DOCSLIB.ORG

Comprehensive Plan

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

LOWER SAUCON TOWNSHIP COMPREHENSIVE PLAN 2000 UPDATE April 19, 2000 Draft For Planning Commission Public Meeting Revised June 12,2000 I TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. LOWER SAUCON TOWNSHIP I 2000 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE TABLE OF CONTENTS ______ I PLAN SUMMARY I. INTRODUCTION A. The Planning Process I B. Previous Planning Efforts C. Historic Prospective on the Comprehensive Plan D. Purpose of Comprehensive Plan Update I E. Importance of Plan Implementation F. Lehigh Valley Planning Commission Role G. The Lehigh Valley Comprehensive Plan I H. Regional Issues 11. GOALS AND OBJECTIVES I A. Goals and Objectives from 1987 Comprehensive Plan B. Year 2000 - Goals and Objectives C. Future Land Use Map I 111. THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN A. Projections Population I Land Needs B. Description of Background Maps C. Description of adjacent Municipal Land Uses and Compatibility I with Township Land Uses D. Natural Resources Planning E. Description of Special Watershed and Wellhead Protection I Weas, with mapping. F. Description of Roadway and Traffic Conditions, with photo map G. Description of Limitations of Public Utilities for Sewer and I Water, with pie charts and tables Iv. PLAN IMPLEMENTATION REVIEW A. Land Use Ordinances I B. New and/or Modified Ordinance C. Established Budget Goals D. Cooperation with School District and Adjacent Municipalities I E. Establish Open Space and Recreation Goals F. Establish Natural Resources and Environmental Protection and I Audit Program I 1 of 2 I I V. RESIDENTS QUESTIONNAIRE RESULTS and ANALYSIS VI. ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PARTICIPATION A. Citizens' Coalition of Lower Saucon Township B. Mi scell aneous Newspaper Articles VII. BACKGROUND MAPS 1. Existing Zoning Map 2. Existing Land Use Map 3. Natural Features Building Limitations Map 4. Agricultural Soils and Woodlands Map 5. Natural Resources Map 6. Sewer and Water Service Areas Map 7. Residential Subdivisions Map 2 of 2 I I I PLAN SUMMARY "Maintain Lower Saucon Township as a Suburban and Rural Community . " This Comprehensive Plan, a blueprint for the next ten (10) years, was prepared with this guiding principle. A Citizen Survey performed in 1998 provided the Township Planning Commission with this guiding principle. A goal of the Plan is to provide a level of government responsive to all residents of the Township. Not each resident or property owner will agree with all Plan recommendations. The future decisions of the Township should be evaluated, however, within the framework of this Plan. At the same time, the plan cannot be static; it must be adaptable to change not for individual benefit, but for the Community as a whole. From all of the background studies and public comment received during the preparation of this update, the 2000 Goals and Objectives of the Township were formulated. These goals are found in Section I1 B of this "Plan". Using these goals, the Township established a general growth pattern for the new Comprehensive Plan. The growth pattern favors development against the boundaries of the adjacent Borough of Hellertown and the City of Bethlehem. This Plan allows for the Township to preserve the natural resources and rural characteristics of the largest portion of the Township south and east of Hellertown. After the Comprehensive Plan is publicly reviewed, changed as necessary, and adopted, the actions to implement the "Plan" will be started. Land use controls such as zoning and subdivision codes will need to be revised. Onlot sewage regulations will need to be revised. Lot grading regulations and property maintenance regulations will need to be developed. At the same time, funding and financial planning will be needed to complement implementation. This process is ongoing. The Planning Commission recommends that the Council take action to adopt, revise, and implement the Comprehensive Plan. The Township would like to thank all the participants that have worked and cooperated to make this plan a working document. D:\LS-cah\LS99-14CompPlan\PlanS~unmary.wpdcah PS - 1 I 1 I I I INTRODUCTION I I I A. The Planning Process I B. Previous Planning Efforts C. Historic Prospective on the Comprehensive Plan I of 1977 1 D. Purpose of the Comprehensive Plan E. Importance of Plan Implementation 1 F. Lehigh Valley Planning Commission Role I G. The Lehigh Valley Comprehensive Plan I H. Regional Issues B I I I I. INTRODUCTION A. THE PLANNING PROCESS I This Comprehensive Plan provides Goals and Objectives for guiding the growth and preservation of Lower Saucon Township for the next ten (10) years. The value of this Plan will be in I measuring proposed changes in our community against the Plan's policies for Land Use, Transportation and Community Facilities, and Services. Each change in these areas should be evaluated against these questions: "Is it within the framework of our Comprehensive Plan?" or "Does it achieve the goals of our Comprehensive Plan?" The Lower Saucon Township Council, the Lower Saucon Township Planning Commission, and many residents have participated in formulating this Comprehensive Plan. The planning process was initiated in 1998 with a Township-wide survey. The Council and Planning Commission considered the following when preparing your Comprehensive Plan: 0 What are the wishes of our residents? 