hour that could cause a spike in traffic accidents. Personally, I have witnessed at least three crashes at the Hempt Rd, Carlisle Pike, and CV high school intersection within two years of driving myself to school, though more accident have occurred at this intersection that I did not witness.
Heavy Increase of Semi-Truck Traffic
Besides the increase in personal use vehicles, the construction of a 186-acre “Business Park” will attract a considerate amount of tractor trailer truck traffic. In 2019, there were 7,631 vehicles across Pennsylvania involved in crashes with a Heavy Truck and 22 were fatal according to PennDot5. In Silver Spring Township, there were 255 total Heavy Truck Related crashes between 2010 and 20192.
The Business Park’s name is incredibly misleading, for the 186-acre area will become Industrially zoned for warehouse use, leading to the problem of increasing semi-truck traffic in an area where it already prevails. In an attempt to alleviate some of the traffic and deter it away from the Carlisle Pike and Hempt Rd intersection, HSS claims it will create an extension to the already existing Dapp Rd; however, young drivers and cars with student passengers will be driving alongside semi-trucks to get to school from Carlisle or New Kingston3.
When driving along the Carlisle Pike, one cannot fail to notice the massive amount of semi-truck traffic without this additional warehouse, especially when I-81 shuts down. Vice-Chair Griffie of the Township’s Board of Supervisors stresses the fact that the township does not have the infrastructure to handle so much semi-truck traffic, and the Dapp Rd extension will do little to alleviate traffic caused by the semis.
“We do not have, nor have we considered, any infrastructure to support the resultant truck traffic…these trucks will go east and further choke up the intersection at Route 114 and Route 11. The Carlisle Pike is frequently clogged with trucks, as are Silver Spring, Hogestown, State and Locust Point Roads. There is no more room”6.
According to Vice Chair Griffie, the only Supervisor who voted against the Settlement Agreement, there are currently twenty-six warehouses within Silver Spring Township6. During a personal phone call, she stated that these warehouses tend to house a business for a couple of months and when they leave, the warehouses sit empty. In the same phone call, Vice Chair Griffie reiterated the traffic pollution of trucks, which is both harmful for the environment and the safety of our community.
Harm to the Community
The addition of warehousing and decrease of green space has many citizens of Silver Spring Township concerned for the Township’s future. Some public concerns about the Settlement Agreement were voiced in the Board Meeting on August 3rd, 2020.
With the recent pandemic that still plagues society, many concerns of the Township residents relate to hardships caused by COVID-19. Along the Carlisle Pike, many retail spaces are empty as a result of loss business, but some spaces have also been unoccupied prior to the pandemic and have not yet been sold. Additionally, with the increase in telework across the nation, the need for large office spaces is very low. As a result, many office buildings are also unoccupied throughout the Township. According to resident Angela Perta, the construction of “a proposed technology park would not successfully attract leasers”6.
Another concerned resident, Michael Niznik, commented on the maximum height of the proposed warehouse. Though the Township usually has a maximum building height of fifty feet, the warehouse that will be constructed by HSS has a maximum height of eighty feet if it rests four-hundred feet away from the road3. Mr. Niznik is concerned about the safety of the building’s occupants in an event of a fire, because the warehouse height would exceed the Township’s fire department ladder truck capabilities.
Harm to the Cumberland Valley School District
During the Board of Supervisors meeting on August 3rd, some residents expressed concern regarding the decreased appeal and quality of the local school district as a result of HSS’s development of the Hempt Property located exactly across the high school6. One concerned resident stated that parents will most likely not wish to send their children “to a school which is near warehouses and industrial uses”6. Although Ms. Perta did not state any potential reasons parents may be deterred from sending their children to Cumberland Valley, there is a sense of degraded appeal of the school district. The warehouses would pose dangerous traffic issues, and it will make the school look less attractive than if it were settled across beautiful farmland.
With the district already struggling to hold all of its students, most of its buildings are operating over 85% capacity. During the 2019-2020 academic year, the school district enrolled 9,151 students for its nine schools, including one high school, two middle schools, and six elementary schools; this number is expected to grow exponentially throughout the next few years8. With the addition of a multi-family residential district on the Hempt Property, more families will move into the area, worsening the strain on the school district to house all of its students in a limited amount of space.
