At a two-hour-plus meeting on Monday, Sept. 28, the Pocopson Township supervisors heard discussion on issues that ran far afield from the Barnard House, which has dominated several recent meetings.
Supervisors Ricki Stumpo and Georgia Brutscher were joined electronically by Supervisors’ Chairman Barney Leonard – participating through Skype. They made recommendations involving pigeons, cats and dogs, and a drainage easement.
Lloyd Pettit, who lives on Corinne Road, offered a primer on pigeon care as he sought the supervisors’ blessing before appearing before the Pocopson Township Zoning Hearing Board. Pettit is seeking relief from the zoning board because his .42-acre property falls short of the half-acre needed to keep pets outside.
“Some people like cats and dogs; I like my birds,” he said, explaining that his hobby began when he found a distressed pigeon in the middle of the road. He said he keeps the pet birds in two, large $3,000 cages and doesn’t envision increasing the size of the flock, which numbers about 14.
To control the population, he said he replaces the pigeon’s eggs with wooden ones, which the birds sit on for about 25 days before abandoning the mission and starting again. In response to a question from the supervisors about his neighbors, Pettit supplied a supportive petition with neighbors’ signatures.
The supervisors agreed to recommend approval to the zoning hearing board, an outcome that Greg Suplick also experienced on behalf of Pocopson Veterinary Station, located at the intersection of Route 926 and Creek Road. Suplick, whose wife, Amy Kidd, is one of the veterinarians at the business, was seeking approval to demolish and then enlarge the back porch of the building.
A more contentious discussion surrounded the request for a building permit at 7 Lian Drive, where a drainage easement has sparked controversy for many years. With Supervisor Ricki Stumpo recusing herself because she lives nearby, Leonard and Brutscher both voted to issue the permit, but Leonard attached a note that the Landmans, who want to build a home on the 4.1-acre property, would be responsible for any problems caused by their excavations.
Andrea Morris, a 20-year resident, repeated her belief that the township “dropped the ball” when a previous homeowner, Paul Hipkins, allegedly violated a 1983 Cannon Hill drainage easement by creating a pond – complete with a beach – that required filling in a sloping area.
Since then, Morris said some sections of the neighborhood have flooded, but Pete Photopoulos, who bought the property from Hipkins in 2010, disputed her account. “I have never seen standing water,” he said. Moreover, he said both the township engineer and the Army Corps of Engineers had found no violations.
In a testy, earlier exchange with Leonard and Brutscher, Photopoulos complained that his efforts to determine how much money the township had spent to assess the alleged violation had not succeeded because the engineers’ bill had no breakdown of the services it provided.
When told that the supervisors typically approve a lump sum bill that covers multiple projects, he responded, “If that’s the way it’s been, it’s ridiculous.” Brutscher said the supervisors would look into getting an itemized accounting.
During a presentation on the Barnard House, Dennis Melton, the architect, discussed a revised floor plan, which has been approved by the Barnard House Steering Committee’s construction group. He said the code-compliant layout now includes a 35-seat conference room and space for three township employees – the secretary, treasurer, and receptionist – on the first floor.
Once a stop on the Underground Railroad, the Barnard House is being renovated for use as the township municipal building and the home of the Kennett Underground Railroad Center. The project, which has generated questions about its cost, workmanship, oversight, and suitability as a site for the township’s administration, was the subject of a question-and-answer session on Monday, Sept. 21, at the Pocopson Home.
Township resident Sean Rafferty said he appreciated the effort to hold the Q&A. But he expressed disappointment with both the substance and the accuracy of some of the answers provided.
Rafferty noted that after examining the township’s finances, he believes that the township could not have afforded to continue the Barnard House renovations without a 150 percent hike in the township’s earned-income tax, which some residents have dubbed the Barnard House tax.
But a handful of other residents applauded the project as well as the forum.
Township resident Robert L. Miller said he appreciated the work that the supervisors and the Barnard House Steering have performed for the past eight years. “I think we are lucky to have a resource like the Barnard House in our township,” Miller said. “I hope it’s completed as planned.”
Three members of the Steering Committee – Carol Haaf, Lauressa J. McNemar, and Jean Conary – also praised the efforts that have gone into the project. McNemar read a full-page statement of support from five members of her family, whom she called “initial skeptics of this project back in 2009” when she joined the committee.
“We see the historic Barnard House and property as the heart of this community, and the local government, KURC [Kennett Underground Railroad Center], and community uses of it will keep that heart beating,” the statement said. “Building community takes time, money and selfless people to keep that community alive.”
Conary challenged a recent remark by Sarah Mims, a longtime member of the township’s Historical Committee, who had expressed disappointment that the Barnard House Steering Committee had only applied for five grants to defray costs. During roughly the same time period, Mims said the volunteers working on the Locust Grove Schoolhouse, which is also being renovated, applied for more than 50.
Arguing that grant money comes from taxpayers, Conary said the Barnard House represented a much better deal. Based on her projected cost of $580,000 for the schoolhouse, Conary estimated the cost per square foot of the Barnard House, roughly four times bigger, at $3.1 million. “It’s not going to cost that, is it?” she asked. “Look at the numbers and look at what we get.”
Township records indicate about $800,000 has been spent so far or is awaiting payment on the project, with at least another $650,000 anticipated for completion.
(2 votes, average: 5.00 out of 5)
Loading...
Comments