0 What do we want to preserve in Lower Saucon Township? 0 What do we want to change in Lower Saucon Township? 0 What are our Township's strong and weak points? 0 How do we build on our strengths and correct our weaknesses? B. PREVIOUS PLANNING EFFORTS Lower Saucon Township has a long history in planning for development and preservation. Lower Saucon Township adopted a Subdivision and Land Development Ordinance in 1958, a Zoning Ordinance in 1963, and a Comprehensive Plan in 1964. The last Comprehensive Plan was completed and adopted in 1977. This plan was updated in 1987. Based upon the 1987 Comprehensive Plan Update the Township updated their Zoning Ordinance in 1988. Since the major Zoning Ordinance revision in 1988, the Township has made minor amendments to the Zoning Ordinance to keep pace with the pressures of development and change. IA-1 This long history of planning is continued in this Comprehensive Plan update. The last twenty (20) years have witnessed intense development pressure on Lower Saucon Township and this pressure is expected to continue for an additional ten (10) years. The Lower Saucon Township Council intends to continue the planning process with the adoption of the Comprehensive Plan. The Plan will be followed by revisions to the Zoning Ordinance, revisions to the Subdivision and Land Development Ordinance and the adoption of other recommended Ordinances. C. HISTORIC PROSPECTIVE ON THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN OF 1977 The 1977 Comprehensive Plan was prepared to help manage development in the Township. This Plan was formally prepared in conjunction with both Fountain Hill Borough and Hellertown Borough. At that time, this type of joint planning effort was unique to Northampton County. It is hoped that more municipal cooperation in planning and implementation would result from this program. Many municipal problems and opportunities cross invisible boundary lines. The City of Bethlehem's Planning Bureau and the Salisbury Township Planning Commission were also contacted to ensure compatible land use planning, during the preparation of that 1977 Plan. The 1987 Update and this Year 2000 Plan Update are both based on this original three Municipalities' Comprehensive Plan. Both Hellertown and Fountain Hill still retain their primary roles as urban centers for the Region. Differences, however, exist between both urban centers. The Lower Saucon Comprehensive Plan shows that the Township offers a great variety of residential living areas. The eastern portion of the Township, largely characterized by wooded steep slopes, is shown as "Rural Limited Development Area" where single homes on large lots (two plus acres) are encouraged to retain the open rural and scenic character of this unique area of the Township. The area south of Hellertown and the western portion of the Township are shown as "Development Areas" with a variety of residential living areas. The areas immediately south and west of Hellertown are shown for apartment and other multi-family housing primarily because the areas are convenient to shopping, schools, parks and other services. Commercial areas are limited to Route 378, and to Route 412 just south of Hellertown. Recreation and leisure time areas are along Saucon Creek, other streams, a system of neighborhood parks, and a Community park at the Town Hall site. The schools in the Township are recommended as Education/Recreation Centers. IA-2 Hellertown retains a predominant residential character. Hellertown is planned as the major commercial center in the Saucon Valley. The renovated “Town Center” provides varied retail, office, service, municipal, and high density residential uses. Fountain Hill retains a very predominant residential character, emphasizing a variety of housing types that offer varied living environments. For example, single family homes on large (approximately one acre) lots planned for the steeply wooded areas in the southern portion of the Borough would contrast with the high rise apartment living environment planned along the Lehigh River in the northern portion. The regional hospital and health care land uses are located at Saint Luke‘s Hospital in Fountain Hill. Recreation/Leisure time areas include the Lechauweki Springs, the expanded Fountain Hill Park, a natural South Side Reservoir Area, a new neighborhood park near the Lehigh River, and the designation of schools as Education/Recreation Centers. Commercial and Industrial areas are largely limited to existing locations. A historic preservation area in the northern portion of the Borough is designated to preserve architecturally and historically significant buildings in this unique area of Fountain Hill. The Zoning/Land Use Plans for adjacent municipalities were investigated in preparing this update. For the most part, the Land Use Plan contained in this update is compatible with that of the adjacent municipalities.
Recommended publications
  • A Taxonomic Revision of Rhododendron L. Section Pentanthera G