Rushed and Hushed
Much to the dismay of Township residents and the Board of Supervisors, the process in agreeing upon the Settlement Agreement was rushed by HSS. Though the sale of the Hempt Property to HSS happened on December 22, 2017, HSS filed a Curative Amendment Application to challenge the validity of the property’s Agricultural Zone classification3. In their initial development plans, HSS proposed rezoning the entire property into an Industrial Zone in order to build five warehouses on the property. Fortunately, the Township was able to intervene and come to a compromise within the new Settlement Agreement3. However, due to the pandemic, the Township appealed for an extension to come to a decision on the Settlement Agreement at a later date, but it was rejected by the Judge.
Residents such as Christine Musser expressed their concern with the decision “being rushed by the developer”6. According to Vice Chair Griffie, the Supervisors were highly concerned about losing a court case against HSS had this issue been brought there. If the Township had not come to an agreement with HSS, the investing group would indeed file the issue with the court, something that the Township cannot afford.
Along with the rush to come to a decision came the lack of public comment. Both Ms. Musser and Kathryn Petra stated to the Board that had the Board Meeting on August 3rd was unfair and not highly accessible to the majority of the residents. Ms. Petra goes so far to say that the teleconference “method seems like a dishonest vote”6. In order to attend a Board Meeting, residents must first register to attend by calling the township between 8:00am and 4:00pm from Monday to Friday to obtain a passcode for the Zoom conference9. This method already limits public participation; however, Ms. Petra sheds light on further limitations that restrict public participation on this issue: “it was unfair to the elderly, those without internet access…to hold teleconference meetings”6.
Also, Richard Rosen, another citizen of Silver Spring Township, was displeased with the Township’s lack of transparency and of a method of communicating this issue to its residents6. The community was highly ill-informed of this issue, and of the fastest growing township, only thirty residents attending the important Board Meeting. (Include survey results here)
What Can We Do Next Time?
To prevent another controversial event like this from happening again in the future, the Township needs to impose a policy that if a property of over 100 acres is going to be re-zoned, then at least 10% of its residents need to comment their position.
The development of the Hempt Property will affect all Cumberland Valley school district residents and most of Mechanicsburg residents by increasing the population and increasing the amount of personal vehicle and semi-truck traffic. Though most residents disagree with this Settlement Agreement, many were unaware of it or if they were, unable to voice their discontent with the agreement. To the Township, you need to do better for the sake of your residents.
Conclusion
Because of the lack of public comment and harmful consequences of the Settlement Agreement passed by Silver Spring Township and HSS Investors, LLC on August 3rd, 2020, the Township’s residents and nearby citizens need to protest against the construction of this proposed plan before it happens. The proposed development of the 451-acre Hempt Property will bring in heavy traffic, as well as danger Mechanicsburg residents by increasing the number of semis on the road, and it will put a strain on the local school district by increasing the Township’s population. Mechanicsburg residents need to be informed on this matter through social media and flyers, and they need to bring it to the attention of the Judge. To prevent a similar issue in the future, the Township needs to reevaluate their existing policies and create one that includes the voices of its residents.
Bibliography
1https://www.pennlive.com/news/2020/08/development-plan-for-hempt-farm-approved-by-silver-spring-twp-supervisors.html
2https://crashinfo.penndot.gov/PCIT/queryTool.html#
3https://pa-silverspring2.civicplus.com/DocumentCenter/View/10340/Settlement-Agreement-w-Exhibits-A7603627?bidId=
4http://www.cvschools.org/
5https://www.penndot.gov/TravelInPA/Safety/Documents/2019_CFB_linked.pdf
6https://www.sstwp.org/AgendaCenter/ViewFile/Minutes/_08032020-1382
7https://cumberlink.com/news/local/communities/mechanicsburg/mccormick-farm-purchase-continues-to-bedevil-cumberland-valley-school-board/article_bf04e839-b891-55f5-93a9-3a75a650586b.html
8https://nces.ed.gov/ccd/districtsearch/district_detail.asp?ID2=4207110
9https://www.sstwp.org/AgendaCenter/ViewFile/Agenda/_02242021-1450
*Due to the layout of the blog, I decided not to include my infographics. I will have maps, as well as information on crashes and survey results of whether residents know about this Settlement Agreement. I also still need to correct my citations. I just put in the sources for now but will go back and revise them.
1). Answer any questions the writer may have posed about the draft
-N/A
2). Comment on scope of the thesis and whether or not it was convincingly argued. What improvements are needed to make it more convincing?
