Quick viewing(Text Mode)

WHARTON TOWNSHIP Fayette County, Pennsylvania

WHARTON TOWNSHIP Fayette County, Pennsylvania

. WHARTON TOWNSHIP Fayette County,

COMPREHENSIVE PLAN I I I

Prepared for: WHARTON TOWNSHIP BOARD OF SUPERVISORS WHARTON TOWNSHIP PLANNING COMMISSION

Prepared by: RICHARD C. SUTTER & ASSOCIATES, INC. Comprehensive PlannersLand PlannersEIistoric Preservation Planners The Manor House, PO Box 564 Hollidaysburg, Pennsylvania 16648

1996- 1997 1 .. I December 31. 1997 I Wharton Township Board of Supervisors POBox 1 I Farmington, Pennsylv.ania 15437 I Attention: Mr. James L. Means, President RE: COMPREHENSIVE PLAN FOR WHARTON TOWNSHIP, FAYETTE COUNTY I Ladies and Gentlemen: Attached kindly find the Comprehensive Plan for Wharton Township. This Plan represents the I cooperative efforts of the Wharton Township Board of Supervisors, the Wharton Township Planning Commission, and the Community Planning firm of Richard C. Sutter and Associates, Inc. over the I past twenty four (24) months. This Comprehensive Plan is intended to act as a guide upon which elected public officials can base their everyday planning and development decisions in such a manner as to insure the future orderly I growth and development of Wharton Township. The Plan cannot be looked upon as a static document but rather as a flexible guide for revitalization and development of the Township which I must be refined as changes in community conditions and attitudes occur over time. In subsequent phases of the planning program, an ongoing process of plan evaluation, updating, and refinement iI should be conducted plus an ongoing process of plan implementation should be initiated. Speaking upon behalf of my associates and me, we have thoroughly enjoyed this most challenging undertalung and look forward to the initiation of the next phase of the Planning Program, that of the I preparation of implementation strategies and ordinances. I With best personal regards Very truly yours,

I RICHARD C. SUTTER AND ASSOCIATES, INC. I Comprehensive PlannersKand Plannerflistoric Preservation Planners

Richard C. Sutter, AJCP I President

I xc: Pennsylvania Department of Community and Economic Development (DCED) I RICHARD C. SUlTER and ASSOCIATES Inc. Comprehensive Planners I Land Planners I Historic Preservation Planners I The Manor House, P.O. Box 564 Hollidaysburg, Pennsylvania 16648 814-695-7577 Fax 81 4-695-80i2 TABLE OF CONTENTS I ~. Page # TITLE PAGE I 1 TRANSMITTAL LETTER .. I 11 TABLE OF CONTENTS ... 111 LIST OF MAPS I V I LIST OF TABLES vi ACKNOWLEDGMENTS vii I BACKGROUND STUDY: PHASE I

I A. HISTORICAL, CULTURAL, AND RECREATIONAL RESOURCES 1 I B. PHYSIOGRAPHY 11 C. LAND USE 17

I D. HOUSING 21a I E. POPULATION 29 F. ECONOMIC 42

I G. TRANSPORTATION 5 la I H. COMMUNITY FACILITIES AND PUBLIC UTILITIES 59 I. MUNICIPAL FINANCE 62 I COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: PHASE II

I A. COMMUNITY GOALS AND OBJECTIVES STATEMENT 69 I B. FUTURE LAND USE PLAN 72 C. HOUSINGPLAN 75 I I ... 111 I TABLE OF CONTENTS (Contd.) I Page #

D. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PLAN 80 I E. TRANSPORTATION PLAN 82 I F. COMMUNITY FACILITIES AND PUBLIC UTILITIES PLAN 84

G. ENVIRONMENTAL PLAN 86 I H. PLAN COMPONENTS INTERRELATIONSHIP STATEMENT 90 1 I. CONTIGUOUS MUNICIPALITIES STATEMENT 91

J. IMPLEMENTATION TOOLS AND STRATEGIES 92 I WELLHEAD AND SPRINGHEAD PROTECTION ORDINANCE I I a I I I I I I I I

iv .- LIST OF MAPS

I MAP # TITLE FOLLOWING PAGE #'S I BACKGROUND STUDY: PHASE I I 1 HISTORIC WHARTON TOWNSHIP IN 1872 3 2 HISTOlUC, CULTURAL AND RECREATIONAL RESOURCES 5

I 3 GEOLOGY 12 I 4 SLOPE 13 5 GENERAL SOILS 14

I 6 PRIME AGRICULTURAL AND HYDRIC SOILS 15 I 7 FLOOD PLAIN AND WETLANDS 15 I 8 EXISTING LAND USE 17 9 TRAFFIC VOLUMES 55 11 10 COMMUNITY FACILITIES 59 11 PUBLIC UTILITIES 1 A. Public Water Service Area 60 B Existing Sewer Service Areas 60

I COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: PHASE I1 I 12 FUTURE LAND USE 74 13 FUTURE TRANSPORTATION 83

I 14 FUTURE COMMUNITY FACILITIES 85 I 15 FUTURE PUBLIC UTILITIES A. Future Water Service Area 85 I . B. . Future Sewer Service Area 85 16 DEVELOPMENTAL CONSTAINTS 89 11 i

V I LIST OF TABLES

TABLE # TITLE PAGE I A- 1 The National Register of Historic Places 6 I A-2 Wharton Township Resources Determined eligible for the National Register 6 A-3 Fayette County Heritage Development Plan identified 7 B- 1 Slope Categories 12 I c-1 General Existing Land Use Summary 20 D- 1 Basic Housing Stastics, 1990 22 D-2 Housing Values and Rent 24 I D-3 Length of Vacancy and Units in Structure 26 D-4 Detailed Housing Characteristics, 1990 28 E- 1 Summary of Demographic Characteristics 30 I E-2 Change in Major Demographic variables, 1980 to 1990 31 E-3 Age Structure of the Population, 1990 33 E-4 Household Structure and Living Situation 37 I E-5 Socio-Economic Characteristics 40 F- 1 Labor Force Characteristics 43 1 F-2 Employment by Occupation, 1990 45 F-3 Employment by Industry, 1990 46 F-4 Household Income Distribution, 1989 48 1 F-5 Poverty and Per Capita Incomes, 1990 50 G- 1 Average Daily Traffic Counts 55 G-2 Road Classification 56 1 G-3 PennDot Twelve Year Plan 57 I- 1 Revenue receipts, 1993-1997 63 1-2 Expenditures, 1993-1997 64 I 1-3 Revenue per Capita, 1993- 1996 65 1-4 Expenditures per Capita, 1993- 1996 65 I- 5 Tax rates, 1993-1996 65 I 1-6 Operating Position, 1993- 1996 66 I- 7 Rate of Change in Property Value, 67 I- 8 Fiscal Capacity, 1993-1996 67 I c-1 Project Cost Estimate Housing Rehabilitation Program 77 I LIST OF GRAPHS 1 GRAPH # TITLE PAGE

D- 1 Distribution of Value 25 I E- 1 Age Structure of the Population, 1990 34 E-2 Projected Population Growth, 20 10 35 F- 1 Income Distribution, 1990 49 I I

v1 I I ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Completion of a project as complex as the Comprehensive Plan for Wharton Township involves a variety of disciplines and much time and effort upon the part of those participanting in the I planning process. A number of people and the planning consulting firm have contributed to this plan. We would like to extend our acknowledgment and thanks to the following:

I Wharton Township Board of Supervisors

James C. Means, Chairman I John H. Lewis, Vice Chairman Joseph Henning Roger Baxter I Laura Savage, Secretary I Planning Commission Members Louis Cesarino I Alan George Robert A. Guerriere John Kopas I Donald E. Myers Charles H. Sherry, Jr William Watts I Scott Whyel I Solicitor: John Purcell, Esquire Public Participation:

~I Public Workshops Public Presentations ‘I Public Meetings Public Hearings

I This Project was Funded by: Pennsylvania Department of Community and Economic Development, I Office of Policy and Strategic Planning Small Communities Planning Assistance Program Grant (SCPAP)

I Planning Consultants:

Richard C. Sutter and Associates, Inc., ~I Comprehensive PlannersLand Planners/Historic Preservation Planners I

I vii PHASE I: BACKGROUND STUDIES

PHASE I: BACKGROUND STUDIES

The initial step in the Comprehensive Planning process is to assemble, compile, and analyze all of the data that is pertinent to the past, present, and future development of the community in a series of Background Studies. This process can be classified into a number of major categories. For this municipality, the following categories have been utilized: Historic and Cultural Resources, 1 Physiography, Land Use, Housing Analysis, Population Analysis, Economy Analysis, Transportation I Analysis, Community Facilities and Public Utilities, and Municipal Finances Analysis. A. HISTORIC AND CULTURAL RESOURCES HISTORIC, CULTURAL, AND RECREATIONAL RESOURCES1

The current character and resources of Wharton Township are a direct result of the historical development of the township. Wharton has experienced an eventful development period, and its existing resources -- historic, cultural, and scenic -- reflect that course of events. In addition, these resources provide today’s residents and visitors with numerous opportunities for active and passive recreation, and for education. Provided below is a brief account of the historical development of W harton Township, with a review of the historic, cultural, and recreational resources that continue to serve the area.

A Brief History of Wharton Township In the early and mid-eighteenth century, the area today known as Fayette County, Pennsylvania was a picturesque land of abundant natural resources, populated primarily by American Indians and visited by French and English fur traders and land speculators. The Company was organized in 1748 to promote settlement of the lands west of the Alleghenies, which included this area. The company engaged and Delaware Indian to clear a road to their land at the forks of the Ohio. This road passed east-west through what is now Wharton Township. (Another Indian path ran north-south through today’s township into West along the Big Sandy Creek.) Despite the efforts of the , land disputes and military conflicts resulted in only dispersed settlement. The earliest settlers of the county may have been Wendall Brown and his sons Manus, Ada, and Thomas, who were probably in the region by 175 1. They settled near the mouth of Jacob’s Creek in what is now Nicholson Township. Christopher Gist was another early settler. An agent of the Ohio Company and a friend of , he arrived in 1754 and settled in what is today Dunbar Township. Other early settlers included William Cromwell, William Stewart, and Hugh C rawford.

By the mid-eighteenth century, Great Britain and France began to compete for control of the lands at the headwaters of the Ohio kver. The French in the region responded to the English threat of colonization through the Ohio Company by constructing a series of forts from to the Ohio. This building campaign included the construction of , erected on the site of an English fort at the forks of the Ohio beginning in 1753. In that year George Washington was sent to warn the French off. He traveled the route forged by the Ohio Company, but was unsuccessful in his mission. Washington retreated and began construction of Fort Necessity while awaiting French retaliation. In

This history is based on information found in the following sources:Alas of the County of Fa-vene and the State of Pennqdvania. : G.M. Hopkins. 1872. Hedd. Sarah H. (ed.) Fa-vene County, Pennsylvania: An Inventory of Historic Engineering and Industrial Sites. Washington. DC: . 1990. Fuvette County Heritage Development Plan. Prepared by the Fay-Penn Economic Development Council and the Fayette County Heritage Committee, in association with the Southwestern Pennsylvania Heritage Preservation Commission. 1995. History of Fayette County Pennsylvania with Biographical Sketches. Philadelphia: H. Everts & Co.. 1882. &fanapementAction Plan Executive Summan,for the Heritage Park. Prepared by Rhodeside & Harwell. Inc.. 1994. Map of Fa-vette CounQ, P.4. Philadelphia: Wm. J. Baker. 1865. The National Road Special Resource Studv. Washington. DC: National Park Service. 1994. Nelson ‘s Biographical Dictionar-v and Historical Reference Book of Fayette Counw, Pennsylvania. Uniontown: S.B. Nelson. 1900. Southwestern Pennsylvania Partnership. 7’he National Road: The Wa-v West (National Road Heritage Park Interpretive Plan). For the National Road Heritage Park. 1995. neWestern Pennsylvania Region: Its Landscape, People, and Industry (Study of Alternatives). Washington. DC: National Park Service. 1994.

1 I the meantime, he continued to improve the Ohio Compiiny’s road. On July 3, The French defeated Washington at Forf Necessity; the French completed their mission by burning the fort. (The fort has been reconstructed and is the focal point of the Fort Necessity National Battlefield, which was listed on the National Register of Historic Places in 1966.) This event spurred the and, ultimately, the defeat of the French at Fort Duquelsne in 1755, led by Major General Edward Braddock. Braddock’s troops used the same road Washington had cleared, widening it for artillery and wagons. Consequently, the route became known as Braddock’s Road. Following French defeat, the colonists continued to struggle with American Indiams until the Battle of Bushy Run in 1763.

As the conflicts in the region were resolved toward the end of the eighteenth century, the abundant rivers and tributaries of the land drew settlers to the area. Patents were awarded for land in the area of Wharton Township as early as 1766. The Revolutionary War again served to retard settlement, but with the resolution of that conflict, westward travel and settlement increased. Braddock’s Road facilitated much of this westward advancement.

With this increased population in southwestern Pennsylvania, Fayette County (named for the French nobleman, the Marquis de La nyette, a supporter of American independence) was established from southern Westmoreland County in 1783. Wharton Township was one of the original townships of the county. At the end of the eighteenth century, Fayette County residents were primarily occupied with agrarian pursuits; isolated from eastern settlements by the , settlers soon diversified their interests and turned to grist milling anti the manufacture of iron, boats, and glass.

Because transporting grain to market was expensive and difficult in this part of Pennsylvania, many settlers also turned to distilling grain into whiskey, which could be transported much more easily and was much more profitable. The importance of the industry to the region was demonstrated in the , a resistance against the new tax on whiskey that began in Brownsville in 179 1. The rebellion ended in 1794, and as late as 1870, distillirig was one of the largest industries in Fayette County. Grain milling, a related industry, was second largest.

While distilling enjoyed top-ranking among the county’s industries, other industries were also important to the economy of Fayette County in the nineteenth century. Irm ore had been discovered by early surveyors and explorers, and the county was the site of the first iron fbrnace (Union Furnace) west of the Alleghenies. Because demand for iron products was so great, Fayette’s iron industry grew rapidly, and the county formed the core of Pennsylvania’s iron industry from 1789 until the early nineteenth century. Wharton Township contributed to the successful iron industry in the county. Wharton Furnace, in the western part of the Township, .was constructed in 1837 by Andrew Stewart. The &mace was originally constructed as a steam- and water-powered, cold-blast charcoal furnace measuring 32’ by 30’ by 32’ high. It first went into blast in 1839. The operation closed temporarily in 1850 due to the tariff of 1849, but re-opened to produce cannon balls for the Civil War. The system was later converted to hot blast, but closed permanently in 1872. Much of the difficulty in running the furnace was due to its isolated location. Without easy access to rail or water transportation, the rough roads of the day made transporting metal slow and costly. Restored in 1961-62, Wharton Furnace still stands approximately 1.8 miles south of IJS Route 40 on SR 2003.

Coal was also known in Southwestern Pennsylvania before the Revolution, and coke was burned in Fayette County early in the nineteenth century, but the coal resources were not exploited until nearly the middle of the nineteenth century. Successfbl beehive coke ovens were operating in the county beginning in 1843, and by 1860 the beehive oven industry was well established in Fayette. The

2 I 1 Connellsville coke region, in which Wharton is situated, contained some of the best coal in the nation ‘I for beehive coke manufacture. Transportation was another important industry in Fayette County and Wharton Township. As the nineteenth century approached, Americans were faced with the challenge of linking communities in the east with the western frontier, and recognized that the lack of well-defined routes for travel slowed the pace of settlement and the transport of goods. In 18 1 1, the unprecedented, federally-funded project to construct America’s first interstate highway began. Known as the National Road, it was laid out along Braddock’s Road, traversing Wharton Township, and was completed from Cumberland, to Brownsville in 1817 and to Wheeling in 1820. By 1840 the National Road was the busiest transportation route in America. It was completed to , Illinois in 1852.

Thousands of travelers used the National Road to reach new westward destinations. The traffic spurred development and improved economic conditions in the region. Inns, taverns, and commercial establishments were erected to serve the travelers, and numerous residences and villages sprung up along the route. One such residence in Wharton Township was constructed by Congressman Andrew Stewart in 1822. Later converted to a tavern, the structure still stands and is known as the Fayette Springs Hotel. The hotel was determined eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places in 1990. Just south of the hotel stands an original National Road milestone. In 183 1, responsibility for the road was turned over to the states, and Pennsylvania constructed six toll houses (including Searight’s Tollhouse in Fayette County) and erected cast iron mile markers. 1865 six hotels were constructed on the National Road in Wharton Township; in 1872 five hotels were operating. See Map 2.