    A Taxonomic Revision of Rhododendron L. Section Pentanthera G

    A TAXONOMIC REVISION OF RHODODENDRON L. SECTION PENTANTHERA G. DON (ERICACEAE) BY KATHLEEN ANNE KRON A DISSERTATION PRESENTED TO THE GRADUATE SCHOOL OF THE UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA 1987 , ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I gratefully acknowledge the supervision and encouragement given to me by Dr. Walter S. Judd. I thoroughly enjoyed my work under his direction. I would also like to thank the members of my advisory committee, Dr. Bijan Dehgan, Dr. Dana G. Griffin, III, Dr. James W. Kimbrough, Dr. Jonathon Reiskind, Dr. William Louis Stern, and Dr. Norris H. Williams for their critical comments and suggestions. The National Science Foundation generously supported this project in the form of a Doctoral Dissertation Improvement Grant;* field work in 1985 was supported by a grant from the Highlands Biological Station, Highlands, North Carolina. I thank the curators of the following herbaria for the loan of their material: A, AUA, BHA, DUKE, E, FSU, GA, GH, ISTE, JEPS , KW, KY, LAF, LE NCSC, NCU, NLU NO, OSC, PE, PH, LSU , M, MAK, MOAR, NA, , RSA/POM, SMU, SZ, TENN, TEX, TI, UARK, UC, UNA, USF, VDB, VPI, W, WA, WVA. My appreciation also is offered to the illustrators, Gerald Masters, Elizabeth Hall, Rosa Lee, Lisa Modola, and Virginia Tomat. I thank Dr. R. Howard * BSR-8601236 ii Berg for the scanning electron micrographs. Mr. Bart Schutzman graciously made available his computer program to plot the results of the principal components analyses. The herbarium staff, especially Mr. Kent D. Perkins, was always helpful and their service is greatly appreciated.
  • Hydrogeology and Ground-Water Quality of Northern Bucks County, Pennsylvania

    Hydrogeology and Ground-Water Quality of Northern Bucks County, Pennsylvania

    HYDROGEOLOGY AND GROUND-WATER QUALITY OF NORTHERN BUCKS COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA by Ronald A. Sloto and Curtis L Schreftier ' U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Water-Resources Investigations Report 94-4109 Prepared in cooperation with NEW HOPE BOROUGH AND BRIDGETON, BUCKINGHAM, NOCKAMIXON, PLUMSTEAD, SOLEBURY, SPRINGFIELD, TINICUM, AND WRIGHTSTOWN TOWNSHIPS Lemoyne, Pennsylvania 1994 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR BRUCE BABBITT, Secretary U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Gordon P. Eaton, Director For additional information Copies of this report may be write to: purchased from: U.S. Geological Survey Earth Science Information Center District Chief Open-File Reports Section U.S. Geological Survey Box 25286, MS 517 840 Market Street Denver Federal Center Lemoyne, Pennsylvania 17043-1586 Denver, Colorado 80225 CONTENTS Page Abstract....................................................................................1 Introduction ................................................................................2 Purpose and scope ..................................................................... 2 Location and physiography ............................................................. 2 Climate...............................................................................3 Well-numbering system................................................................. 4 Borehole geophysical logging............................................................4 Previous investigations ................................................................. 6 Acknowledgments....................................................................
  • Loudoun County African-American Historic Architectural Resources Survey

