Beaver Valley Conservancy, Pike Creek Valley Civic League And The Newark City Council All Meet Tonight At 7PM

There are three meetings I'd like to attend tonight! 

1). Beaver Valley Conservancy General Meeting: Monday, September 23rd at 7pm 

Join us: Our next general meeting is Monday, September 23rd from 7pm-9pm at the Brandywine Town Center. The building is the one with the glass dome on top that juts out into the water, it is the closest domed building to Naamans road and is across from Red Robins.  The location can be found here: http://goo.gl/maps/S2jG

Watch our newest video - Seen from a child's perpsective, the proposed development in Beaver Valley is stripped of its complexity and reduced to simple terms. The video offers us a chance to step back and look at this fight with new eyes.

Some recent Save The Valley news ~
Concord Township's Woodlawn Trustees' rezoning issue discussed at meeting

Is Supervisor Salvucci Sincere? We applaud supervisor Salvucci's statements in the Delco Times in support of protecting Beaver Valley.  If these statements in the paper are accurate, then this is very positive news for Beaver Valley. However, her statements were made at the end of the September 3rd supervisors meeting, outside the public comment period, and furthermore she does not state outright that she'll oppose a rezoning vote.  Supervisor Kevin O'Donoghue echoed her comments. Is this a sincere offer or election season maneuvering? If she and the other supervisors are in fact planning to oppose the rezoning proposal, they should directly contact Save The Valley and other groups to state their intentions.  They have not done so. Even more convincing would be an official press release or mailer to Concord residents detailing their intentions. Also, unanswered in the recent meeting is the reason why Dominic Cappelli recused himself, which by law he is required to do.

2). The Pike Creek Valley Civic League shifted its meeting topic tonight from the CVS - Whiteman's Garage controversy to the Pike Creek Golf Course decision. They begin at 7PM at Skyline United Methodist Church ~ 

Judge's ruling heats up battle over proposed development in Pike Creek 

Development at ex-Pike Creek Golf Course closer following judge's decision 

With some comment rescues ~
I'm sorry, but I still don't understand how Judge Parkins' ruling can just be thrown out and Judge Wallace is allowed to issue another one. Why can't we go to a third judge now?? I hope everyone is paying close attention and the county does what is right.
Once again, why doesn't anyone care about those of us who actually LIVE here already? 

Pike Creek is too crowded as is. Property values around here are rapidly declining as is. You know what's a great solution to these serious problems? Build more townhouses! Just another slap in the face to the middle class people who live here. Thanks Judge. You just took hard earned money out of my family's pocket and put it into that of a corporation. 

The residents of this area, my family included, DO NOT want this land developed. We live where we do because of the beautiful surroundings and peaceful environment provided by the greenery - NOT MORE DEVELOPMENT!

Plus, recent action taken by the County ~

Sept. 12, 2013, Max Walton, the County's outside counsel for the New Castle County v Pike Creek Recreational Services (former Three Little Bakers property) case, filed a motion for clarification and/or limited re-argument of portions of the Courts’ September 5, 2013 opinion. The basic premise of the motion requests:

1. Clarification that the 130 acres of golf course land were previously dedicated, so that any future development cannot use them as their open space. This affects how density would be calculated in any future plan submission.  Under the Code, community golf courses cannot be constructed in community open space.
2. That a separate parcel is created for the golf course.
3. That a Code compliant plan be submitted for that parcel, showing an 18-hole golf course.  This assures us that the land is set aside, and is a way for the County to determine if the set aside is really large enough to build a golf course.
4. That the golf course land be subtracted from the gross site acreage, in order to determine what might be available developable land.  This assures us that the golf course land cannot be counted as base site area when calculating density for any future submission of a development plan. 

http://www2.nccde.org/council/District3/default.aspx

3). Newark City Council meets at 7PM. I want to be there to ask what they have to say about Max Walton's opinion which directly states that Council's intention was to approve the new zoning category that allows for a utility-scale power plant. 

Is the city really going to allow this defacto utility to sell electricy back to the grid without any oversight from the Public Service Commission? ~

From Paul Baumbach: Newark City Council asked for a third-party legal analysis of the question on whether the proposed Data Center and Power Plant is permitted by current zoning. The 11-page analysis is athttp://www.nonewarkpowerplant.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/2013-09-09-walton.pdf 

www.nonewarkpowerplant.org

With some comment rescues ~  - Still, this opinion is based on assumptions about the plan that may not be correct.
- Indeed, the legal opinion begins with a long list of assumptions/caveats.
- Given that the City of Newark has done so much behind the scenes to get the power plant installed, including being a public sponsor for the project for a state grant for new natural gas pipelines, who is accountabe? Who is accountable for fact-checking the caveats and assumptions? Who is accountable for the steps the city has already taken that they have not disclosed to the public before?
- At last month's city council meeting the City Manager said that she "assumed to be factual" the claims made by the data centers llc at the meeting on Sept 3. Clearly, there are statements that were not factual, such as the 1/2 mile distance to the closest residence, the NEPA-style environmentla impact assessment as a part of an air construction permit, the reason why the PUblic Serivce Commission is not involved. Who is accountable for those? Newark is assuming that everything was correct?
- My understanding is that the PSC is not involved since there are no plans to sell energy via a monopoly to the public.I further understand that Representative Kowalko is working to ensure that all relevant environmental processes are properly and transparently followed.
- On the PSC, that is not true. Call the PSC. I have spoken with them. 
- The Public Service Commission has no oversight over municipal electric utilities. This is the responsibility of Newark City Council. If The Data Centers LLC were located in Delmarva Power's jurisdiction, they would have oversight. I spoke at length about this with the PSC community ombudsman Matt Hardigan. I suggest that you call him.

Plus, a FOIA request has been submitted for the document referred to in the minutes of the March 2012 City Council meeting when the STC Zoning for the STAR campus was adopted 

http://www.cityofnewarkde.us/ArchiveCenter/ViewFile/Item/2176
From page 12:  "Assuming approval, Mr. Clifton questioned the next step and whether there would be a Memorandum of Understanding between the University and the City. Ms. Roser said a letter would be signed that will formally bind the City and the University to this Zoning Code category." 

~*~