Two settlements that emerged in Wharton Township as a direct result of activity on the National Road are Farmington and Chalk Hill. Farmington developed in the eastern part of the township. The first structure erected there was a log tavern. Later, two stores and two houses, then a post office, were constructed. Chalk Hill, situated northwest of Farmington, grew at a much slower rate.

In 1852, the completion of the line of the to using a route that bypassed Fayette County, served to slow development along the NationaLRoad. Consequently, from the second half of the nineteenth century, the National Road was used primarily for local traffic in Wharton Township. Though its use was somewhat diminished by the railroad, the National Road remained an important local resource and settlements along the route in the township showed expansion in the second half of the nineteenth century. In 1865 Farmington had a hotel, a church, a store, a saw mill and approximately ten other structures. In 1872 a school house and several residences were added. In 1865 the settlement at Chalk Hill included two hotels and a store. By 1872 one hotel remained in operation and a school house had been constructed. Today, US Route 40 follows much the same path as the National Road. In recognition of the significance of the road and the remaining National Road-era resources along the route, the National Road Heritage Park was established on April 28, 1994.

Other villages also emerged in other parts of Wharton Township in the nineteenth century; they developed primarily along waterways. Elliotsville, located near the center of the township at the junction of the roads to Haydentown and Uniontown on Big Sandy Creek, was recognized as the center of the Wharton Independent School District. The village was settled as early as 1817, when Benjamin Elliot built a sawmill and a flour mill. The settlement was named for S.D. Eliiot, who held a number of elected offices. In 1865 Elliotsville had a grist mill and five other structures. By 1872,

3 two sawmills and a card mill were in operation, and a school house had been constructed. -- Gibbon’s Glade, first called Sanbornton, was established in the southern part of Wharton Township 1 on Little Sandy Creek and Gibbon’s Glade Run. By 1tI47 a sawmill and a log house were erected by Samuel Morton, and in 1849 a flour mill was constructed by Christian Harader. In 1865 the 1 settlement included a grist mill, a store, and five othler structures. In 1875 the name of the settlement was changed to Gibbon’s Glade and in 1882 it possessed 5 dwellings, which were occupied by a miller, a farmer, a blacksmith, a distiller, and a clerk. I

By the turn of the nineteenth century, the township’s settlements remained strong. In 1900 Farmington was the home of the only doctor in the township, and had come to be regarded as a 1 pleasant summer resort, probably for the sulphur springs located in the area. The Chalk Hill Hotel was the only licensed hotel in the township in 1900. In that year Chalk Hill was still classified as a hamlet, but was considered to have great potential for growth. By 1899 Elliotsville had about a dozen 1 buildings, including a store, a flour mill, a schoolhouse, and a post office, and was considered a favorable location for business. By 1900 Gibbon’s Glade was recognized as a mercantile village with 13 buildings, including a sawmill and a post office. I Recreational Resources of Wharton Township 1 Recreation is an important and growing activity in Pennsylvania, in Fayette County, and in Wharton Township. Recreational resources not only provide benefits for physical and mental health, but can also have a significant economic impact. Recreation c8aninclude both active and passive activities. 1 Passive recreation might include sightseeing, nature watching, photography, walking and driving tours, short-term educational trips, and participation in. local festivals and other celebratory events. More active pursuits typically include hiking, biking, boating, and the like. The wide range of 1 activities, the proximity of varying types of resources in the township, and the wide range of modem interests suggest a strong tie between these existing resources and the potential for additional tourism and economic development. 1

Clearly, the subject of recreation is an extensive one, anti the discussion here is limited to large public outdoor spaces. In Wharton Township these resources include forest lands, natural areas, game lands, 1 waterways, and historic and cultural sites. Forest lands, natural areas, game lands, and waterways are described below. Historic and cultural sites are addressed in following sections. Smaller recreational 1 facilities, such as community parks, are addressed in the Community Facilities section of this report Forest Lands The Forbes State Forest is a vast resource situated primarily in the southern and I western sections of Wharton Township, south of Route 40. A variety of recreational activities are permitted within the forest, including hiking, biking, snowmobiling, horseback riding, bird watching, and photography. The Forbes State Forest is identified on Map # 2. I Natural Areas The Quebec Run Wildlife Area is contained within the Forbes State Forest in the southwestern comer of the township. This area offers opportunities to study native plant and animal 1 life, as well as walking, hiking, and photography.

Game Lands Deer hunting is a major social and recreational pastime in Wharton Township that I also has a significant economic impact. In addition to hunting, other compatible recreational uses are welcome on these game lands. Included within the township are portions of State Game Lands NO. 5 1, situated at the northern tip of the township, and a small portion of State Game Lands No. 138, I

I 4 I I WHARTON TOWNSHIP Comprehensive Plan Fayette County WHARTON TOWNSHIP

c IN 1872 ...*a

u *.T d' .- , i From: Atlas of the County of Fayette and the State of Pennsylvania, wHA published by G.M. Hopkins & Co. in Philadelphia in 1872.

'MAP1 b

RICHARD C. SUTTER and ASSOCIATES, Inc. Comprehensive PiannersRaml Planners Historic Preservation Planners I situated at the western border of the township. State Game Lands No. 265 are situated just beyond 1 the eastern border of the township. Park Lands Although no designated state parks are situated within the boundaries of Wharton Township, Ohiopyle State Park is situated just outside the township to the northeast. Ohiopyle serves I as a primary recreational resource for the township and the surrounding area.

Waterways The extensive number of streams distributed throughout Wharton Township make the I township extremely attractive to fishermen. The primary streams of the township are the Big Sandy Creek, the Little Sandy Creek, Meadow Run, and Beaver Creek.

1 Overnight Facilities Due to the extensive recreational sites available in the region, a number of facilities in Wharton Township provide overnight accommodations. These include several 1 campground sites located within the Forbes State Forest and along Route 40. A number of motels and hotels are also located in the township; many of them are situated primarily along Route 40. In addition to acting as supportive amenities for the region's recreational sites, these campgrounds and I hotels also act as destinations in themselves.

Historic Preservation in Wharton Township 1 The historical development of Wharton Township has had a direct impact on the architectural and cultural resources of the area. The resources that stand in the township today clearly reflect the historical development of the township and impart a unique character to the township -- a character I that can benefit the township visually, socially, and economically. Although the scope of this work does not allow for the creation of a full Historic Preservation Plan for Wharton Township, the number of existing historic resources and heritage related activities recently completed or currently under way I in the township warrant a brief review. Such a review should be used by the Township as a starting point for establishing a comprehensive historic preservation plan that addresses each significant i resource, while taking advantage of the research and planning Completed to date, and capitalizing upon activities already under way.

I Identification of Historic Township Resources One of the first steps in preservation planning is the identification of existing historic resources. Wharton Township benefits from having this step already complete. The identification of these resources exists primarily in two locations. One is the 11 National Register of Historic Places. The other is the Fayette County Heritage Plan. Table A-1 lists the resources located in Wharton Township that are listed on the National Register of Historic Places. 'I Table A-2 lists the township resources that have been determined eligible for the National Register. The National Register of Historic Places The National Register of Historic Places is a computerized listing, maintained by the National Park Service of the Federal Department of the 1 Interior, of properties that are officially recognized as having historic, architectural, archeological, engineering, or cultural significance, at the national, state, or local level. The greatest advantage in the creation of a National Register Historic District is its serving as a formal public declaration that I historic resources, and the conservation of those resources, are important to the community. National Register listing can also provide added credibility to municipal efforts that seek to enhance and I preserve historic places. Listing on the Register also encourages the rehabilitation of income- producing historic properties that meet preservation standards, by offering tax incentives. Listing on the National Register does not restrict the rights of private property owners in the use, development, I or sale of private historic property. Only local historic districts, enacted by local ordinance and

5 I controlled by a municipality, can control alterations, demolition, and new construction; and, this is usually done with the input of interested citizens. The oinly protection offered by National Register listing is in the provision of a review of federally funded projects that may affect listed or eligible I properties. This review does not mean that federal, state, local, or private projects will necessarily be stopped. I TABLE A-1 I I I 1 I

early charcoal iron furnace. and an important part of the industrial I I 1 TABLE A-2

WHARTON TOWNSHIP RIESOURCES I DETERMINED ELIGIBLE FOR THE NATIONAL REGISTER LOCATION DATE OF LISTING Braddock Inn S 40. 1 mile east of Chalk Hill 12/10/90 I Downer House 'VS 40 at Chalk Hill 10/24/90 Fayette Springs Hotel US 40. % mile east of Chalk Hill 1O/24/90 I Samuel Fraser Tavern US 40 at Fdgton 10/2U90 Rush Service Station US 40 at Farmington 12/10/90 Ft. Necessity Monument US 40, 1 mile west of Farmington 12/20/90 I I I I

6 I

w The National Road Heritage Park: The National Road Heritage Park extends along US Route 40 through Fayette County and beyond. The park was established in 1994 and is I currently being‘developed around the history of the National Road, particularly as a gateway to the American West, and around historic towns and sites. The heritage plan identifies the I park as one of the county’s four most important resources, and indicates that the park has great potential to make a significant economic impact in the county.

I ’ The Fort Necessity National Battlefield: The Fort Necessity National Battlefield is located on US Route 40 at Farmington. The park commemorates the events surrounding the start of the French and Indian War, particularly the only military surrender of George I Washington, which occurred at his “fort of necessity” built at this location. The current fort is a reconstruction.

I The Fayette County Heritage Development Plan also identified a number of other projects located throughout the county that should be considered for future development. Those proposed projects I situated in Wharton Township are listed in Table A-3. l TABLE A-3 FAYETTE COUNTY HERITAGE DEVELOPMENT PLAN I IDENTIFIED HISTORIC RESOURCES IN WHARTON TOWNSHIP I I. i I I I

I Source: The Fayette County Heritage Development Plan. 1995

The Southwestern Pennsylvania Heritage Preservation CommissiodPath of Progress The I Southwestern Pennsylvania Heritage Preservation Commission (SPHPC) works to organize the diverse natural, scenic, and historic sites of Southwestern Pennsylvania into a coherent whole, and does so primarily by two methods. One method is the Path of Progress, the other is the Pennsylvania I Heritage Parks. The Path of Progress is a driving tour route that connects heritage sites in nine

7 counties in Southwestern Pennsylvania. The Path of I?rogress passes through Wharton Township along US Route 40 (the National Road), and an extensioln of the Path includes a portion of Route 38 1 north of US Route 40. The Pennsylvania Heritage Parks Program seeks to establish and maintain 1 parks that preserve and enhance the natural, scenic, cultural, and recreational resources of the region, while providing visitors with interpretive and educational opportunities focused on the industrial I heritage of the state. One of these parks is the National Road Heritage Park Corridor, which was established in 1994, includes a portion of Wharton Township, and is currently being developed. I The SPHPC encourages the development of resources into attractions that are a part of a comprehensive tourism development effort, and believes in maximizing the potential contribution of tourism to the local economy. The SPHPC funds heritage-related development projects and can I provide technical assistance for such projects. It has assisted in fbnding the Fayette County Heritage Development PZan and various projects related to the National Road Heritage Park. 1 Next Steps The Fayette County Heritage Development Plan identified the appropriate steps to be taken over the next ten years for both the National Road Heritage Park and the Fort Necessity National Battlefield. 1 The plan recommends that the implementation plan established in the 1994 Management I Action Plan for the National Road Heritage Park be followed. These plans include various interpretation, preservation, linkage, economic development, promotion and marketing, and education activities. An interpretive plan for tlhe National Road Heritage Park, called The I National Road Heritage Park: The Way West.,was also recently completed. It provides additional information and suggested strategies for developing the Fort Necessity/National Road Interpretive Center, the Mouth Washington Tavern, and the Mount Summit Inn. I

For additional National Road Project information, contact: National Road Heritage Park of Pennsylvania, Robert Grenoble, Executive Director, 6 1 East Main Street, Uniontown, PA I 15401, (412) 430-1248.

The Heritage Plan recommends that the Phase :I, 2, and 3 implementation plans established I in the General Management Plan for Fort Necessity National Battlefield be followed. Phase 1 is currently under way. It consists of the construction of a maintenance compledpark I headquarters, the construction and installation of wayside exhibits, and completion of research and study elements. Phase 2 includes the construction of a visitor center, the rehabilitation of the Mount Washington Tavern, the improvement of facilities at Jumonville Glen and at I Braddock’s grave site, the remodeling of the Great Meadows center, and the completion of research and studies. Phase 3 includes the construction of park housing, the removal of the existing ranger residence, the consolidation and improvement of picnic area facilities, the I reforestation of the hillside adjacent to the Great Meadows area, and research and studies.

For additional Fort Necessity National Battlefield information, contact: Marilyn Parris, I Superintendent, Fort Necessity National Battlefield, U.S. Department of the Interior, National Park Service, U.S. Route 40, Farmington, PA, (412) 329-5812. I Regarding the additional heritage resources identified by the plan and listed in Table A-3, the township should review this list carefully and add any resources that have not been included. Other priority actions regarding all the listed resources include: I

8 I Determining potential threats Ranking of resources Listing potential development scenarios Creating a Township Heritage Committee to oversee future development Seeking funding I Soliciting support I Initiating priority projects As suggested in the Heritage Plan, tourism marketability is a key issue to consider in the development of these heritage resources. Timeliness is also an important factor; capitalizing upon the momentum I created by the activities of the SPHPC and the National Road Heritage Park could greatly benefit the township.

I Summary of Findings Wharton Township possesses an interesting story of historical development, and retains numerous historic, cultural, and scenic resources that continue to tell that story. I Especially important segments of history in Wharton Township revolve around early military events and industrial development, particularly furnace-related iron production and transportation-related development along the National Road. I The township contains important forest lands, game lands, and waterways that are significant recreational resources. In coordination with historic and cultural resources, these sites have I potential for tourism and economic development. Three township resources have already been listed on the National Register of Historic Places. Six additional resources have been determined eligible for the National Register. The recently I completed Fqette Coiirity Heritage Development Pian identified thirteen heritage resources in Wharton Township. The National Road and the National Road Heritage Park are a primary resources that should I be capitalized upon by the township in a timely fashion. The township can continue the efforts begun by the Fayette County Heritage Committee by establishing a Wharton Township Heritage Committee to expand upon and address the I identification and treatment of resources identified in the Heritage Plan. The township’s efforts should be coordinated with other related and interested groups and organizations, including the Fayette County Heritage Committee, the Southwestern I Pennsylvania Heritage Preservation Commission, local historical societies, representatives of I the heritage sites, and other interested persons. I I 1 I

I 9 I I .. I I I I B. PHYSIOGRAPHY I I I I I I I I I I I I I PHYSIOGRAPHYz I .. This section of the Comprehensive Plan presents an analysis of the physical and environmental features of Wharton Township. Characteristics reviewed include geology, topography, slope, soils, I water resources, flood plains, wetlands, and natural resources, including mineral resources, forest land, game lands, and park land. A review of these basic characteristics is critical to forming and accurate determination of the potential for fbture development and for determining potential problems I with existing development in the Township. lI Geology The geologic structure of Wharton Township is composed primarily of the Allegheny Group and the Glenshaw Formation. The Allegheny Group is characterized by cyclic sequences of sandstone, shale, I limestone, clay, and coal. It includes valuable clay deposits and Vanport Limestone, and commercially valuable Freeport, Kittaning, and Broohille-Clarion coals. The base of the Allegheny Group is at the bottom of the Brookville-Clarion coal. The Glenshaw Formation is characterized by I cyclic sequences of shale, sandstone, red beds, and thin limestone and coal. It includes four marine limestone or shale horizons. The base of the formation is at the top of the Upper Freeport coal.