    Loudoun County African-American Historic Architectural Resources Survey

    Loudoun County African-American Historic Architectural Resources Survey Lincoln "Colored" School, 1938. From the Library of Virginia: School Building Services Photograph Collection. Prepared by: History Matters, LLC Washington, DC September 2004 Sponsored by the Loudoun County Board of Supervisors & The Black History Committee of the Friends of the Thomas Balch Library Leesburg, VA Loudoun County African-American Historic Architectural Resources Survey Prepared by: Kathryn Gettings Smith Edna Johnston Megan Glynn History Matters, LLC Washington, DC September 2004 Sponsored by the Loudoun County Board of Supervisors & The Black History Committee of the Friends of the Thomas Balch Library Leesburg, VA Loudoun County Department of Planning 1 Harrison Street, S.E., 3rd Floor Leesburg, VA 20175 703-777-0246 Table of Contents I. Abstract 4 II. Acknowledgements 5 III. List of Figures 6 IV. Project Description and Research Design 8 V. Historic Context A. Historic Overview 10 B. Discussion of Surveyed Resources 19 VI. Survey Findings 56 VII. Recommendations 58 VIII. Bibliography 62 IX. Appendices A. Indices of Surveyed Resources 72 B. Brief Histories of Surveyed Towns, Villages, Hamlets, 108 & Neighborhoods C. African-American Cemeteries in Loudoun County 126 D. Explanations of Historic Themes 127 E. Possible Sites For Future Survey 130 F. Previously Documented Resources with Significance to 136 Loudoun County’s African-American History 1 Figure 1: Map of Loudoun County, Virginia with principal roads, towns, and waterways. Map courtesy of the Loudoun County Office of Mapping. 2 Figure 2. Historically African-American Communities of Loudoun County, Virginia. Prepared by Loudoun County Office of Mapping, May 15, 2001 (Map #2001-015) from data collected by the Black History Committee of the Friends of Thomas Balch Library, Leesburg, Va.
  • HIGH ALLEGHENY PLATEAU ECOREGIONAL PLAN: FIRST ITERATION Conservation Science Support—Northeast and Caribbean

    HIGH ALLEGHENY PLATEAU ECOREGIONAL PLAN: FIRST ITERATION Conservation Science Support—Northeast and Caribbean

    HIGH ALLEGHENY PLATEAU ECOREGIONAL PLAN: FIRST ITERATION Conservation Science Support—Northeast and Caribbean The High Allegheny Plan is a first iteration, a scientific assessment of the ecoregion. As part of the planning process, other aspects of the plan will be developed in future iterations, along with updates to the ecological assessment itself. These include fuller evaluations of threats to the ecoregion, constraints on conservation activities, and implementation strategies. CSS is now developing a standard template for ecoregional plans, which we have applied to the HAL first iteration draft report, distributed in 2002. Some of the HAL results have been edited or updated for this version. Click on the navigation pane to browse the report sections. What is the purpose of the report template? The purpose of creating a standard template for ecoregional plans in the Northeast is twofold: — to compile concise descriptions of methodologies developed and used for ecoregional assessment in the Northeast. These descriptions are meant to meet the needs of planning team members who need authoritative text to include in future plan documents, of science staff who need to respond to questions of methodology, and of program and state directors looking for material for general audience publications. — to create a modular resource whose pieces can be selected, incorporated in various formats, linked to in other documents, and updated easily. How does the template work? Methods are separated from results in this format, and the bulk of our work has gone into the standard methods sections. We have tried to make each methods section stand alone. Every section includes its own citation on the first page.
  • Thenorthforkofbenscre