-With such a unique topic (one where your argument is just to abolish a proposed plan), your thesis is quite simple, which is perfectly fine due to the topic. Honestly, your thesis is perfect and the rest of the brief supports it well.
3). Comment on the evidence for the policy or its implementation. Does the draft need stronger sources to support the arguments? What kinds?
-No! I absolutely LOVE the sources you used. Not all of them are the most reliable, as some of them are personal opinions of residents, but I think that is absolutely perfect for your brief specifically. Since it is such a local issue, it makes sense that your sources for your argument are locals. Not many know about this issue, and it only really affects those in the nearby area. Thus, those that live there are perfect sources to use. I love the diversity.
4). Did the piece handle questions of feasibility or objections to the policy?
-Unless I missed it, I don’t think so.
5). Comment on any improvements to arrangement that could be considered.
-I would add a counterargument where you address why the developers wanted this plan to pass. Then, after explaining their perspective, explain why your perspective outweighs theirs, or the flaw in their judgement.
6). Comment on the structure of the issue brief, including subtitles.
-You have a lot of paragraphs outlining concerns, which is great. However, maybe you could have one big section titled “Concerns” or something like that, and then have even smaller subtitles outlining each specific concern.
7). Make one recommendation for something that could be moved, changed, added, or deleted.
-In the concern for road safety section, I would change the double negative “will not fail to” into just “will succeed.”
Looveeeee this! I think the title and thesis are great! I think you clearly explain every possible harmful impact of this decision in a simple way supported by great facts and personal statements. This brief is very unique in that it is something local to you and that you have all these personal statements. I think it will really speak to your audience. The only thing that might make this brief more organized is having subheaders under main headers. I see Billy also mentioned this so I just want to reiterate it. Also, I think the section “Harm to the Community” was a little confusing to me. This is probably a me thing, but it wasn’t registering what the issue was clear. I understood it after the second read, but maybe be more specific on what the harm is? In the end, I love the suggestion you made on what to do in the future. As for a counterargument, it is kind of hard to say. I am sure you can find a statement on why they wanted to build up the land into an industrial/residential site somewhere or find online why other places have done something similar. I don’t think you will have a hard time refuting it given the vast amount of facts given!
1). Answer any questions the writer may have posed about the draft.
N/A
2). Comment on scope of the thesis and whether or not it was convincingly argued. What improvements are needed to make it more convincing?
The thesis was convincingly argued with strong logos, pathos, and ethos. I have no improvements to suggest.
3). Comment on the evidence for the policy or its implementation. Does the draft need stronger sources to support the arguments? What kinds?
The evidence for the concerns, the policy, and the action that should be taken is strong. I thought that the strongest piece of evidence was the personal phone call with Vice Chair Griffie. Great job!
4). Did the piece handle questions of feasibility or objections to the policy?
The issue brief clearly focused on the concerns of the development agreement from the perspective of the Silver Spring Township residents, but minimally discussed the objections to the policy from the perspective of the contractors. The issue brief also discussed the feasibility of the development agreement. After reading Billy’s comment, I also suggest evaluating both perspectives of the issue to effectively discuss the superiority of the argument against the development agreement.
5). Comment on any improvements to arrangement that could be considered.
Throughout the majority of the issue brief, the doubts were emphasized thoroughly, but the discussion concerning the action that should be taken or the changes that should be made to the agreement was short. To me, the main focus of the issue brief is to highlight an issue and propose ways to resolve the problem. So, I suggest elaborating more on what the Silver Spring Township and the HSS contractors could do to reach a compromise or to avoid the development agreement altogether. Further emphasis on this part of the project will help your issue brief sound strong from the beginning to the end.
6). Comment on the structure of the issue brief, including subtitles.
I loved the structure of the issue brief and I thought that the ideas flowed smoothly.
7). Make one recommendation for something that could be moved, changed, added, or deleted.
The only recommendations I have are to elaborate more on the changes that could me made to your policy of interest or the actions that should be taken now, and to check for consistency. I noticed that in one sentence you said “Vice-Chair Griffie,” yet in another sentence you said “Vice Chair Griffie.” I notice super small details, so I thought that this would be worth mentioning!
Awesome job, Haven! I can tell that this issue brief strikes a personal chord in you because the passion that flows from this issue brief is spectacular! Keep up the good work!