I Along the western edge of the township, the geologic structure is composed primarily of Burgoon Sandstone, which is interspersed with small deposits of the Shenango Formation through Oswayo Formation undivided, and is bordered on the east by a band of the Mauch Chunk Formation and the I Pottsville Group. Burgoon Sandstone is a buff, medium-grained, cross-bedded sandstone. In places, it contains plant fossils and conglomerate at the base. The Shenango Formation through Oswayo I Formation, undivided are characterized by greenish-gray, olive, and buff sandstone and siltstone, and gray shale in varying proportions. The Mauch Chunk Formation is characterized by grayish-red shale, siltstone, sandstone, and some conglomerate, with some local non-red zones. It includes Loyalhanna I Member, a cross-bedded sandy limestone, at the base, and Greenbrier, Wymps Gap, and Deer Valley Limestones. The Pottsville Group is a gray conglomerate, fine- to coarse-grained sandstone, and siltstone and shale containing minable anthracite coals. It includes three formations: Sharp Mountain I (conglomerate and conglomeratic sandstone), Schuylkill (sandstone and conglomeratic sandstone), and Tumbling Run (conglomeratic sandstone and sandstone). The geologic structure of the area is I illustrated on Map # 3. Topography Topography, the three-dimensional form of the land surface, is a direct result of the underlying 1 geologic structure and weathering conditions. Hard, resistant bedrock withstands wind and water I 2 meinformation presented in this section is based on the following sources: The Atlas of Pennsylvania. Philadelphia: Temple University Press, 1989. A Geography ofPennsylvania. University Park. PA: The Pennsylvania State I University, 1995. Thomas A. McElroy. Groundwater Resources of Fayerte County, Pennsylvania. Harrisburg: Pennsylvania Topographic and Geologic Swey, 1988. Pennsylvania Geological Survey. Coal and Surfuce Structure hlap of Fayette County, Pennsylvania. PA Geological Survey, 4th Series, Fayette County. 1938. US I Department of Agriculture. Soil Survey of Fayette Couny, Pennqlvania. 1973. Wharton Township Comprehensive Development Plan, 1978-79. Prepared by the Wharton Township Planning Commission and the Local Government I Research Corporation. 1979.

P 11 erosion and results in areas of high elevation and steep slopes. Softer rocks erode to form valleys and gently sloping land: . . I Wharton Township lies in the Appalachian Plateaus physiographic region of Pennsylvania, which is situated west of the Appalachian Front. An area of rolling uplands cut by deep, steep stream valleys, I the plateau’s surface is underlain by warped sedimentary rocks and is divided by numerous rivers and streams into valleys with knobby hills. The landscape of the Plateaus is an irregular one that is dominated by far-branching stream patterns. The folds of the Allegheny Plateaus in Wharton I Township run primarily in a northeast-southwest direction.

Fayette County has two distinct topographic settings corresponding to two physiographic sections of 1 the Appalachian Plateaus province. The western half of the county is situated in the Pittsburgh Plateaus section, and the eastern half of the county, including Wharton Township, is located in the Allegheny Mountain section. This section is characterized by prominent ridges and is delineated by I Chestnut Ridge on the west and Laurel Hill on the east:, with the Ligonier Valley lying in between. Chestnut Ridge also defines the western boundary of Wharton Township. The highest point of the ridge is 2,778 feet, at the Pondfield Two lookout tower lccated five miles south of Summit. The ridge I decreases in elevation to the north. The altitude of Laurel Hill increases to the north from approximately 2,300 feet at the Mason-Dixon Line to 2,994 in the northeastern comer of the county. 31 Slope Slope determines the areas in which construction can occur and the types of construction that are I feasible for particular locations. Slope also has a significant impact on excavation requirements, sewage requirements, and construction cost. Slope is expressed as a percentage; it is the inclination of the surface of the land relative to the horizontal datum. For example, one percent slope is I equivalent to a one foot vertical deviation over one hundred feet of horizontal distance. The following table presents the four major slope categories with their associated suitable development types. I TABLE B-It I I SLOPE CATEGOMES 1 I SLOPE I SUITABLE DEVELOPMENT USES 0-8% Generally economically capable of large scale or intensive land use I development, including but not limited to industrial areas, commercial complexes, major public facilities, and high density residential developments 8-15% Intensive and large scale land uses are less feasible; single family high density I development is possible 15-25% Scattered low density residential development and other less intensive uses; these I areas should be utilized only after less steeply sloped areas have been developed Over 25Y0 Generally unsuitable for building purposes; best suited to passive recreation and conservation areas I

Low and moderate slopes of 0 to 8 percent and 8 to 15 percent are located throughout Wharton Township but predominate in the northern and eastern sections of the township. However, in the I central-eastern section, the stream banks of Meadow :Run, Deadman Run, and Beaver Creek are characterized by the steeper slopes of 15 percent and over. These steeper slopes predominate in the I central, western, and south-central regions- of the township, and constitute approximately.. 46 percent 12 I I of the township’s land. They are primarily located south of Route 40 and along the township’s waterways, and increase westward toward Chestnut Ridge. A significant portion of these steeper I sloping areas coincide-withthe boundaries of the Forbes State Forest. The steeper slopes, combined with this designated public use of land, serve to severely limit development potential in this area of I the township. The slopes of Wharton Township are identified on Map # 4. Soils The types of soils present within a given location have a direct relationship to agricultural pursuits, I construction, and development. Soil type determines agricultural productivity, natural drainage characteristics, building foundation requirements, and sewage disposal requirements.

I General Soil Composition The soils of Wharton Township include four associations. The Gilpin- Wharton-Ernest Association comprises the majority of soils in the township, and is located in the I central and eastern sections of the township. It includes moderately deep and deep, well-drained and moderately well-drained, medium-textured, nearly level to very steep soils underlain by acid shale and some sandstone bedrock. The Dekalb-Hazleton-Cookport Association is located along the I I western and eastern borders of the township. It includes moderately deep and deep, well-drained and moderately well-drained, moderately coarse textured and medium-textured, nearly level to very steep soils underlain by bedrock that is dominantly acid sandstone. The Upshur-Albrights Association is I located along the western boundary of the township and is a deep, well-drained to somewhat poorly drained, gently sloping to very steep, reddish soil. The Monongahela-Philo-Atkins Association, located in a small area in the southeastern comer of the township, includes deep, moderately well- I drained and poorly drained, medium-textured, nearly level to sloping soils.

The Monongahela-Philo-Atkins Association soils are typically found on stream terraces and flood ‘I plains. The other associations are typically found on uplands. The locations of these soil associations I appear on Map # 5. Wharton Township has had a history of problems relating to on-site sewage systems. Each of the soil associations found in the township is characterized by moderate to severe limitations for the following ,I uses: septic tanks, sewage lagoons, basements, streets and parking lots, and sanitary landfills. Hydric Soils Hydric soils are soils that are saturated with water. Identification of these soils is I important because the location of hydric soils is one indication of the potential existence of wetland areas. Hydric soils are also typically good for agricultural pursuits, but not for development. Hydric soils are found throughout Wharton Township, but are concentrated primarily in the central section. I Hydric soils are identified on Map # 5.

Prime Agricultural Soils Soils that are best suited for producing food, feed, forage, fiber, and I oilseed crops, and that are available for cropland, pasture land, range land, and forest land are designated ,as Prime Agricultural Soils. The growing season, moisture supply, and a variety of soil characteristics including soil temperature, Ph, depth to water table, flooding characteristics, erosion I characteristics, and rock content are all considered in this designation. In Wharton Township, there are few areas of Prime Agricultural Soils, due in part to the large amount of steeply sloping land. The I areas that do exist form small pockets located primarily along the southern and western borders of the township. Prime Agricultural Soils are identified on Map # 5. I

13 I I Water Resources/Drainage/FloodPlains Drainage is the natural process of the downhill flow of all water from the land to the seas and the means by which the water is carried. The land areas that contribute water to ditches, sewers, I channels, streams, and rivers are called drainage basins. Drainage basins are directly determined by the topography of the land. In Wharton Township, draina,ge features have been influenced primarily I by the folds of the Allegheny Plateaus. Wharton Township is located within the Drainage Basin and the I watershed; the Youghiogheny and Cheat Rivers are important county waterways, and the main tributaries of the Monongahela. This river system was if major determinant in the development of Southwestern Pennsylvania. Wharton Township is drained by several streams, most of which are I tributaries of the Cheat River. The Cheat enters the Monongahela at Point Marion. The immediate area of the township is drained chiefly by Big Sandy Creek: in the southern part of the township, with numerous runs in the western part of the township; Little Sandy Creek in the southeast; Meadow Run I in the north; and Beaver Creek in the northeast. The supplies water to many communities in the region, and the Youghiogheny Resemoir is an integral part of the Ohio River flood control system, as well as an important recreational resource that serves the area, although it I is located outside of the township boundaries. Deer Lake iis situated on Meadow Run in the northern section of the township. I A problem that has been previously identified throughout Fayette County is the pollution of streams by mine drainage. However, this problem is expected to1 diminish as mining continues to decline. I Special flood hazard areas have been identified in the south-central and eastern sections of Wharton Township. Shown on Map ## 6, these areas follow Big Sandy Creek from the southern township I border to just north of Elliotsville; Little Sandy Creek to Gibbon Glade; and Meadow Run northeast of Farmington, then around the eastern township border. I Wetlands Wetlands are transitional lands between terrestrial and aquatic systems in which the water table is at or near the surface. or in which the land is covered by shallow water. The water is present in I sufficient amounts to support vegetation that is typically adapted for life in saturated soil conditions, as in swamps, marshes, bogs, and similar areas. In Wharton Township, 102 wetland sites have been identified. These sites are dispersed throughout the township, excepting areas along the western I border and in the southwest corner of the township. Wetlands are identified on Map ## 7. I Natural Resources Mineral Resources Historically, coal has played a significant role in the economic and industrial I development of Wharton Township and Fayette County. The county is entirely situated within the Pittsburgh Basin , known for its quality bituminous coal. The coal of this region was recognized as nearly perfect and was exploited for making beehive coke. Early coal production was I used for domestic purposes, including heating, cooking, and early industrial pursuits, like blacksmithing. I The coal underlying Wharton Township lies primarily in the Upper Freeport and Lower coal seams, which are among the most profitable. The cod: beds have been mined locally where seam I

14 I

thickness and quality enabled profitable operations. Between 188 1 and 19 17 Fayette County produced 18.6% ofPennsylvania coal. Changes in production methods forced a decline after 19 17, but recoveries in the coal industry were achieved in the 1940s and in the 1960s and OS, although the overall trend is one of decline and mineral resources are no longer major contributors to the economy. In Wharton, mining operations have occurred throughout the township, but primarily they have been located in the central, southern, and western areas. In Fayette County, up to 50% of the coal resources have been mined out. Gas and oil deposits have also been depleted.

Sandstone and limestone in the region are quarried for building materials and for use as crushed stone for roads. Plentiful clay and shale deposits are used for brick, drain tile, and sewer pipe.

Forest Lands Wharton Township is situated within the Appalachian Oak Forest section of the Eastern deciduous forest . In this tall, broadleaf deciduous forest, white oak and northern red oak predominate. Other species include sugar maple, sweet birch, bitternut hickory, beech, tulip poplar, white pine, scarlet oak, scrub oak, chestnut oak, and black oak. Much of this forest is second- and third-growth forest, due to clear cutting for fuel, construction, and development. The township's woodlands continue to provide wood for construction purposes; these woodlands remain one of the township's major economic resources. A large portion of the township's forest lands is contained within the Forbes State Forest, a vast resource situated primarily in the southern and western sections of the township, south of Route 40. The forest encompasses the Quebec Run Wildlife Area. The forest is identified on Map # 8.

Game Lands State Game Lands No. 5 1 are situated at the northern tip of the township and extend beyond the township boundaries. This area is accessible from Township Road 722. A small portion I of State Game Lands No. 138 is situated at the western border of the township, near the intersection of State Routes 2001 and 2002. These game lands also extend beyond the township; another area of No. 138 can be reached by Township Road 345. State Game Lands No. 265 are situated outside the township but are easily accessible just beyond the eastern border, north of Route 40.

Park Lands There are no designated State Parks within Wharton Township; however, Ohiopyle State Park is situated just outside the township boundaries to the northeast.

Summary of Findings The geologic structure of the township is composed primarily of sandstone, shale, limestone, clay, and coal. w The topography of the township is characterized by prominent ridges. Approximately 46% of the township land area is composed of steep slopes that are generally unsuitable for development. The soil composition of the township is characterized by moderate to severe limitations for septic tanks, sewage lagoons, basements, streets and parking lots, and sanitary landfills. Hydric soils are located throughout the township. The township has few areas of soils designated as-Prime Agricultural Soils. Several streams drain the township. Significant portions of the major streams in the eastern and south-central areas of the township have been identified as special flood hazard areas. W 102 wetland sites have been identified in locations throughout the township. w Coal, gas, and oil deposits in the township have been significantly depleted and today play a much smaller role in the economy of the township than they did in the past. W Stone resources in the township continue to be productive.

15 Forest lands are particularly abundant in Wharton Township; the boundaries of the Forbes State Forest coincide with a large area of land that is too steep for significant development. Portions of Go State Game Lands are contained within the township. I There are no State Parks in Wharton Township. I I I 1 I I I I I I I 1 I 1 I I

16

I .. I I I C. LANDUSE 1 I I I I I I I I 1 I I I LAND USE

Land Use is the study and classification of the “man-made” features of the earth’s surface. A knowledge of existing land use patterns and their relationship to each other must be prepared in order to formulate a plan for the future orderly growth and development of the community.

Land use information has a wide variety of applications. These applications include: the planning of future utilities such as sewer, water, and power; transportation facilities; parking areas; community growth and expansion; and future land requirements.

In order for land use information to be available, a land use inventory and study must first be performed. A land use study classifies, records, and analyzes the existing use of the developed land of the community according to the land’s functional activities. Although the land use pattern of each community is unique, three classifications of land use serve as the basic elements for a land use study: residential, commercial, and industrial. In classifying the land use of Wharton Township the three basic classifications have been customized and expanded adding classifications for publichemi- public, State Game Lands, State Forests, Nemacolin Woodlands Resort, Fort Necessity National Battlefield, Braddock’s Grave, wooded, agricultural, water covered, and vacant land. Due to the highly rural and undeveloped nature of the Township several categories have not been used to analyze the land use patterns such as a breakdown of residential housing into single-family, multi-family, or special residential and mobile homes. Areas covered by streets and alleys, typically broken down for townshipss or other higher density developed areas were not calculated for the Township. Likewise, industrial lands were not identified and will not appear in the Land Use table but has been left for definition in the text because of its usual importance in land use issues and will be called upon for Future Land Use decisions.

The results of the land use study are presented in the form of an existing land use map and a statistical summary. Refer to Map #8, Existing Land Use Map and Table C-1 - Wharton Township Existing Land Use Summary.

Land Use Characteristics: An Overview Land use patterns in Wharton Township reveal a geographically large, low density Township with a high concentration of wooded lands and lands dedicated to agriculture. The Township is mostly undeveloped with great amounts of lands protected within the Forbes State Forest and State Game Lands #51. Primary development has occurred along the US Route 40 corridor including several national historic sites and a premier resort.

Local land use in the Study Area has been classified into ten categories, as defined below:

Residential - comprised of low density housing consisting of single-family detached housing units on individual lots;

Special Public Uses - This category was specially created for this Township and is broken down into land use occupied by Nemacolin Resorts, Fort Necessity National Battlefield and Braddock’s Grave. Commercial - includes land sustaining retail, wholesale, service businesses;

17 I Industrial - comprised of land occupied by businesses involved in the manufacture, proc-essing,storage, or distribution of durable and/or non-durable goods; 1 I Public/Semi-Public - includes uses such as municipal buildings, churches, schools, fire companies, cemeteries, recreational facilities, and other similar civic uses; I State Game Lands - comprised of land devoted to preservation by the State; I State Forests - comprised of land devoted to preservation by the State;

Wooded - includes land which is covered by deciduous and/or evergreen vegetation, I timberland, and adjacent surface waters;

I Vacant - includes land not defined to be in or associated with any active land use; and I

Water - includes areas covered by water cl.assified as rivers, streams, canals, lakes, and ponds. I Existing Land Use Characteristics I Residential Of all the land uses present in the commiunity, residential is of most concern to the average citizen. Residential areas are where people spend most of their time and have their greatest 1 investment - their homes and property. The proper development, preservation, and upgrading of these areas should be of the utmost concern to all members of’the community. I In classifying the residential areas within Wharton Township four one category has been chosen to cover the single-family residential, two-family residential, multi-family residential, and special residential or mobile homes types f residential land uses. Single-family residential areas are 1 composed of detached housing units and their properties accommodating only one family. Two- family residential areas are comprised of structures and their properties accommodating two families. Multi-family residential areas are composed of structures and their properties accommodating more 1 than two families. Mobile home properties are occulpied by a specific housing types not on a permanent foundation, composed of detached housing units and their properties accommodating only 1 one family and for this analysis are included as single-family residential. The Township contains 2,770.5 acres of residential land occupying over 28 percent of the developed I area, but only 4 of the total land area. Of the 9,627.45 acres of developed areas in the Township lands dedicated to residential living occupies slightly more thian 28 percent. Most of the residential land is located within a few miles of the US Route 40 corridor and the remaining is sparsely clustered in I the in the north ans south eastern sections of the Township surrounding the Forbes National Forest and State Game Land #5 1. I Commercial The portions of the Township devoted to commercial activity are classified as commercial including neighborhood commercial and central business corridors. The neighborhood commercial district includes commercial activities that provide necessary services for the daily 1 operation of the household. They include such establislhments as delicatessen stores, barber shops, beauty parlors, local grocery stores, and local drug stores. The central business corridor includes commercial activities of a more intensive nature. This type of activity includes retail stores, offices, I

1s I banks, hardware stores, gasoline stations, garages, restaurants, and hotels. Highway commercial is the major commercia4 activity in the Township along the US Route 40 corridor.