    Thenorthforkofbenscre

    TTHHEE NNOORRTTHH FFOORRKK OOFF BBEENNSS CCRREEEEKK COLDWATER CONSERVATIION PLAN February 2014 PREPARED BY THE SOMERSET CONSERVATIION DIISTRIICT 1 Acknowledgements This plan was funded and developed by a grant awarded to the Somerset Conservation District by the Cold Water Heritage Partnership, which is a multifaceted joint venture between the Pennsylvania State Council of Trout Unlimited, The Foundation for Pennsylvania Watersheds, The Pennsylvania Department of Conservation and Natural Resources and The Pennsylvania Fish and Boat Commission. Author: Greg Shustrick, Somerset County Watershed Specialist GIS mapping: Amanda Deal Kind regards to the following contributors for their assistance with the plan development: o Mr. Richard Lorson, PFBC SW Region 8 Area Fisheries Manager o Mr. Michael Depew, PFBC Fisheries Biologist o Mr. Scott Alexander, PADEP Biologist o Mr. Len Lichvar, Somerset Conservation District Manager o Mr. Drew Walker, Somerset Conservation District Intern o Ms. Amanda Deal, Environmental Consultant o Ms. Samantha Kutskel, Coldwater Resource Specialist, PATU / CWP o Mr. James Shustrick, Public Volunteer o Mr. Chris Mahla, Public Volunteer o Mr. Travis Rudge, Public Volunteer o Mr. Andy Fresch, Public Volunteer o The Mountain Laurel Chapter of Trout Unlimited o The Greater Johnstown Water Authority o The Bens Creek Canoe Club SOMERSET CONSERVATION DISTRICT, 6024 GLADES PIKE, SOMERSET, PA 15501 www.somersetcd.com , 814.445.4652 X 5 [email protected] *Digital copies of this plan can be downloaded on the District’s website
  • To Middle Silurian) in Eastern Pennsylvania

    To Middle Silurian) in Eastern Pennsylvania

    The Shawangunk Formation (Upper OrdovicianC?) to Middle Silurian) in Eastern Pennsylvania GEOLOGICAL SURVEY PROFESSIONAL PAPER 744 Work done in cooperation with the Pennsylvania Depa rtm ent of Enviro nm ental Resources^ Bureau of Topographic and Geological Survey The Shawangunk Formation (Upper Ordovician (?) to Middle Silurian) in Eastern Pennsylvania By JACK B. EPSTEIN and ANITA G. EPSTEIN GEOLOGICAL SURVEY PROFESSIONAL PAPER 744 Work done in cooperation with the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Resources, Bureau of Topographic and Geological Survey Statigraphy, petrography, sedimentology, and a discussion of the age of a lower Paleozoic fluvial and transitional marine clastic sequence in eastern Pennsylvania UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE, WASHINGTON : 1972 UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR ROGERS C. B. MORTON, Secretary GEOLOGICAL SURVEY V. E. McKelvey, Director Library of Congress catalog-card No. 74-189667 For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office Washington, D.C. 20402 - Price 65 cents (paper cover) Stock Number 2401-2098 CONTENTS Page Abstract _____________________________________________ 1 Introduction __________________________________________ 1 Shawangunk Formation ___________________________________ 1 Weiders Member __________ ________________________ 2 Minsi Member ___________________________________ 5 Lizard Creek Member _________________________________ 7 Tammany Member _______________________________-_ 12 Age of the Shawangunk Formation _______ __________-___ 14 Depositional environments and paleogeography _______________ 16 Measured sections ______________________________________ 23 References cited ________________________________________ 42 ILLUSTRATIONS Page FIGURE 1. Generalized geologic map showing outcrop belt of the Shawangunk Formation in eastern Pennsylvania and northwestern New Jersey ___________________-_ 3 2. Stratigraphic section of the Shawangunk Formation in the report area ___ 3 3-21. Photographs showing 3. Conglomerate and quartzite, Weiders Member, Lehigh Gap ____ 4 4.
  • Route of Meriwether Lewis from Harpers Ferry, Va. to Pittsburgh, Pa

