Wednesday night's regional planning committee only lasted about 20 minutes, but a fair amount of things were covered.
A free regional traffic study by the Delaware Valley Regional Planning Commission will finally get underway next month, according to Montgomery County officials.
And the planners voted to endorse a letter asking for an increase in federal funding to fight the invasive spotted lanternfly species, now covering the trunk of a tree near you.
So far, Pennsylvania has received $5 million from the federal government but needs $50 million to effectively combat the Korean native.
County officials also reported that in the last few years, more than $360,000 has been awarded through state mini-grants to 18 different park improvement projects in seven of the eight municipalities that participate in the regional planning group.
Two items of interest also came up.
East Coventry Planning Commission Chairman Walter Woessner, Jr. reported that a New Jersey firm that auctions heavy equipment is looking at opening up an auction and storage facility on 100 acres at the corner of Route 724 and Frick's Lock Road, which has the potential to create a traffic problem during auctions.
And Pottstown Borough Councilman Ryan Procsal reported he met with the new owner of the Ellis Mills building in the 200 block of High Street in the borough.
They want to establish a "Reading Terminal Market-type" business on the first floor and host competitive ax throwing on the second.
Yeah, competitive ax throwing.
I will leave you with that thought.
Here are the Tweets.
So what are you going to do about the inevitable pollution that older heavy equipment will bring to the location, grease, oils, lubicants, hydaulic fluids all occasionally leaking from the machinery. What regulations will be in place? Often these locations become eyesores and pollution havens along with junk that doesnt sell and simply remains on the property. Let's make sure if they are given the go ahead the proper laws and regulations are in place and enforced. Not a big employer more a user of the grounds.
ReplyDelete