Commercial land is primarily located along the Route 40 corridor occupies 123.5 acres or 1 percent of the developed area. Very little commercial activity exists away from the highway.

Industrial There are the two (2) factories of the Bruderhof classified industrial activities identified in the Township. Included in the industrial category are industrial operations which involve the fabrication, assembly, storage or packaging of a product. This type of industrial operation usually does not present any serious discomforts to the neighboring properties in the form of noise, smoke, odor, and traffic congestion.

PublidSemi-hblic Areas designated as public are lands owned or developed by public funds and I are usually operated as part of governmental function. Activities that are included in this category include city halls, fire houses, post offices, libraries, museums, school, parks and playgrounds. The I township does not have any libraries or museums. Areas classified as semi-public are lands developed by a limited group of people for their own use with limited public control and accessibility. Such uses include churches, private schools, I cemeteries, lodge halls, and fraternal organizations. Such organization, mostly churches occupy the majority of semi-public lands.

I The Township contains 1,6 10.70 acres of land dedicated to public/semi-public land uses occupying I 16 percent of developed lands and 2 percent of the total land area. SW-eHia: 1. Nenuicolin WootIlantls Resort It is unusual for a land use classification to be specific for a single I development such as Nemacolin. However, due to the highly rural nature of the area and the very significant size of certain features, such as the resort, it seems very appropriate. The resort occupies 786.9 acres of land or 9 of the total developed land in the Township and 1 percent of the total land area. Located along US Route 40 this private resort is one of the premier golf resodprivate retreats in the Commonwealth.

1 2. Fort Necessity National Battlejield This historic site occupies over 852 acres along US Route 40 west of Nemacolin and in the heart of the commercial activity of the Township. Occupying over 1 percent of the developed land Fort Necessity is the third largest developed land use other than B residential and agricultural land.

3. Brmldock’s Grave Braddock’s Grave is a small land use occupying only 17.6 acres, 1 percent I of the developed area, but is a very significant historical site located along the US Route 40 corridor I west of Fort Necessity National Battlefield and Nemacolin. Agriculture Lands dedicated to this use are currently in use for commercial farming or large plots of land formerly used for commercial farming with the facilities still in tact for such uses. This I category occupies over 3,464.60 acres in the Township or over 35 percent of the total developed area - the largest single category of developed land uses.

I State Came Lands State Game Lands #51 occupies 1,710.80 acres of land in the northwestern

IY I I portion of the Township or 2 percent of the total land. .. State Forests Forbes State Forest is the second largest single land use in the Township occupying I over 14,212.68 acres or 23 percent of the Township’s total land. I Vacant Land The next three categories are considered to undeveloped lands and make up a very small percent of the total land in Wharton Township. Land classified as vacant is not being presently utilized for any of the above activities including non-agridtural fields and vacant lots. This land is I yet to be developed and provides an opportunity for future growth and development and properly planning land development. The Township contains 2,494.1 acres of vacant land, 3 percent of the total land area, slightly less than the total area occupied by residential land uses. 1

Wooded Land Areas classified as wooded are predominantly forest covered with no type of manmade development. Wooded land in Wharton occupies 35,799.3 acres or almost 55 percent of I the total land in the Township, by far the largest land use category. This land does not include the land dedicated to the State Game Lands or Forbes State Forest. I Water Areas classified as water include: rivers, strea:ms, canals, lakes, and ponds. Wharton has a minimal 188.2 acres of land under water. I TABLE C-l I I 1 1 I 1 I I 1 1

20 I Land Use Summary Having inventoried, -classified, recorded, and mapped the existing land use of the Township, a I statistical summary can now be made. The following table presents this summary for the existing land use patterns of Wharton Township.

I A number of significant conclusions can be drawn from a comparison of the contents of the above table with nationwide averages of communities similar in size and type to Wharton Township. These conclusions are:

rn The Township has a lower than average amount of its developed land dedicated to residential I land uses but considering the highly rural nature of the area and the area and low level of local employment centers this can be expected. rn Agriculture is a major land use for developed lands in the township occupying almost half of I all developed lands most of which is still active. rn Special land uses, such as Nemacolin Resort, Fort Necessity National Battlefield, and Braddock’s Grave, occupy almost 19 percent of the developed land in the Township. 1 Undeveloped land occupies 84 percent of the total land in the Township with over 78 percent I occupied by wooded areas and Forbes State Forest.

1 21

1 I .. I I D. HOUSING ANALYSIS I I I I I I I 1 HOUSING ANALYSIS ~. 1 Introduction Housing is an important component all Comprehensive Planning efforts because it represents both the critical shelter function and the largest store of the community’s wealth. This section analyzes I several of the most important variables for housing: change in total units, vacancies (including seasonal housing units), age of the housing stock, tenure, size and type of units, persons per unit, and other measures. This section also includes the findings from a windshield survey of housing I conditions. 1 Total Units and Change in the Number of Units In 1990 there were 1,507 housing units in Wharton Township (TABLE D-1). This was an increase of 115 units from the 1980 Census count of 1,392, or 8.3 percent growth in ten years. This was a I rate of growth well above the County level of 0.5 percent or even the state rate of 7.4 percent. Since total population increased by less than three percent and total households by only seven percent, it is probable that many of the new housing units built during the decade of the 1980’s were seasonal 1 units or second homes.

Vacancies and Seasonal Homes Seasonal homes were shown as 232 in the Census; this was 15.3 percent of the total housing stock (TABLE D-1). And 98 others were listed as vacant, reason not given. The gross vacancy rate on April 15, 1990 was 25.1 percent which was extremely high. Since, however, the seasonal homes should be subtracted from that total to give an accurate measure of the real estate definition of vacancy, the true rate was closer to 9.7 percent. This is still a high figure and indicates that many homes listed as “other vacant” probably were second homes or miscounted seasonal units. Only Henry Clay Township had a higher proportion of seasonal homes in its total; the two Townships had over fifty percent of the County’s seasonal housing stock. TABLE D-3 shows that over one-half of the seasonal units are occupied for less than six months of the year.

Relatively few homes were vacant “for sale” or “for rent”. In 1990 there were 16 homes listed for sale and 14 for rent. Eighteen were sold or rented but not currently occupied.

Home Ownership and Rentals On Census day in 1990 only 1,129 of the 1,507 total units were occupied due to the high number of seasonal units; of these 896 were owner occupied and 233 were renter occupied (TABLE D-1). Owner occupancy was high at 79.4 percent compared to the Commonwealth or the County, which were at slightly over 70 percent and 72 percent respectively. This high owner occupancy is fairly typical of rural townships, however.

21a Total 4938140 61406 I507 29 I1 2522 1057 5761 4190 1112 331 5881 Occupied 4495966 561 10 I I29 2740 2372 620 5461 3978 1038 263 5273 Vacant 442 I74 5206 378 I72 I50 437 300 212 . 74 68 608

Own Occupied 3176121 40595 896 2217 I847 49 I 3985 3046 789 225 2685 Renter Occupied 1319845 15515 233 533 525 I29 I476 932 249 38 2588

Vacant For Rent 102774 I330 I6 25 35 13 89 79 9 5 294 Vacant For Sale 48763 559 I4 17 I4 12 40 41 4 0 69 Rented or Sold not Occupied 43747 552 18 I3 8 7 27 40 I 4 37 Seasonal or Occasional Use 144359 I141 232 4 9 372 8 2 28 49 7 For Migrant Workers 212 I n 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Other Vacant 102319 1713 'I8 I13 84 33 I36 50 32 20 I

Vacant usual home elsr\vhrre 30663 896 I H2 18 12 I38 27 5 34 35 16 AI1 other vacants 41 151 I 4400 I96 I54 138 2Y9 2 73 207 40 33 592

Tenure by Age: I5 to 24 years Own Occupied 38312 440 21 24 25 I2 45 19 13 8 16 25 to 34 years Own Occupied 454725 4565 I29 284 238 73 456 289 IO0 36 229 35 to 44 years Own Occupied 685952 8042 204 468 387 I07 849 619 171- 52 416 45 to 54 years Own Occupied 543801 6286 I68 372 308 78 649 5n I I26 33 320 55 IO 64 years Own Occupied 561214 7300 I39 43 I 307 82 697 595 I30 39 47 I 65 to 74 years Own Occupied 550399 8389 I37 404 367 83 74 1 613 152 35 697 75 years and over Own Occupied 341718 3373 9 8 234 215 56 548 410 96 22 506

75 years and over Renter Occupied 145233 1717 2 0 36 46 II 98 88 18 2 44 I

Size of llousing Unit: I room 54056 234 6 4 3 0 I1 5 1 4 74 2 rooms 118931 975 43 17 I5 16 46 45 8 3 300 l OPtl I tl ?i?Y 0 77 3 rooms .,,"I, I .,...- 78 1 71 73 332 I68 51 -- 806 4 rooms 708783 1358Y 315 608 636 319 I593 73 I 280 67 1086 5 room 890483 I4627 383 814 h76 288 I539 903 281 88 IO05 6 rooms 1211468 14389 323 684 560 I 89 I234 1044 232 78 I322 7 rwms 695647 664 I I 79 320 262 91 506 632 I44 30 602 8 rooms 46 I824 4670 11)l --7%) I97 47 34 I 394 71 26 378 9 or more rooms 398020 2753 79 I44 IO2 34 I59 268 44 13 308

Persons per llousing Ilnit: I person I 150694 I4000 218 59 I 471 I29 1363 92 I 220 57 I985 2 persons 1441 196 I7796 398 830 714 206 I747 1385 333 70 I570 3 persons 789334 10572 207 560 477 I06 1075 780 214 46 782 4 persons 676345 8690 100 482 455 I06 859 580 I51 63 559 5 persons 290628 347 I 75 190 I88 45 292 243 80 17 246 6 persons 95332 1088 23 58 47 17 90 51 24 8 88 7 or more persons 52437 484 8 1') 20 II 35 18 16 7 43

Persons per Occupied Unit 2 57 256 2.66 2.6') 2.75 2.73 2 52 2.52 2.70 2.79 2.23

N N

- = m m m m Age of Homeowners Of the 896 owner occupied dwelling units, only 26.2 percent were occupied by householders over the age of 65 (TABLE D--l). This may seem relatively high but over 30 percent of the homeowners in the Commonwealth as a whole were over 65. By contrast, almost 40 percent of all homeowners were under the age of 45. These numbers are close to the expected levels given the age structure of the population in the Township.

Size of Housing Units and Persons per Housing Unit Most housing units in Wharton Township (1 02 1 of 1507 or 67.7 percent) had between four and six rooms, not counting bathrooms (TABLE D-1). This was appropriate given the large number of families; however, only 127 had fewer than four rooms. This was just 8.4percent of total housing units and suggests that the creation of some smaller senior housing might be appropriate since 616 households had only one or two residents. On average there were 2.66 persons per housing unit in the Township in 1990.

Value of Owner Occupied Housing Units In 1990 the median value of owner occupied housing units in the Township was $55,400 (TABLE D-2). This was well above the $39,700 value for the County but equally below the $69,700 value for the Commonwealth. Only South Union Township among the municipalities in the study area has a median value above that of Wharton; most of the other Townships are well below the Wharton median. Although the median value of housing indicates that fifty percent of the housing stock is above and fifty percent below that level, it says little about the actual distribution of housing values. FIGURE D-1 compares the distribution of housing values to the Commonwealth and the County.

As shown, Wharton has substantial mid-priced housing, and relatively little high price housing compared to the Commonwealth. It has far fewer low value homes than the County as a proportion of its total housing stock.

Rents Rents follow the same pattern as owner occupied housing values: lower than the state but higher than the County (TABLE D-2). In 1990, the median monthly rent in the Township was $230 compared to $196 in Fayette County and $322 in Pennsylvania. The median rent in the Township was above that of any other study area municipality.

m 23 Value of Owner Occupied Units: Less than SI5000 Value 882(l3 3 104 26 212 I73 24 244 108 75 15 109 $ I5000 to $ I9999 66 I86 2035 in I33 [J 5 I4 I82 53 34 7 I25 $20000 to $24999 88693 2514 20 142 122 111 232 1 I6 29 7 I90 $25000 to $29999 100557 2603 31 I47 I12 IO 23 I I19 38 8 _-Xj $30000 to $34999 I18673 2812 32 127 I40 25 274 I59 48 I1 250 $35000 to $39999 I 17728 2540 27 I 28 I09 16 269 184 43 13 227 $40000 to $44999 131x82 2574 48 I24 83 24 270 I73 41 I4 255 $45000 to $49999 I I7304 1933 24 83 78 24 225 163 24 6 178 $50000 to $59999 237903 3512 79 I38 I38 47 347 310 44 I5 287 $60000 to $74999 345873 3618 9 I 191 143 35 377 532 43 18 259 $75000 to $99999 433929 2467 0 3 I50 78 23 209 433 27 12 165 $ 100000 to s I24999 233290 612 21 33 I4 6 31 I53 7 1 32 $125000to$149999 162591 294 8 25 II I IO 85 6 I 25 $ I50000 to s I 74999 I I I450 139 9 7 7 I II 40 I 0 16 $175000 to $199999 69 I68 63 6 7 0 0 3 21 0 0 4 $200000 to $249999 729 IO 67 I 3 7 I 5 29 0 0 6 $250000 to $299999 36170 24 0 0 0 0 0 I2 0 0 1 $300000 to $399999 27055 1 9 7 0 0 0 0 10 0 0 0 $400000 to $499999 10146 3 I 0 0 0 0 I 0 0 0 $500000 or more I1460 I4 I 0 0 0 0 4 0 0 2 Total Units 2581261 30956 538 1645 I300 278 2923 2705 460 I29 2357

I’KKCENI‘ 01: TurAi,

Less than $15000 3.42 10.03 4.83 12.8‘) 13.3 I 8.63 8.35 3.99 16.30 I 1.63 4.62 $15000 to $19999 2.56 6.57 3.35 8.09 7.3 I 5.04 6.23 I .96 7.39 5.43 5.30 $20000 to $24999 3.44 8.12 3.72 8.63 9.3x 6.47 7.lJ.I 4.29 6.30 5.43 8.06 $25000 to $29999 3.90 8.41 5.76 8 94 n.(s 6.83 7.90 4.40 8.26 6.20 9.55 $30000 to $34999 4.60 0.08 5.95 7.72 10.77 8.09 9.37 5.88 10.43 8.53 10.61 - __ - ,.- + ..I., c1 1” 535000 to $39999 4.56 I.L.4 J.UL t.to o...o ,.I“c ’L 3.10 6.80 9.35 !!lo8 9.63 $40000 to $44999 5.1 I 8.31 8.92 7.54 6.38 8.63 9.24 6.40 8.91 10.85 10.82 $45000 to $49999 4.54 6.24 4.46 5.05 6.00 8.63 7.70 6.03 5.22 4.65 7.55 $50000 to $59999 9.22 11.35 14.68 8.39 10.62 16.91 11.87 11.46 9.57 11.63 12.18 $60000 to $74999 13.40 I I.60 16.91 11.61 I I .no 12.59 12.90 19.67 9.35 13.95 10.99 $75000 to $99999 16.81 7.97 17.20 9.12 6.00 8.27 7.15 16.01 5.87 9.30 7.00 $100000 to $124999 0.04 I !)X 3.90 2.01 I ,011 2.16 1.16 5.66 I .52 1.55 1.36 $125000 to $149999 6.30 0.95 I A9 1.52 0.~5 0.36 0.34 3.14 I .30 0.78 I .06 $ I50000 to $ I74999 4.32 0.45 I .67 0.43 0.15 0.36 0.38 I .48 0.22 0.00 0.68 $175000 to $199999 2.68 0.20 I 12 0.12 o.on 0.00 0.10 0.78 0.00 0.00 0.17 $200000 to $249999 2.82 0.22 0.10 0.18 0.15 0.36 0.17 I .07 0.00 0.00 0.25 $250000 to $299999 I .40 0.08 0.00 0.00 0.(10 0.00 0.00 0.44 0.00 0.00 0.08 $300000 to $399999 I .05 0.06 0.37 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.37 0.00 0.00 0.00 $400000 to $499999 0.39 0.0 I 0.IIJ 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.04 0.00 0.00 0.00 $500000 or more 0.44 0.05 0.19 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.15 0.00 0.00 0.08