    Route of Meriwether Lewis from Harpers Ferry, Va. to Pittsburgh, Pa

    Route of Meriwether Lewis from Harpers Ferry, Va. to Pittsburgh, Pa. July 8 – July 15, 1803 by David T. Gilbert National Park Service Harpers Ferry, West Virginia May 5, 2003 (Revised September 28, 2015) Introduction The route which Meriwether Lewis traveled from Harpers Ferry, Virginia to Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, between July 8 and July 15, 1803, has not been well documented 1. The only primary source we have is a letter Lewis penned to President Jefferson from Harpers Ferry on July 8, 1803: I shall set out myself in the course of an hour, taking the route of Charlestown, Frankfort, Uniontown and Redstone old fort to Pittsburgh, at which place I shall most probably arrive on the 15th.2 Route of Meriwether Lewis July 8-July 15, 1803 Pittsburgh R Elizabeth E V I Petersons R Brownsville Pennsylvania O I H (Redstone old fort) O Uniontown Farmington POT OMA Cumberland C R IV Grantsville E M R O Maryland Forks of N Cacapon Harpers O N Fort Ashby Ferry G Brucetown A (Frankfort) H E Gainesboro L A Winchester R I West Virginia V Charles Town E R Virginia 1. With the exception of quoted primary sources, this document uses the contemporary spelling, Harpers Ferry, and not the 19th century spelling, Harper’s Ferry. Harpers Ferry was part of Virginia until June 20, 1863, when the state of West Virginia was created by Presidential Proclamation. 2. Meriwether Lewis to Thomas Jefferson, July 8, 1803, quoted in Donald Jackson,Letters of the Lewis and Clark Expedition, With Related Documents, 1783-1854 (Champaign, Illinois: University of Illinois Press, 1979), 106-107.
  • View of Valley and Ridge Structures from ?:R Stop IX

    View of Valley and Ridge Structures from ?:R Stop IX

    GIJIDEBOOJ< TECTONICS AND. CAMBRIAN·ORDO'IICIAN STRATIGRAPHY CENTRAL APPALACHIANS OF PENNSYLVANIA. Pifftbutgh Geological Society with the Appalachian Geological Society Septembet, 1963 TECTONICS AND CAMBRIAN -ORDOVICIAN STRATIGRAPHY in the CENTRAL APPALACHIANS OF PENNSYLVANIA FIELD CONFERENCE SPONSORS Pittsburgh Geological Society Appalachian Geological Society September 19, 20, 21, 1963 CONTENTS Page Introduction 1 Acknowledgments 2 Cambro-Ordovician Stratigraphy of Central and South-Central 3 Pennsylvania by W. R. Wagner Fold Patterns and Continuous Deformation Mechanisms of the 13 Central Pennsylvania Folded Appalachians by R. P. Nickelsen Road Log 1st day: Bedford to State College 31 2nd day: State College to Hagerstown 65 3rd day: Hagerstown to Bedford 11.5 ILLUSTRATIONS Page Wagner paper: Figure 1. Stratigraphic cross-section of Upper-Cambrian 4 in central and south-central Pennsylvania Figure 2. Stratigraphic section of St.Paul-Beekmantown 6 rocks in central Pennsylvania and nearby Maryland Nickelsen paper: Figure 1. Geologic map of Pennsylvania 15 Figure 2. Structural lithic units and Size-Orders of folds 18 in central Pennsylvania Figure 3. Camera lucida sketches of cleavage and folds 23 Figure 4. Schematic drawing of rotational movements in 27 flexure folds Road Log: Figure 1. Route of Field Trip 30 Figure 2. Stratigraphic column for route of Field Trip 34 Figure 3. Cross-section of Martin, Miller and Rankey wells- 41 Stops I and II Figure 4. Map and cross-sections in sinking Valley area- 55 Stop III Figure 5. Panorama view of Valley and Ridge structures from ?:r Stop IX Figure 6. Camera lucida sketch of sedimentary features in ?6 contorted shale - Stop X Figure 7- Cleavage and bedding relationship at Stop XI ?9 Figure 8.
  • Direct Protection Areas