Lower value qiiaiiile $42.500 625.200 S36.400 s22.3on 522.300 $28.600 $26.600 $38,300 $2 I .000 $27,000 $28,700 Median value $09.700 $39.700 Sj5.400 437.400 535.400 $44.800 $40.500 $59.000 $35,700 $4 1,300 $4 1,000 Upper \due qiiartile $109.500 $mion $77.000 $60.000 $54.6(iO $59.500 557.600 $81,500 $53.000 $60,600 $57,300

Rents Lower contiact rent quaitile $217 $133 $158 61-11 SI43 $152 $122 $132 $1 IO $122 $151 Median contract rent $322 SI96 $230 $195 $188 $186 $21 I $224 $159 $175 $225 Uppei contiact lent quaiiile $447 $256 $304 $242 $237 $232 $278 $316 $208 $263 $287 N P

- m - FIgurc D-l : Distribution of Value Owner Occupied NousingUnits, 1990

$500000 or morc $40000o to $499999 $300000 to $399999 $250000 to $299999 $200000 to $249999 $175000 to $199999 $ I50000 to $174999 $125000 to $149999 $ 100000 to $124999 $75000 to $99999 $60000 to $74999 $50000 to $59999 $45000 to $49999 $40000 lo $44999 $35000 to $39999 $30000 to $34999 $25000 to $29999 $20000 to $24999 $15000 to $19999 Less ihan $15000 0 2.5 5 7.5 IO 12.5 Percent 7 Less than 2 months VacForRent 27965 234 2 13 IO 4 26 17 .I I 42 4 3 2 up to 6 months VacForRent 3896 I 431 9 8 10 9 3 28 32 75 4 6 or more months VacFor Rent 35848 675 5 I5 12 I2 6 35 30 I I77 7 0 Less than 2 months VacForSale 7013 44 I I I (I 5 I? 0 I 7 7 7 9 I 0 2 up to 6 months VacForSale I5805 134 6 3 6 23 3 0 6 or more months VacForSale 25945 38 I 7 I4 9 5 IO 28 20 45 2 22 Less than 2 months OthVac 49340 469 I50 8 13 IO 15 24 II 18 19 5 21 55 2 up to 6 months OthVac 66117 716 77 29 ?I II 131 29 54 20 I72 6 or more months OthVac 175180 --_-7777 121 93 67 55 266 I18 62

3240 750 262 3305 ldetached UinStruc 263663 I 4 I754 1117 2089 1794 I559 779 3584 >)I) 13 5 lattached UinStruc 909676 1308 1011 -- I38 32 1 3 389 284 234 IO 760 2 UinStruc 279700 2647 111 47 33 34 7 202 140 I 3 0 472 3 or 4 UinStnic 227788 1905 16 II) II II I4 92 88 210 0 0 374 5 to 9 UinSiruc 17104I 1531 5 3 I 0 6 I03 0 151 19 I I I80 IO to 19 UinStnic I49119 613 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 69 20 to 49 UinStruc 99244 276 0 0 0 0 I32 0 0 0 386 50 or more UinStruc I44428 787 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 329 54 19 Mobile home 254920 6735 207 499 526 256 223 1032 165 76 6 8 82 Other tlU 65293 850 42 33 I9 30 25 44

,

Source: Census of Population and Housing, 1990 1 Type of Housing As would be expected in a rural Township, most of the homes are single family detached units; this I category was 74 percent of all units in 1990 (TABLE D-3). An additional 207 units were mobile homes (13.7 percent). There were 100 units of attached single family homes (6.6 percent); which is fairly high for a rural area, and only 41 units (2.7 percent) of multi-family housing. The latter is a I very small percentage and suggests that housing choice may be somewhat limited for both senior and start-up households. There were, in addition, 42 housing units which don’t fall into any of the above I classifications. These may include garage apartments, units attached to commercial structures, etc. Water and Sewer Although there are some private sewer and water systems within recent sub-divisions in the I Township, there are no municipal systems; only 93 units are connected to any kind of “public” water and only 29 have “public” sewer. Almost all housing units have drilled wells for their water and 1 septic tanks for their sewage. Age of Housing Stock I Between 1980 and 1990,432 housing units were constructed in Wharton Township according to the Census. This figure is greater than the change in total units because of demolitions and conversions. Note, in TABLE D-4, that most of the units built in the Township during the 1980’swere built in the 1 first five years of the decade. This is somewhat surprising because economic conditions were much better throughout in the latter half of the decade. In total, the housing built during the 1980’s was 28.7 percent of the Township’s total stock. This was the most housing built I in a single decade, though both the 1970’s and 1960’s saw over 300 units constructed. Only 150 units of the existing stock were built before 1940.

I The housing stock in the Township is, on average, much newer than any of the surrounding areas. The median year that the housing stock was constructed in Wharton was 1970; for the County it was 1 1948, for the state 1954. None of the surrounding Townships had their median year after 1965. Year Householder Occupied Unit I As might be expected given the new housing stock, most of the resident have occupied these units for less than ten years (57 percent). TABLE D-4 also shows that only 100 householders have occupied 1 the same unit since before 1960. i I 1 1 I

27 IABLE D-4: DETAILED iIOUSINC CHARACTERISTICS, 1990

Water & Sewer: PUBLIC WAIER 3854953 50935 93 25x6 20'2 8 5137 4093 957 5 588 I DRILLED WELL 905420 6777 I127 2U I 377 635 482 72 91 I88 0 DUG W ELI. 72 n( n) 746 K3 38 36 61 64 n 16 I2 0 uriiE~WATER I(i4967 2948 I 1)x 87 87 360 89 6 38 I32 '0 PUBLIC SEWER 36 7033 8 3024 1 2 9 369 316 17 2740 3826 75 5 - 5856 SEPTIC TANK I210054 295 IO I395 2373 21 I6 990 2964 347 996 324 25 OTtIER SEWER 57748 I655 77 I70 90 57 68 6 31 n 0 \'ear Built: BUILT I989 73954 678 46 39 19 13 72 74 23 II 52 BLT 85 TO 88 271938 2338 73 I44 I36 67 51 I 154 53 7 72 BLT no TO 84 266690 3569 313 I79 I62 86 468 259 84 30 154 BLT 70 TO 79 778612 9905 329 579 526 283 967 753 276 64 434 ULT 60 TO 69 6 I2604 5897 218 280 I zn I73 55 I 435 145 73 523 BLT 50 TO 59 720956 7236 I xn 342 279 in1 679 796 84 35 548 BLT 40 TO 49 47806 I 6727 I 84 243 286 I26 79 I 552 95 29 761 BLI 1939 OR BEFORE 1735325 25056 131 I IO6 904 I35 1733 1156 342 88 3337

MED YR STRUC BLT I954 1948 I970 I953 I Y 49 II965 1955 1955 1962 I962 1939

Year llouseholder Occupied: WIDR OCC UNIT IN 89 637084 6208 I in 283 206 65 603 424 131 25 94 1 IItIDR OCC 85 TO 88 1 104097 10763 28 1 431 446 I I9 1286 790 242 34 ! 085 ~IIIDRocc 80 To 8-1 594590 6982 244 3115 315 I I4 62 I 525 124 43 620 HHDR OCC 70 TO 79 875291 12246 256 568 33: 142 I097 863 270 71 1036 c ,-,-I11 IIHDK OCC 60 TO69 ,-L I JJ 7222 I28 408 '94 63 687 564 73 34 6-10 JItIDR OCC 60 OR BEFOR 742171 I 2689 100 731 578 I20 I in1 798 I97 58 95 I

Type of Ileal llsed: UTIL GAS tiExr 2226793 24607 7 509 384 4 2244 2659 I42 0 4512 LP GAS tIEAT 76697 1039 64 39 77 18 I12 44 74 6 59 ELEC HEAT 664952 5955 I47 342 253 79 765 562 I33 28 368 OIL IIEAT I252685 19255 73') 1519 I 2x8 380 21)52 553 480 I57 187 COAL HEAT 132277 3892 95 2 78 306 46 235 I27 160 43 I I4 WOOD HEAT I16613 1221 75 53 55 94 59 I3 48 31 7 SOLAR [EAT I158 2 0 0 (1 0 0 0 0 0 0 OTHER lIEAT, 171 I2 Ill 0 0 9 0 8 0 n 0 26 NO HEAT USED 7679 28 (1 41 0 2 0 6 0 0 0

Source: Census of Population and Housing, 1990

m-=-- - I I I I E. POPULATION ANALYSIS I I I 1 I I I I I I I I I Much of the emphasis of Township and other local Comprehensive Planning programs is on land use and elements of the built environment. It must be remembered, however, that plans are developed for people and that the people of an area are its community. They determine the needs and desires which are reflected in the Plan. It is, therefore, appropriate to begin the planning process with a carehl analysis of the characteristics of the population. That is the purpose of this section. Most of the data in this analysis is from the 1990 Census of Population and Housing, though earlier Census is data is used in some cases to show recent changes.

Location and Land Area Wharton Township in Fayette County is a very large Township in geographic extent with almost 92 square miles of land area. It is bounded on the South by Preston County, and on the West by Springhill, Georges, South Union, and North Union Townships. On the North and Northeast it is bordered by Dunbar Township and on the East by Stewart and Henry Clay Townships. The closest city of significance is Uniontown, about six miles from the Northwest border of the Township, between South and North Union Townships. The seven Townships and Uniontown make up the study area for this analysis. Pennsylvania and Fayette County are also used as comparables.

Total Population and Density In 1990, Wharton Township had 3,390 people (TABLE E-1). Most of the surrounding Townships had more residents and less land area. Hence, the density of population (36.9 persons per square mile) was among the lowest in the study area. Only Henry Clay and Stewart Township had fewer residents per square mile. By comparison Fayette County, with 790 square miles and 145,351 residents had a population density of 184 persons per square mile and the Commonwealth had 265 persons per square mile. The low density has several implications for planning; including a generally rural character, high costs for the delivery of services, and substantial opportunities for increased growth.

Population Change Between 1970 and 1990 Wharton Township gained just over 32 percent.in total population (TABLE E-2), most of this change came between 1970 and 1980. In 1970 the Township had 2,567 residents; by 1980 this number had increased to 3,305. In contrast, between 1980 and 1990 the Township added only 85 new residents to make a total of 3,390. Fayette County, as a whole, lost 14,066 residents between 1980 and 1990, six percent of its 1980 total. Despite the minimal gain between 1980 and 1990, Wharton fared better than most of its neighbors. The only other Township in the study are to m gain population between 1980 and 1990 was Henry Clay. Poor economic opportunities in western m Pennsylvania are blamed for most of the out-migration which occurred during this decade. I I NAME Pennsylvania Fayctte County \\harlun 'I'wp Ihnbnr 'I'wp Gcorges l'wp Ilcnry Clay Twp North hionTwp South Union 'I'Iv~ISpringhill Twp Stewart Twp Ilni0ntoa.n City __I__ -I---~ ------__I----- ~ Land Area 44819.62 790.I2 9I .YO 5Y.UY 47.94 5 I .28 38.70 16.74 33.49 50.64 2.04 Persons 11881643 I45351 3390 7460 6525 I860 13910 10223 2800 734 I2034 Density 265.I I 84.0 36.9 120.3 136.1 36.3 359.5 610.9 83.6 14.5 5905.3

Families 3 I55989 4094 I 88 I 2(" I86? 480 3999 300 I 793 I97 3125 llouseholds 4495966 561 IO I119 2741 2372 620 5461 3978 1038 263 5773

Male 5694265 69080 I668 Mi3 3195 943 6578 4738 I337 382 5359 Female 6I87378 76271 I722 37V7 3330 917 7332 5485 I463 352 I 6675

\Vhite 10520201 139773 3379 71s') 6447 I833 I3478 9890 2763 . 731 ' 10582 Black IO89795 51 I6 3 I47 64 20 397 262 20 0 1387 Amerlnd 14733 I39 4 9 5 4 IO 3 9 0 16 Asian 137438 219 4 12 9 I I4 60 0 0 24 Other Race I19476 IO4 0 3 0 2 II 8 8 3 25

Hispanic 232262 452 II 13 3 6 50 32 23 3 61

Persons Under 18 27948 IO 35083 907 I x94 I679 526 3338 2261 775 I88 96-18 Persons Over 65 I829 IO6 26076 497 1074 982 328 2317 1997 4 I4 YO 2872 Females 15 to 45 2344062 29446 753 1559 1425 367 2953 1993 617 I57 2134 Median Age 34.0 35.9 34.2 34.3 33.5 33.9 35.7 39.0 33.8 32.8 38.2

Per Capita Income $ 14,068 $9.79 I SX.623 SlO.05I $7.9I5 $9.483 $9.414 $I 5.81 8 $9,567 $7.243 $10.091 Median IIH Income $29,069 $19.195 $2 I.03 I $I'J.798 $17.796 $19.028 $19,191 $25,891 $19,969 $18.235 $15,383 Median Fam Income $34,856 623.578 $22.634 $14.4b(J 520.668 $22.404 $23,945 $3 I .667 $23,430 $20.833 $1 1,289 Persons in Poverty I283629 3006 I 635 1584 1501 419 2352 I743 577 I75 2896 Percent in Poverty 11.1 20.9 20. I 21.4 23.0 24.7 17.I 17.4 20.6 23.9 24.6

Under 18 in Married Cy1 Fnm 20366 I3 25435 627 1458 I320 396 2371 I704 587 I64 1559 Under I8 in Fem liead 1111 425838 5715 73 249 I94 35 649 369 IO8 8 707

Over 65 Males Alone 113351 1723 34 71 75 23 I53 95 33 6 I99 Over 65 Females Alone 412913 6326 70 239 208 45 5 76 409 92 23 933 Single Person 1111 I I50694 I400Y 218 50 I 471 I29 1363 92 I 220 57 1985

In Correctional Facilities 42930 Y2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 92 In Nursing Homes I06454 I 109 72 78 0 96 94 216 0 0 I I6 In College Dorms 132187 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Over 25 With IIS Diploma 5878654 66269 I508 .;-I66 2611 732 6500 5391 1045 27 I 6191 Over 25 With College Degree 1412746 9074 332 .368 I97 78 798 1276 I32 32 1031 TOT2Splus 7872932 97760 2174 4") 4204 1182 9422 7227 I788 475 8470

Source: Census of Population and Housing, 1990

w C

= Population 1970 I1766310 I54668 2567 73hh 6224 6non I en 13561 I0370 2629 704 I6282 Population 1980 I I n64720 I 594 I 7 3305 761 )5 7138 5900 I663 I5340 I0992 2906 787 14510 Population 1990 11881643 145351 3390 7460 6525 5596 I860 13910 I0223 2800 734 I2034 Population Chy 1380-90 I6923 - I4066 85 -145 -613 -304 I97 -1430 -769 -106 -53 -2476 Yo Pop Chg 1980-1990 0.14 -8.82 2 57 -I.'JI -859 -5 15 II X5 -9.32 -7 00 -3 65 -6.73 -1706 % Pop Chg 1970-1990 0.98 -6.02 32 06 I 'ti 4 84 I 7.80 30 99 2.57 -1 42 6 50 4.26 -26 09

YO Female. 1990 52. I 52.5 50 8 50 9 51 52 49 3 52.7 53 7 52 2 48 55 5 YOFemale. 1980 52.1 51.9 4x 7 51 50 7 51.1 50 9 52. I 52 9 51 4 48.2 , 55 7

YOllnder 18, 1990 23.5 24. I 26 8 25 4 25 7 23 6 28 3 24 2' I 27 7 25.6 22 70Under 18. 1980 26.3 27.7 30 4 29 7 31 27.4 28 6 27.7 26 2 33 3 30.3 22 6

YOOver 65. I990 15.4 17.9 I4 7 14.4 15 20.7 I7 6 16.7 I9 5 I4 8 12.3 23 9 ?'o Over 65, 1980 12.9 14.2 12 1 11.2 124 I 5.8 I6 6 13.4 I4 ton 9.9 20

% Black, 1990 9.2 3.2 0 I I9 0 1) 6.5 12 2.6 24 07 0.0 96 Vo Bid, 1980 8.8 3.8 0 I 2.3 II 11.4 0 I 2.6 33 14 0.0 92

YOIlispanic. 1990 I .o 0.3 n3 0 2 0 II 0 6 04 0.3 03 on 0.4 04 YOIlispanic. 1980 I .3 0.4 0 5 0.2 0 5 0.I o n 0.4 03 02 I .3 0 4

Total Households. 1990 4495966 561 10 I 12') 2740 2372 2092 620 546 I 3978 I 038 263 5273 'lotal Ilouseholds, 1980 42 I9606 56566 IO56 2544 232 I 1% I 54 I 5386 3947 952 280 5863 % Chg Illlold~,I980--90 6.5 -0.8 6 9 7.7 77 5.6 I4 6 I .4 ox 90 -6. I -10 I

PersonsAlousehold, 1990 2.57 2.56 2 66 2 09 2 15 2.62 273 2.52 2 52 27 2.79 2 23 Personslllouscliold. 1980 2.81 2.x2 2 77 2.09 3 ox 2 96 2 91 2.Xl 2 76 3 05 2.81 2 43

Total Families, 1990 3 I55989 Jnw I 88 I 2W)h I X62 1.546 4x0 3999 300 I 793 197 3125 Total Families. I980 3 I34322 43569 XI8 2079 1940 I582 4-11) 4'27 3156 779 212 3x18

w c I Age Structure In 1990, the population of Wharton Township had a median age of 34.2 years (TABLE E-1); this was very close to the Pennsylvania median of 34.0 and well below the 35.9 year median of Fayette I County. Both the City of Uniontown and its suburban Township, South Union, had exceptionally high median ages at 38.2 and 39.0 years respectively. I Persons under 18 were 26.8 percent of the Wharton Township population in 1990 (TABLE E-2), which was well above the state, county, and study area averages. However, the percentage of children I in the Township did decline between 1980 and 1990 from 30.4 percent. On the other hand, the percentage of persons over 65 increased from 12.1 percent to 14.7 percent. Even at this higher figure Wharton was well below the Commonwealth and County average for elderly as a percent of total I population. In 1990, 15.4 percent of Pennsylvanians arid 17.9 percent of Fayette County residents were over 65. Only two Townships in the study area had lower elderly percentages than Wharton. 1 A more detailed analysis of age structure (TABLE E-3 and FIGURE E-1) shows that Wharton Township has relatively fewer residents between the ages of 20 and 35 than the state on average. This leads to the high median age, despite the fact that the elderly population is fairly small and the youth I population fairly high. This “missing” age cohort is the group which tends to be most responsive to better economic opportunities in other regions. I Minorities Only eleven persons of races other than white and eleven Hispanics were identified in the 1990 I Census in Wharton Township (TABLE E-I). Total minorities, then, are a very small part of the population of Wharton Township; less than 0.7 percent. This is low even for rural western Pennsylvania. The County had rates more in keeping with western Pennsylvania; total minorities I were about 3.5 percent of the population.

Household and Family Structure I There were 1,129 households in the Township in 1990; ofthese 881 were families (TABLE E-1). (The Census defines a family as two or more related individuals living in the same housing unit, whereas a household is any group of persons living in an occupied housing unit). There were 218 single I person households which accounted for most of the non-family units. Between 1980 and 1990, the number of households in the Township increased by 6.9 percent while the number of families I increased by 7.7 percent (TABLE E-2). This indicates that families are increasing as a percentage of all households. However, both households and families are getting smaller. The average size of households in the Township decreased from 2.77 persons in 1980 to 2.66 persons in 1990. This I explains how households could increase at a faster rate than the population. I I I I

32 I a

TABLE E-3: AGE STRUCTURE OF THE POPULATION, 1990

Under 5 \'HS 797058 8812 236 449 386 I16 872 566 I so 52 75 I 5 'IO 9 788301 9638 245 512 454 I40 880 624 205 64 755 10'1'0 I4 755161 10271 264 578 532 I83 994 642 238 45 710 15TO I9 8 I8058 10329 245 57 I 499 131 96 I 669 226 4 0 706 20 TO 24 863007 88 IO 2 I6 460 450 I12 862 513 I79 50 688 25 'ro 29 9202 I7 9402 210 540 489 I29 915 580 I90 56 786 30 TO 34 992239 I I133 '70 585 506 I I2 I075 728 191 56 878 35 TO 39 9230 I 8 I I134 283 607 482 137 I128 786 218 ' 60 ' 877 40 TO 44 82 I849 9753 247 504 46 I 114 1018 752 208 57. * 726 45 TO 49 656083 7718 204 395 39 I 90 74 I 592 146 40 513 50 TO 54 557762 6862 I63 398 277 I04 686 557 132 27 490 55 TO 59 552378 6025 I44 362 303 83 655 512 I20 40 51 I 60 TO 64 607406 8488 I66 425 3 I3 72 797 705 I53 39 77 I 65 TO 69 590557 8643 Ihl 394 364 93 727 63 I I42 3 0 842 70 TO 74 479464 6878 I26 272 265 75 632 494 Ill 27 740 75 TO 79 36 I306 5156 86 I88 I70 67 456 398 77 21 592 80 TO 84 225943 3199 71 I33 103 45 288 275 44 7 399 85 AND O\'ER 171836 2200 53 87 71 48 214 199 40 5 299 Median Age 34.0 35.9 34.2 34.3 33.5 33.9 35.7 39.0 33.8 32.8 38.2 Total Pop 11881643 I4535 I 3390 7460 6525 I860 13910 10223 2800 734 I2034

Under 5 \'RS 6.7 6.I 7.0 6.0 5.9 6.2 6.3 5.5 6.4 7. I 6.2 5 TO 9 6.6 6.6 7.2 6.9 7.0 8.0 6.4 6. I 7.3 8.7 6.3 IO TO 14 6.4 7. I 7.8 7.7 8.2 9.8 7.1 6.3 8.5 6. I 5.9 15 TO 19 6.9 7. I 7.2 7.7 1.6 7.0 6.9 6.5 8. I 6.7 5.9 20 TO 24 7.3 6. I 6.4 6.2 6.9 6.0 6.2 5.0 6.4 8.0 5.7 25 TO 29 7.7 6.5 6.2 7.2 7.5 6.0 6.6 5.7 6.8 7.6 6.5 30 'IO 31 8.4 7.7 8.0 7.8 7.8 6.0 7.7 7.1 6.8 7.6 7.3 35 IO39 7.8 7.7 8.3 8. I 7.4 7.4 8. I 7.7 7.8 8.2 7.3 40 'IO 44 6.9 6.7 7.3 6.8 7. I 6. I 7.3 7.4 7.4 7.8 6.0 45 TO 49 5.5 5.3 6.0 5.3 6.0 -1.8 5.3 5.8 5.2 5.4 4.3 SO TO 54 4.7 4.7 4.8 5.3 4.2 5.6 4.9 5.4 4.7 3.7 4. I 55 TO 59 4.6 4.8 4.2 4.9 4.6 4.5 4.7 5.0 4.3 5.4 4.2 60 TO 64 5. I 5.8 4.0 5.7 4.8 3.9 5.7 6.9 5.5 5.3 6.4 65 TO 69 5.0 5.9 4.7 5.3 5.6 5.0 5.2 6.2 5.1 4. I 7.0 70 TO 74 4.0 4.7 3.7 3.6 4.1 4.0 4.5 4.8 4.0 3.7 6. I 75 'ro 79 3.0 3.5 2.5 2.5 2.7 3.6 3.3 3.9 2.8 2.0 4.9 80 TO 84 I .9 2.2 2. I I .8 I .6 2.4 2. I 2.7 I .6 I .o 3.3 85 AND OVER I .4 I .5 I .6 I .2 1.1 2.6 I .5 I .9 1.4 0.7 2.5 w w

Source: Census of Population and Housing, 1990 - .- -~ ...... - ...... - -...... -- . ._- - Age Structure of thc Population, 1990 Pen nsy 1van i cz and Wliar-ton Township

.... ---. ... - .....

.r......

0 2 4 6 8 10 Percent of Total

w P ...... - - . . .. __ . . - - - - .-. .... ___.. I Living Situations of Persons Over 65 There were 497 persons over 65 in Wharton Township in 1990. Almost one-half of all single person I households were persons over the age of 65 living alone (1 04 of 2 18). Females over 65 outnumbered males by a substantial margin. In 1990, there were 70 females over 65 living alone compared to 34 males (TABLE E-1). In total 304 persons over 65 were living in family situations in the township. I Twenty-five were living in non-institutional group quarters and 54 were living in nursing homes or other institutional settings (TABLE E-4).

I Living Situations of Persons Under 18 Of the 907 persons under the age of 18 in the township, 753 were accounted for in the household sample; the remainder were in group quarters. Of those not in group quarters, 627 were living in I married couple families; 18 were in male headed family households with no wife present and 73 were in female headed households (TABLE E-4). Thirty-four children were living with other relatives and I only one child was living with an unrelated family. Population Projections I Wharton Township, unlike most areas of Fayette County and the County itself, grew in population between 1980 and 1990. The only other Township in the study area to show growth over this period was Henry Clay Township. The rate of growth was much slower than it had been in the previous two I decades but this was largely due to out-migration caused by economic restructuring in all of western Pennsylvania.

On the other hand, the growth spurt between 1970 and 1980 was also probably atypical; highway improvements and the development of the Deep Creek Resort area and Ohiopyle State Park, along with local tourist related development, probably contributed to the extremely high growth rate over I this period. Given all of the above, the most likely scenario for population growth from 1990 to 20 10 is a continuation of the average trend from 1960 to 1990. This would see the Township grow in I population from just under 3,400 to over 4,550 persons in the next 20 years. This is a very high rate of growth and will only be sustainable if economic conditions in the County and the Region continue to be better than they were I Projected Population Growth in the 1980's. Wharton Township to 20 10 Educational Attainment jooO I I ...... In Pennsylvania 74.7 } I percent of all persons over 4500 ...... _...... ~...... -= . j ,/' the age of 25 have ._ . __ __ ...... __ ...... I attained at least a high school diploma (TABLE E-5). Wharton Township I residents lag this average slightly. In 1990, about /' : ...... : ~ .__ 69.4 percent of persons I over 25 held high school diplomas. This was just 1 above the County average of 67.8 percent and about average for the I surrounding communities.

35 1 On the other hand, Wharton has more persons over 25 with a college degree than all but one of the communities in its reg.ion. The state average for college graduates is 17.9 percent; Wharton had 15.3 percent and Fayette County had only 9.3 percent. Only !south Union Township had a higher rate of i college graduation than Wharton in the study area. I School Enrollment In 1990,26.5 percent of all persons in Wharton Township were enrolled in some level of education. This was well above the 21.8 percent level for the County as a whole and also above the state level I of 23.8 percent (TABLE E-5). This is primarily a reflection of the age structure of the population. But it is also an indication that more of the post secondary young people in Wharton Township attend some type of college than is the case in County. In 1990, only 3.8 percent of the population of Fayette I County was enrolled in college while 5.1 percent of Wharton’s population were in college.

Place of Residence in 1985: I One indication of migration and mobility in the population of area is the Census reported statistic on “place of residence in 1985”. Of the 3,154 persons over ithe age of five in the Township, 2,059 lived in the same house in 1990 they lived in 1985. This was 65.5 percent of the population. In comparison I 72.1 percent of all Fayette County residents lived in the same house on both dates. (TABLE E-5). Typically areas which are experiencing fairly strong growth have low rates of stable residency while I areas which are stagnant to declining -- and, therefore have almost no new in-migrants - have very high rates. Wharton Township is more or less in the middle; it did experience some net growth but not a rapid influx. I Of those who live in a different house in 1990 than in 1985, 563 were from somewhere in Fayette County; 197 were from elsewhere in the Commonwealthl; and 3 17 were from somewhere else in the I U.S. Interestingly, 24 persons were from some foreign nation; those 24 represented 25 percent of all persons who had moved from a foreign nation to Fayette County in the five years between 1985 and 1990. I I I I I I I I

36 I D

- .. in Iti

1.1 ?4Jtj

42 I MI 8 34 11 277

1'j7 176 ?3? I ti IO 17 ti 57

1) I?

11 (I

2.1 .I I

6-18 .{.?IJ

01) -I 2 1 (I

XO 4 8 311 35 NAME Pennsylvania Fayette County \\'harton Twp Uunbar 'lwp Georgcs 'lwp Ilenry Clay 'lwp North Union Twp South llniun Twp Springhill 'lwp Stewart Twp llniontown city

I_-_ -__--- -___ Ll\'lNC SlTllATlON UNDER 18: Householder or Spouse 2780 51 0 I 3 I 7 0 1 0 4 Child in Married Couple Family 20366 I3 25435 62 7 1.158 I320 396 2371 I 704 587 I64 I559 Child in hlale llead Family 8664 I I148 18 64 57 I2 I06 62 24 3 IO4 Child in Female Head Family 425838 5715 73 24'J I94 35 649 369 IO8 8 707 Child with other Relatives 185930 2132 34 IO'J 93 23 I 85 I04 50 9 225 Child with Non-relatives 44649 374 I I3 I! 4 25 22 5 4 43

LIVING SITII..\TION O\'ER 65: Family householder 627978 9316 171 393 385 91 814 704 157 30 877 Family Spouse 393 I40 5419 101 218 225 65 442 424 99 19 493 Living with other Relatives I27733 I735 32 65 79 I4 I74 I37 25 6 I98 Living with unrelated Family 8424 I39 1 3 I 4 22 17 -7 0 IO Male alone I13351 I723 34 71 75 23 I53 95 33 6 I99 hlale head non-family household 8330 92 3 4 3 7 6 4 7 3 II Female alone 412913 6326 70 23') 208 45 576 409 92 23 933 Female head non-family household 10333 106 7 6 3 0 7 5 2 0 I4 Living in non-Family household I5958 I72 3 3 3 3 15 5 2 3 29 Institutionalized 102454 9x0 54 72 0 81 89 197 0 0 IO0 Living in other Group Quarters 8492 68 25 0 0 0 19 0 0 0 8

TYPE & SIZE OF I1OUSEIIOLD: 2 persons Family I292637 16830 368 782 678 I96 1659 1338 312 62 I440 3 personsFamily 764654 10445 207 55s 476 I05 I068 776 211 46 760 4 persons Family 666161 X650 200 482 453 I 06 857 579 I50 63 556 S persons Family 287112 3454 75 I90 I 8X 4s 290 240 80 16 242 6 persons Family 93960 ion2 23 sn 47 17 90 51 24 8 85 ... _._.._ r ...... 71, ?,% ._I ., .^ !. A .I UI IIIUIC prisuiia raiiiiiy 5:;;; 4%; 8 ., _" :: 35 I/ 10 .(L

I person Non-Family I I 50694 140110 218 5Y I 471 12') I363 92 I 220 57 1985 2 persons Non-Family 148559 966 30 48 36 IO 88 47 21 8 I30 3 persons Non-Family 24680 127 0 5 I I 7 4 3 0 22 4 persons Non-Family 10184 40 0 0 7 n 2 I I 0 3 S persons Non-Family 3516 17 0 0 0 o 7 3 0 I 4 6 persons Nun-Family 1372 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 7 or more persons Non-Family 972 4 0 0 0 0 0 I 0 0 I

Source: Census of Population and Housing, 1990 I Place of Birth One indication of the ldng term stability of an area is the percent of the population born in the state I of residence. Florida and Arizona score very low on this statistic, while Pennsylvania has the highest percentage in the nation at 80.2. Fayette County is among the highest counties in the state with 88.4 I percent of its residents born in Pennsylvania (TABLE E-5). While stability is usually considered a good thing, this statistic also indicates that relatively few persons from elsewhere want to live in the area. Wharton Township fares slightly better than the state I and much better than the County but still attracts a relatively small proportion of its population from I outside of Pennsylvania. In 1990,79.1 percent of all residents of the Township were born in the state. Somewhat surprisingly, considering the influx of 25 foreign born persons between 1985 and 1990, only 50 residents of the Township were born in a foreign nation. This suggests that there is no long I term immigration stream influencing the composition of the population.