    Direct Protection Areas

    Thorn Junction Benbow Knob, The 6486 ' EEL Panther Peak R, S FK Windy Mountain Shasta-Trinity 1862 ' 7081 ' Thorn E Vinegar Peak Schofield Peak Six Rivers E L 6549 ' 1992 ' R FK , Little Butte , M M N R Booth Knoll EEL A F B K 5632 ' E T 2427 ' A T Shelter Cove R O C L HUMBOLDT R E Walker Butte K Hopkins Peak , E S R K F 2404 ' A 6749 ' K Reed Mountain W Round Mountain E Sugarloaf Mountain Chamisal Mountain Whitethorn Beall Place 3101 ' R A E L Pilot Peak K 5000 ' L 7367 ' Harvey Peak E A Big Butte R 2598 ' E C Brush Mountain , 4092 ' R 5922 ' M 7361 ' 4200 ' F Island Mountain K D CR Linn, Mount Linn Mount Lake Mountain , N EA IL Moose Peak F F G 8092 ' 2467 ' 3851 ' K O TRINITY 1787 ' LM Oven Lid BA South Yolla Bolly South Yolla Bolly Mountains 6662 ' E Island Mountain L Solomon Peak 2460 ' D 3286 ' 8092 ' E Cooks Valley 7581 ' R C Horse Ranch Peak R, N Twin Peaks FK K 4156 ' F Nielson Place S 7403 ' , R EEL R, L N FK E E Hammerhorn Mountain 7563 ' Noble Butte Andersonia 2435 ' EE L R, Little Butte S FK, E Wildhorse Peak BR 1800 ' R 3564 ' C Piercy Table Rock IS H R F AN C Ramsey 3360 ' DI Island Mountain Delmonico Place IN 3847 ' Bald Mountain Bell Springs Mountain 3938 ' 3861 ' Mina EE L R, M FK Bell Springs R Ball Rock C S Griffin Place 6663 ' Camel Rock E Castle Peak M 3837 ' O 6216 ' Steuben Place High Tip E H E T L R 372 ' , S Mitchell Place F R K L Cold Springs Workcenter Kenny E E Red Rock 6050 ' TEHAMA Red Mountain Little Baldy Beaver Glade Fire Station 4095 ' 3646 ' Pratt Place Buck Mountain Leech Lake Mountain Ball Mountain
  • Description of the Hollidaysburg and Huntingdon Quadrangles

    Description of the Hollidaysburg and Huntingdon Quadrangles

    DESCRIPTION OF THE HOLLIDAYSBURG AND HUNTINGDON QUADRANGLES By Charles Butts INTRODUCTION 1 BLUE RIDGE PROVINCE topography are therefore prominent ridges separated by deep SITUATION The Blue Ridge province, narrow at its north end in valleys, all trending northeastward. The Hollidaysburg and Huntingdon quadrangles are adjoin­ Virginia and Pennsylvania, is over 60 miles wide in North RELIEF ing areas in the south-central part of Pennsylvania, in Blair, Carolina. It is a rugged region of hills and ridges and deep, The lowest point in the quadrangles is at Huntingdon, Bedford, and Huntingdon Counties. (See fig. 1.) Taken as narrow valleys. The altitude of the higher summits in Vir­ where the altitude of the river bed is about 610 feet above sea ginia is 3,000 to 5,700 feet, and in western North Carolina 79 level, and the highest point is the southern extremity of Brush Mount Mitchell, 6,711 feet high, is the highest point east of Mountain, north of Hollidaysburg, which is 2,520 feet above the Mississippi River. Throughout its extent this province sea level. The extreme relief is thus 1,910 feet. The Alle­ stands up conspicuously above the bordering provinces, from gheny Front and Dunning, Short, Loop, Lock, Tussey, Ter­ each of which it is separated by a steep, broken, rugged front race, and Broadtop Mountains rise boldly 800 to 1,500 feet from 1,000 to 3,000 feet high. In Pennsylvania, however, above the valley bottoms in a distance of 1 to 2 miles and are South Mountain, the northeast end of the Blue Ridge, is less the dominating features of the landscape.
  • Environmental Conservation Plan