I

39 TABLE E-5: SOCIO-ECONORIICCllARACTERlSTlCS

EDUCATION OF PERSONS OVER 25: Less than 9th Grade 741167 I4654 325 557 78 I 256 I289 88 I 390 I I3 i056 9th to IZth, no Diploma 12531 I I 16837 34 I 867 81 I I94 1633 955 353 91 1223 lligh School Graduate 3035080 4469 I 847 2542 2026 526 4454 2990 690 198 3965 Some College 1017897 WO5 208 416 322 94 922 87 I I57 27 92 8 Associate Degree 412931 3499 I21 I40 67 34 326 254 66 14 267 Bachelor's Degree 890660 5618 258 228 9 8 54 536 773 92 24 66 I Graduate Degree 522086 3456 74 I40 99 24 262 503 40 8 370 Total persons Over 25 7872932 97760 2174 wo 4204 I182 9422 7227 1788 475 8470

Percent at least IIS Grad 74 7 67 8 69 4 70 9 62 I 61 9 69 0 74.6 58 4 57.1 I, 73. I Percent at least Coll Grad I7 9 93 I5 3 75 47 66 85 17.7 74 6.7 12.2

SCIIOOL ENROLLhlENT PERSONS OVER 3: Public Pre-primary 1 I6196 I109 34 47 25 9 67 I09 9 10 126 Private Pre-primary 94687 515 20 19 --11 0 65 50 0 3 60 Pub ElemlSecondary I550547 22463 597 1347 1171 313 I985 1378 503 109 1482 Pri Elem/Secondary 298 I42 2005 75 I08 87 67 215 I67 12 2 207 Public College 494504 4577 155 I84 239 48 487 357 47 16 382 Private College 275477 999 19 55 27 18 87 91 40 0 50 Not Enrolled in school 8578343 108505 2355 544 I 4706 I346 10428 776 I 2084 562 9315

PLACE OF RESIDENCE IN 1985: Same house 7026054 9x423 2050 5400 4720 I179 9296 6724 I896 526 7192 Same County 2451510 270 I7 563 I370 1032 224 2924 2179 590 103 3 148 .,.- ,,I? 115 Same State 81501 I hb3 I 'I I 111: I66 -<< 135 456 82 36 364 Other NE State 284847 605 IO0 4 0 22 46 I16 9 0 25 Midwest State 103682 815 25 36 17 9 51 44 13 0 165 Southern State 233010 2402 I87 9 5 I75 68 200 136 52 9 227 Western State 7248 I 549 5 4 29 I2 56 14 0 -3 Ill Puerto Rico I3960 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Outlying Province 'I 18 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Foreign Nation 82497 103 24 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 23

PLACE OF BIRTII: Pennsylvania 9527402 128556 2682 6057 5463 I522 12514 8969 I728 657 1 0550 Other NE State 742755 I852 I48 hl 51 31 I92 230 34 8 128 Midwest State 348917 38-10 I41 I76 245 72 359 343 89 14 411' Southern State 666 I22 8865 304 205 734 215 606 553 923 45 709 Western State 104730 780 31 26 13 I5 I 04 50 17 7 99 Puerto Riro 674 I3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Outlying Province 4463 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

U.S. Cit Born Abroad 50525 360 35 0 I1 5 15 0 0 A 47 Foreign Born 3693 I6 I098 50 35 7 1(1 94 I04 9 0 90

P 0

Source: Census of Population and Housing, 1990

===-mm = m - - m F. ECONOMIC ANALYSIS 1 ECONOMIC ANALYSIS I How and where people make their living is an important concern for Comprehensive Planning. In addition to determining such factors as income and commuting, the economic structure of a I community has a major influence on land use, required social services, and the tax base. Because most economic statistics are not reported for governmental units smaller than counties, the basis for this analysis is the 1990 Census of Population and Housing. The Census reports employment statistics by place of residence rather than place of work. Hence, this section describes the income, occupation and job characteristics of the residents of the Township and County wherever they might be employed.

Labor Force The labor force of a community includes all those persons who are employed or are unemployed but actively seeking work. The potential labor force includes all persons over the age of 16 who are not prevented from working by a disability. In 1990 in Wharton Township, there were 1,26 1 employed persons and 19 1 persons unemployed but seeking work (TABLE F- 1). The potential workforce had 2,612 persons over the age of 16. This gave the Township a labor force participation rate of 55.6 percent. In comparison the Commonwealth had a LFPR of just over 60 percent and Fayette County had a LFPR of only 42.1 percent which was among the lowest in the state.

Unemployment As might be expected given the low labor force participation rates, Fayette County had very high unemployment in 1990. Male unemployment was 15 percent while the female rate was just over 1 1.1 percent (TABLE F-1). In that year the statewide average unemployment was 5.7 percent. Wharton Township fared somewhat better than the County but still had rates about double the state rate. The unemployment rate for men in the Township in 1990 was 11.3 percent; for women it was 15.2.

Place of Work Most workers in Pennsylvania are not employed in the community in which they live. In fact, in the state as whole, 69.9 percent of employed persons work outside of their own minor civil division. In part, this is due to the small size of the boroughs and townships around the Commonwealth. In Fayette County the state tendency is somewhat amplified; in the County 8 1.4 percent work outside their place of residence (TABLE F-1). However, perhaps because of its areal extent, Wharton Township has a slightly larger percentage of its population employed locally. Only 6 1.9 percent of the employed residents of the Township work elsewhere.

Of those who are employed outside the Township, 11.7 percent work outside the County and 3.6 percent work outside the state. It is unusual for a Township which lies on the border with another state to have such a low percentage of out-of-state workers. This suggests that there are relatively few job opportunities in the part of rural West Virginia which touches the Township. The percentage of workers who are employed out of the County is also low by both state and County standards. In 1990, 20.8 percent of all workers in Pennsylvania worked outside their County of residence and 27.5 percent of Fayette County’s employed persons worked in other counties.

I 42 TABLE F-I: LABOR FORCE CIIARACTERISIICS

NAME Pennsylvania layette County WhnrIon l'wp Dullhar T\vp CkorgCS 'l'\\'p I lellr). Clay T\vp Nor111Union l'\vp South Union 1iv.p Springhill T\\,p Stet\,arI T\vp Unionto\\rn city ...... _-____-__--__--_-_-______.____------...... ______...... ______LABOR FORCE ST,\TIIS PERSONS O\'ER 16: hlALE: In Armed Forces 16659 6') 0 3 0 0 in 0 0 0 14 Employed 295287 I 27x I8 739 1515 1301 325 2683 2125 53 I I56 I935 llneiiiployed 198697 49 I2 04 27 I 269 73 46 I 300 I03 35 4-18 Not in labor force 1248442 20457 456 1noo 8x0 263 I864 1352 360 83 1735 FELIALE: In Armed Forces 1951 0 0 1) 0 0 0 0 0. 0, 0 Employed 248 I66 I 21403 54 I IIII 912 230 2283 I760 447 89 1851 I Inemployed I46098 2659 97 I I4 I33 21 287 I94 89 12 I 217 Not in labor force 23464 37 37376 ,585 1789 1563 474 3400 257 I 608 I86 3495

PLACE OF WORK: Worked in County 1006525 328 I 9 I069 2061l I644 327 4138 30x2 389 I 70 3220 Worked out of County I I lozoo 132x4 I47 1x6 345 I49 668 639 59 56 452 Worked out ofState 23 I407 2146 45 I2 I79 65 no I25 466 13 91 Total Workers 5348132 48249 1261 2558 2lh8 54 I 4886 3846 914 239 3763 Worked in hlCD I6099 I9 8978 480 143 76 26 586 I77 52 6 2781 \\'orked out of hlCD 3738213 3927 I 711 2415 2092 515 4300 3669 862 233 982 %Out of County 20 n 27.5 11.7 190 15.9 27 5 I3 7 16.6 6.5 23.4 I 2.0 %out Of State 43 4.4 3.6 0 5 8.3 120 I .6 3.3 51.0 5.4 2.4 %Out of hlCD 69 9 81.4 61.9 94 4 96.5 95 2 nn 0 95.4 94.3 97.5 26.1

TRAVEL TIME TO WORK: Less than 5 minutes 209293 ?42?, 66 I I3 81 31 205 225 29 2 282 5 to 9 minutes 663562 7481 I49 298 I80 74 I030 915 39 26 1 I46 IO to 11minutes 873894 81x9 I20 444 305 81 1251 908 I04 16 846 15 to 19 minutes 874 I 34 7502 20 I 594 479 52 n36 570 62 3.2 42s 20 to 21 minutes 762843 6134 212 396 322 54 408 207 215 -11 I95 25 to 29 minutes 30629 I 24x4 92 57 79 18 I72 74 I44 2s 111 30 to 31 minutes 620439 4467 Ill 2x0 20 I 56 I98 I97 I 84 34 I 82 35 to 39 minutes 131044 979 2X 51 62 20 7 63 17 2 47 40 to 11 minutes I58154 I139 IO 51 51 4 73 63 26 13 66 15 to 59 minutes 350019 3193 I02 6X I 89 58 289 309 15 20 20 1 60 to 89 minutes 2 I 2848 2495 92 9 7 I25 50 21 I I 98 32 16 I44 hlore than 90 minutes 4 I060 530 0 40 18 I4 74 38 10 6 55 \\'orked at home I4455 I 1227 78 69 7(1 26 I32 79 37 6 63 Travel Time to Work A high percentage of Wharton Township employed population worked at home. In Pennsylvania only about 2.7 percent of all employed persons worked from their residence. In Wharton Township 6.2 percent were so employed (TABLE F- 1). Further, 17 percent had commutes of less than ten minutes, slightly better than the state average. Nonetheless, it cannot be claimed that all Wharton Township’s workers had short commutes. Fifteen percent traveled more than 45 minutes to their place of work which was substantially higher than the 11.3 percent statewide. Just under 49 percent had travel times of 15 to 34 minutes. This suggests that most are employed in Uniontown or Connellsville or their surrounding suburbs.

When travel times are compared to place of work it is clear that there is a bi-modal distribution of employment in the Township. Many people work at home or in their own municipality. Many others travel substantial distances to their employment.

Employment by Occupation In Pennsylvania slightly less than 44 percent of all workers are employed in traditional “blue collar” occupations. In Wharton Township, in 1990, 52.5 percent of all workers were in these occupations. Fayette County had almost exactly the same percentage in the blue collar trades (TABLE F-2). This is not surprising given the manufacturing oriented economy of the County. What is somewhat surprising, is that Wharton Township had a large number of its employees in the higher paying “managerial and professional” group (just over 25 percent) which was higher than either the state or the County. Professionals, in fact, make up the largest occupational group in the Township.

The largest blue collar occupational group was the “other service” category which generally includes many low skill and low wage service workers employed in hospitals, retail establishments, hotels, and business service activities. “Precision production” which, in general, translates to skilled labor was the second largest blue collar group, but it employed a far smaller percentage of workers in the Township than in the County. This group is typically the highest income group among the blue collar occupations.

44 TABLE F-2: EhlPLOYIkIENT BY OCCUPATION, 1990

NAME Pennsylvania Fayette County \\'h;irtoii .lw Ihnhar Twp Cieorges T\tp Ilcnry Clay 'l~pNorth llnion 'Iwp South llnion 'lrvp Springhill Twp Stewart Twp Uniontown City ...... ______--__------...... Total Employnient 5434532 4922 I 1280 2626 2213 555 4966 3885 978 245 3786 hlanagers 610637 3866 I30 171 I61 35 336 552 92 17 447 Profcssionals 756447 5875 I92 I75 I 7h 52 588 153 73 20 576 Technicians 20505 I I335 33 I IO 51 9 I85 78 38 6 66 Sales 6059 I5 5442 I I2 233 223 52 646 50 I 52 20 502 Administrative/Clerical 912845 6909 I47 347 282 70 787 644 200 14 543 llousehold Services I5050 I42 0 3 8 0 36 14 0 2 --73 7 Protective Services 85556 574 0 31 43 & 41 15 15 I 93 Other Services 6079 I4 6569 187 299 310 IO6 57 I 412 122 ' 46 , 600 Farmers, Fishers, For. 90255 926 c) n 88 56 26 40 12 --77 19 23 Precision Production 6x076 7105 I46 438 314 96 761 458 141 46 372 hlachine Operators 4 I9553 3909 97 253 I72 21 352 20 I 82 22 I66 Transport Operators 237902 3526 49 258 252 41 330 131 I16 20 I59 Laborers 25933 I 3043 89 220 159 39 287 I04 25 12 217

NAME Pennsylvania Fayette County \\liartoii Tw Dunhar Twp Ckorges 'l~pllcnry Clay T\vp North llnion Twp South llnion Twp Springhill Twp Stewart Twp Uniontown City ...... ______--___-_------...... ----__-______-______hlanagers 11.2 7.9 10.2 6.5 73 6.3 6.8 14.2 9.4 6.9 11.8 Professionals 13.9 11.9 I5.0 6.1 8 0 9.4 I 1.8 19.4 7.5 8.2 15.2 Technicians 3.8 2.7 2.6 4.2 2.6 I .6 3.7 2.0 3.9 2.4 I .7 Sales 11.1 11.1 8.8 8.c) IO.I 9.4 13.0 12.9 5.3 8.2 13.3 Administrative/Clerical 16.8 14.0 11.5 13.2 12.7 12.6 15.8 16.6 20.4 5.7 14.3

Il-...nhnl.l..""JC.IY." "C.,Ca-,:nnc ...a e.3 0.3 on 0 I 0 4 0.0 0.7 0.4 0.0 0.8 0.6 Protective Senices I .6 I .2 0.0 I .2 I .9 0.4 0.8 0.4 1.5 0.4 2.5 Other Senices 11.2 13.3 14.6 11.4 14.11 19.1 11.5 10.6 12.5 18.8 15.8 Farmers, Fishers. For. I .1 I .9 7.7 3.4 23 47 0.8 0.3 2.2 7.8 0.6 Precision Production 11.6 14.4 11.4 I6 7 I4 2 17.3 I5 4 11.8 14.4 18.8 9.8 hlachine Operators 7.7 7 9 7.6 9.6 78 4.3 7. I 5.2 8.4 9.0 4.4 Transport Operators 4.4 7.2 3.8 9 x II 4 7.9 6.6 3.6 11.9 8.2 4.2 La borers 4.8 6.2 7 0 8.4 72 7.0 5.8 2.7 2.6 4.9 5.7 TABLE F-3: ERIPI.O\'MENT BY INDUSTRY, 1990

NAhlE I'ennsylvania Fayette County \\'hiirtou I'M Ilunhar Twp Georges 'lap llcnry Clay l'wp North Ihion Twp South [Inion Twp Springhill Twp Stewart Twp Chiontown City ______--...... ------______-__--__-______---__-____ ...... ------___...... ,\griculture 9781 I 83 I 94 7') 65 23 40 18 8 13 23 hlining 3 I396 I 666 I5 3lJ 1-11 15 I37 I63 74 -1 64 Construction 331 161 3178 74 21 I I52 85 236 I69 73 38 216 hlanuf, Nondur 445349 1933 35 I20 X5 17 141 I06 61 II 208 hlanuf. Ihrable 641871 6473 I80 437 255 38 762 332 89 30 287 Transport 24 I749 29 I 5 55 I9X I73 35 274 153 71 19 76 Conirull'uh Iltils I34992 13" .3h 51 Oh 5 I75 I 06 50 I I05 Wholesale 234880 I988 24 88 63 33 236 220 59 6 , 147 Retail 93 I987 10123 I74 569 410 I 06 I127 86 I I02 28 956

Finance. lnsuranc 35 I 5 I 9 I lJ7.5 50 I07 84 13 255 220 33 I I 164 Business Services 236825 I905 57 x7 Ill I5 I89 I 08 16 II I94 Personal Services I38027 I CJW 94 X5 76 40 131 I05 30 20 191 Rerrcat ion 56928 427 2h IX 21 4 29 51 0 13 31 llealth Senices 539555 4906 I16 275 274 66 463 489 I46 20 374 Education 448888 4224 126 I52 Ih7 40 364 380 96 16 294 Other Prolessiona 352988 2070 8') 43 33 17 263 28 I 28 8 259 Public Admin 2 I8606 I244 35 67 37 3 I44 I23 42 8 I97 lotal 5134532 4922 I I 2x0 2626 2213 555 4966 3885 978 245 3786

Agriculture I8 17 7.3 3 0 2 9 4. I 08 05 08 53 06 hliuing 0 6 3.4 12 I5 h 4 2.7 28 42 76 08 17 Construction 61 6.5 5.8 x 0 6.9 15.3 48 44 75 15 5 57 hlunuf, Nondur 82 39 2.7 4h 3x 31 28 27 62 45 55 hlanuf, Durable II 8 I3 2 14.1 I h h II 5 68 I5 3 85 91 I2 2 76 Transport 44 5.9 4.3 75 7x 6.3 55 39 73 78 20 Comndl'ub lltils 25 2.8 28 I 9 3 0 0 9 35 27 51 04 28 \Vholerale 43 4 0 I .9 34 28 5.9 48 57 60 24 39 Retail 17 I 20.6 13.6 21 7 18 5 19.1 22 7 22 2 10 4 II 4 25 3 Finance, Insuranc 65 4 0 39 41 3x 2.3 51 57 34 04 43 Business Services 44 3.U 45 33 5 I1 2.7 38 28 16 45 51 Personal Services 25 4.0 7.3 32 34 7.2 26 27 31 82 50 Recreation I 0 0 9 2 0 0 7 0 v 0 7 0 h 13 no 53 0 8 llealth Services 99 IO.0 9.I IO 5 12.4 I I .9 9 3 I2 6 I4 9 82 99 Education 83 8.6 9.8 58 7.5 7.2 73 98 98 65 78 Other Prolessiona 65 4.2 7.0 16 15 3.1 53 72 29 33 68 Public Adniin 40 2.5 2.7 26 I .7 0.5 29 32 43 33 52 Total I00 0 I00.0 IOO.0 I (IO 0 100.0 IOO.0 100 0 100 0 100 0 100 0 100 0

P o\ Employment by Industry Agriculture employs far more people in the Township than in the County or state as a percentage of total workers. In fact, in 1990, agriculture employed '7.3 percent of all Township workers, which 1 largely explains the high percentage of persons employed from their homes (TABLE F-3). For comparison purposes it is relevant to note that agriculture employs only 1.8 percent of the state's I workforce and 1.7 percent of the Fayette County workforce. The very high percentage of agriculture workers is unique to Wharton Township among the municipalities in its region. Only Stewart Township comes close to the Wharton level and it had just 5.3 percent in farming related activities 1 in 1990.