    Environmental Conservation Plan

    ENVIRONMENTAL CONSERVATION PLAN ENVIRONMENTAL CONSERVATION PLAN Salisbury Township includes extremely important natural resources, including the mostly wooded Lehigh and South Mountains. The hydrology and other natural resources of Salisbury have great impacts upon the quality and quantity of groundwater and surface waters in the region. In particular, where groundwater reaches the surface at springs and seeps, it greatly impacts creeks and rivers and feeds into wetlands and other habitats. Salisbury Township is a stopping point for a wide variety of migratory birds, and a home and breeding grounds for many other species of birds and wildlife. Salisbury Township includes the headwaters of the Saucon and Trout Creeks. The Trout Creek and many other areas drain to the Little Lehigh Creek, which is a major drinking water source for Salisbury and Allentown. Other areas in drain directly to the Lehigh River. The mountains and areas at the base of the mountains are particularly critical for recharge of the groundwater supplies. The Lehigh County Conservation District in 2011 completed a Natural Resource Inventory (NRI) for Salisbury Township. That effort provided detailed mapping and analysis of many natural resources, including water resources, water quality, birds and habitats. A full copy of that report is available on the Township’s website. Prime Agricultural Soils The United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) rates soil types for their ability to support crop farming. Soils most conducive to producing food and sustaining high crop yields are given the designation of “prime” and are rich in nutrients, well drained and permeable, as well as resistant to erosion. Prime agricultural soils typically have gently rolling to flat topography.
  • Wild Trout Waters (Natural Reproduction) - September 2021

    Wild Trout Waters (Natural Reproduction) - September 2021

    Pennsylvania Wild Trout Waters (Natural Reproduction) - September 2021 Length County of Mouth Water Trib To Wild Trout Limits Lower Limit Lat Lower Limit Lon (miles) Adams Birch Run Long Pine Run Reservoir Headwaters to Mouth 39.950279 -77.444443 3.82 Adams Hayes Run East Branch Antietam Creek Headwaters to Mouth 39.815808 -77.458243 2.18 Adams Hosack Run Conococheague Creek Headwaters to Mouth 39.914780 -77.467522 2.90 Adams Knob Run Birch Run Headwaters to Mouth 39.950970 -77.444183 1.82 Adams Latimore Creek Bermudian Creek Headwaters to Mouth 40.003613 -77.061386 7.00 Adams Little Marsh Creek Marsh Creek Headwaters dnst to T-315 39.842220 -77.372780 3.80 Adams Long Pine Run Conococheague Creek Headwaters to Long Pine Run Reservoir 39.942501 -77.455559 2.13 Adams Marsh Creek Out of State Headwaters dnst to SR0030 39.853802 -77.288300 11.12 Adams McDowells Run Carbaugh Run Headwaters to Mouth 39.876610 -77.448990 1.03 Adams Opossum Creek Conewago Creek Headwaters to Mouth 39.931667 -77.185555 12.10 Adams Stillhouse Run Conococheague Creek Headwaters to Mouth 39.915470 -77.467575 1.28 Adams Toms Creek Out of State Headwaters to Miney Branch 39.736532 -77.369041 8.95 Adams UNT to Little Marsh Creek (RM 4.86) Little Marsh Creek Headwaters to Orchard Road 39.876125 -77.384117 1.31 Allegheny Allegheny River Ohio River Headwater dnst to conf Reed Run 41.751389 -78.107498 21.80 Allegheny Kilbuck Run Ohio River Headwaters to UNT at RM 1.25 40.516388 -80.131668 5.17 Allegheny Little Sewickley Creek Ohio River Headwaters to Mouth 40.554253 -80.206802