Manufacturing, on the other hand, is slightly less important to the Township than it is to either the 1 state or the County. In 1990, manufacturing employedl 16.8 percent of the workforce in Wharton compared to 17.1 percent in the County and 20.0 percent statewide. Retail employment was low at 13.6 percent due to the lack of a major commercial center in the Township. Education and other I professional service activities were high which helps account for the high level of professionals in the Township. I Household Incomes With high unemployment, low labor force participaticln, and an occupational structure weighted towards agriculture and service, it would be expected that incomes in Wharton Township would be 1 low. They are. The median household income in 1989 was $2 1,03 1 (TABLE F-4). This was slightly above the Fayette County level of $19,195 but only 7:2.3 percent of the Pennsylvania median of I $29,069. Since most households in the Township are families and since these tend to have more persons per household, per capita incomes are even lower than the household incomes would suggest. In 1989, the per capita income in the Commonwealth was $14,068 and in the Township it was $8,623. 1 This was just 6 1.3 percent of the state average.

Approximately 22 percent of all households in the Township in 1989 had incomes below $10,000 I compared to just 15.5 percent of households in Pennsylvania (FIGURE F-1). At the other end of the spectrum, only ten percent of all households had incomes over $50,000 in Township, while in Pennsylvania 22 percent of households had incomes above that level., - I

Poverty As the income distribution suggests, many persons in both the County and the Township live in some I degree of poverty. According to the 1990 Census, the poverty rate in the Township was 18.7 percent and in the County it was 20.7 percent (TABLE F-5). For the Commonwealth as a whole, in 1990, 1 only 10.8 percent of the population was below the povert:y level. Of particular concern is the fact that 36 percent of those in poverty were children under 18 ye:ars of age. This far exceeds the percentage of children in the age structure. On the other end poverty is not a special problem of the elderly in 1 Wharton Township, only 6.3 percent of those in poverty were persons over 65. I I I

47 I 'l':\I%l,K F-4: 11Ol~S1<1101.1~INCOAIE I~ISII~IBIITION,1989

NAME Pennsylvania Fayette County \\'harton 'lwp 1)unhar lwp Georges Twp Ilenry Clay 'lwp North llnion Twp South llnion Twp Springhill Twp Stewart Twp Llniontown City __-I------____----__-I__~-- __I__ --~---I_ LTS5000 244825 5645 87 287 218 55 485 360 103 27 69 1 $5000-9999 452700 9075 I54 405 431 I22 810 505 175 34 1047 $ IOOOO- 12499 22 I502 4424 53 23 I 229 24 479 22 I 88 24 449 SI 2500-14999 I9380 I 3 I20 5 9 I I7 I39 50 277 I90 31 18 409 $I 5000- I7499 2 I5433 3650 75 I98 I52 39 439 I96 83 22 307 $1 7500- I9999 I96882 3018 I04 IO5 I56 36 37 I I15 40 17 226 S20000-22499 220356 3109 -10 I40 I 50 26 301 I98 46 21 385 $22500-24999 I8604 7 2468 70 I22 I 24 32 216 I49 43 16 227 $25000-27199 2064 I7 2b50 77 I55 I16 36 261 I53 41 IO 207 $27500-19999 172621 2183 67 91 I20 18 264 I42 50 10 ,155 S3U000-32499 207578 2279 38 78 61 42 243 I50 53 13 125 $32500-34999 158078 I554 40 62 39 20 I83 I36 12 II 91 $35000-37199 I76887 I769 26 I I9 57 IO I57 90 106 7 1 I7 $37500-39999 140281 1235 26 56 38 21 I26 I21 31 7 69 $40000-42499 162316 1480 32 56 63 9 I76 161 0 3 80 $42500-44999 I20365 I140 9 64 39 13 96 IO5 16 7 102 $45000-47199 126521 827 0 80 20 I4 47 120 16 2 47 $47500-49999 101820 815 33 71 35 1 IO8 97 7 2 81 $50000-54999 192430 1405 26 IO3 61 9 123 I46 0 4 1 I3 $55000-59999 148154 I003 28 48 33 I9 99 Ill 31 3 81 $60000-74999 292049 1645 38 47 54 7 I39 I85 57 2 I05 575000-99999 193936 867 8 9 31 4 47 I70 0 0 85 SlOO000-124999 7 I686 218 0 16 0 9 26 33 0 0 36 sI 25000- I 49999 29870 76 7 0 0 7 0 13 0 n 6 sIsoooo+ 60197 265 0 9 0 5 9 I IO 10 0 45 Tort\ I. 4492958 55938 I007 2669 2 175 624 5482 3977 1039 260 5286

NAME __ __-____Pennsylvania Fayctte Chmty \\'harton lwp Dunbar Twp Georgcs 'lwp Ilenry Clay 'l'wp ------North lliiion Twp South (Inion Twp Springhill Twp Stewart Twp llniontown City LTS5000 5.4 10.1 7 .L) 10.8 9.2 8.8 8.8 9.1 9.9 10.4 13.1 $5000-9999 10.1 16.2 14.0 15.2 18.1 10.6 14.8 12.7 16.8 13.1 19.8 5 IOOOO- I2499 4.9 7.9 4.8 8.7 0,6 3.8 8.7 5.6 8.5 9.2 8.5 S 12500- I 4999 4.3 5.6 . 5.4 4 .4 5 9 8.0 5. I 4.8 3.0 6.9 7.7 $15000-17499 4.8 6.5 6.8 7 .4 6.4 6.3 8.0 4.9 8.0 8.5 5.8 $I 7500- I9999 4.4 5 .4 0.5 3.9 6.6 5.8 6.8 2.9 3.8 6.5 4.3 $200UO-22499 4.9 5.6 3.0 5.2 (1.3 4.2 5.5 5 .0 4.4 8.1 7.3 $2250624999 4. I 4.4 6.1 4.6 5.2 5.1 3.9 3.7 4. I 6.2 4.3 S25000-274Y9 4.6 4.8 7.0 53 4 '1 5.8 4.8 3.8 3.9 3.8 3.9 s27500-29999 ' 3.8 3 9 6.I 3 .4 51 2 9 4.8 3.6 4.8 3.8 2.9 $30000-32499 4.6 4.1 3.5 2 3 2.6 6.7 4.4 3.8 5.1 5 .0 2.4 $32500-34999 3.5 2.8 3.6 2.3 I .6 3.2 3.3 3.4 I .2 4.2 I .7 $35000-37499 3.9 32 2 .A 4.5 2.4 I .6 2.9 2.3 10.2 2.7 71 $37500-39999 3. I __11 2 .4 2. I I .(I 3.4 2.3 3.0 3 .O 2.7 I .3 540000-42499 3.6 2 .6 2.9 2.1 2.7 I .4 3.2 4.0 0.0 I .2 I.5 $42500-44999 2.7 2.0 0.8 2.4 I 6 2.1 I .8 2.6 I .5 2.7 I .9 $45000-47499 2.8 I .5 0 0 3.0 I .2 11 0.9 3.n 1.5 0.8 0.9 $47500-19999 2.3 I .5 3.0 2.7 I .5 0.3 2 .0 2 .4 0.7 0.8 I .5 $50000-54999 4.3 2.5 2.1 3.9 2.6 I .4 11 3.7 0.0 I .5 2. I $55000-59999 3.3 I .8 2.0 I .8 I .4 3 .O I .8 2.8 3 .O I .2 I .5 $60000-74999 6.5 2.9 3.5 I .8 2.3 1.1 2.5 4.7 5.5 0.8 2.0 $75000-99999 4.3 I .5 0.7 0.3 I .3 0.6 0 3 4.3 0.0 0.0 I .6 sinoooo- 124999 I .6 0.4 0.0 0.6 0.0 I .4 0.5 0.8 0.0 0.0 0.7 SI 25000- 149999 0.7 0. I (1.h 0.0 0.0 0.3 0.0 0.3 0.0 0.0 0. I s I50000+ I .3 0.5 0.0 0.3 0.0 0.8 0.2 2.8 I .o 0.0 0.9

. .. Income Distribution, 1990 Pennsylvania and Wharton Township

$150000+ 1 1 1 $1 00000-124999 $60000-74999 $50000-54999 $45000-47499 I 1 1 $40000-42499 $35000-37499 $30000-32499 $25000-27499 $20000-22499 $15000-17499 $10000- 12499 LT$5000 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 Percent of Households

IRCS&A, Inc. I Pennsyl. Wharton T. P U

Source: Census of Population & Housing, 1990

--m-m-m-~-mm-~~=~ I TABLE F-5: POVERTY ANI) PER CAPITA INCOMES, 1990

!Per Capita Income $14.068 $9.79 I $8,623 $I 0.05 I $7,') I5 $9,483 $9.4 I4 $I 5,818 $9,567 $7,243 $10.091

PERSONS BELOW IVWERTY: Less than 5 years old I3783 I 31 I2 49 I28 I h5 31 209 I87 44 13 332 5 years old 26063 726 6 21 -70 7 43 86 I 3 90 6 to I1yean old 145372 3593 75 25 I I76 73 266 I59 63 19 316 12 to 17 years old 122961 3062 9 7 I 90 I I3 44 I86 148 70 17 22 I 18 to 24 years old I no27 I 3242 78 I63 255 -10 247 219 56 I2 294 25 to 34 years old lXSXl2 4h90 81 243 213 71 38 I 285 59 . 25 440 35 to 44 years old I2Xllhh 3123 I IO 204 I48 47 259 I68 54 17 269 55 to 54 years old X? I23 2300 39 94 I I2 21) 209 141 44 16 I93 55 to 64 years old 404'N> I Ih5 ?I 43 57 21 I io 56 79 I3 I41 60 to 64 years old 51539 1312 3') 47 4X 9 I32 44 36 8 I35 65 to 74 years old 92516 I x72 20 I22 I Ih 26 I63 86 46 26 213 Persons over 75 90579 I774 -70 h't 7X 31 ) I47 I64 25 6 252

TOTAL HELO\\' PO\'ERlY 1283629 3(11lh I 635 I584 1301 41') 2352 1743 577 I75 2896 IOIAL PERSONS I1881643 I4i35l 33') I 7460 6525 I870 I3884 10249 2800 733 I2034 PERCENT BEI.O\\' Po\wn 10 80 3168 18 73 21 23 23 (IO 22 41 16.94 1701 20.6 I 23.87 24 07

ul 0 I Summary of Findings The economic situation in Wharton Township i,s not good. I Incomes are low, poverty is almost double the state average. This derives, in part, from the occupational and employment structure of the population, but is even more directly related to a lack ofjob opportunities which keeps unemployment high and many able bodied persons 1 out of the labor force. 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 1 I 1 I I 1 1 I

51 G. TRANSPORTATION ANALYSIS 1 TRANSPORTATION ANALYSIS

An examination of the transportation network of Wharton Township forms the basis for ensuring an efficient movement of goods, people and services throughout the Township. Transportation is the framework on which a community bases many of its decisions regarding land use and zoning. This part of the background studies will review street classifications, traffic volumes, existing transportation systems, levels of service, and other related information such as the Pennsylvania Department of Transportation's (Penn D0T)Twelve-Year Plan.

Classification of Streets There are 74.775 miles of State maintained roads in Wharton Township according to figures generated by the Pennsylvania Department of Transportation for 1997. These roads vary in cartway, right-of-way, length, surface type, and the type of service provided. The typical categories of roadway service types are defined by the federal Department of Transportation and described below:

ern1 CIcrsslficnflons

Ar?erial, major Major arterial roads handle high volumes of traffic generally traveling long distances. Interstate highways, including Interstate 79 and Interstate 70 are considered to be major arterials. These roads usually have at least four lanes of traffic in both directions and have limited access.

Artend, minor Minor arterials are streets with signals at important intersections and stop signs on I side streets. These streets collect and distribute traffic to and from collector streets.

Collectors Collectors are streets that collect traffic from local streets and connect with major and minor arterials.

Local street A local street provides vehicular access to abutting properties and discourages through traffic. This class of street carries traffic to and from collectors and serves adjacent land use; it contains loop streets, residential streets, cul-de-sacs, alleys and parking connectors.

Cul-de-sac street A cul-de-sac is a street with a single common ingress and egress and a turn around at the end.

Dead end street A dead end street has a single common ingress and egress.

Service street A service street runs parallel to a freeway or expressway and serves abutting properties.

Dual street A dual street has opposing lanes separated by a median strip, center island, or other form of barrier, and can be crossed only at designated locations.

Expressway An expressway is a divided multi-lane major arterial street for through traffic, with partial control of access and with grade separations at major intersections.

Freeway A freeway is a limited access highway with no at-grade crossings. I 5 la Paper street A paper street is one that has never been built, but is shown on an approved plan, subdivision plat, tax map, or official map. I Public Road means any road under the jurisdiction of and maintained by a public authority and open to public travel. I Rural Classifications I Rural Area means all areas of a State not included in the boundaries of urban areas. Rural Major Arterial Routes means those public roads that are hnctionally classified as a part of I the rural principal arterial system of the rural major arterial system as described in Volume 20, Appendix 12, Highway Planning Program Manual. Serve corridor movements having trip length and travel density characteristics indicative of substantial statewide or interstate travel. Serve all, or I virtually all, urban areas of 50,000 and over population and a large majority of those with population of 25,000 and over. I Rural Minor Arterial Routes means those public roads that are functionally classified as a part of the rural principal arterial system of the rural minor arterial system as described in Volume 20, Appendix 12, Highway Planning Program Manual. Links cities and larger towns and form an I integrated network providing interstate and inter-county service. They are to be spaced at such intervals, consistent with population density, so that all developed areas of the State are within a I reasonable distance of an arterial highway. Provide seniice to corridors with trip lengths and travel density greater than those predominantly served by rura!l collector or local systems. Minor arterials therefore constitute routes whose design should be expected to provide for relatively high overall I travel speeds, with a minimum interference to through traffic.

Rural Major Collector Routes means those public roads that are hnctionally classified as a part I of the major collector subclassification of the rural colllector system as described in Volume 20, Appendix 12, Highway Planning Program Manual. Provide service to any county seat not on an arterial route, to the larger towns not directly served by the higher systems, and to other consolidated I schools, shipping points, county parks, important mining and agricultural areas, etc.

Rural Minor Collector Routes means those public roads that are functionally classified as a part I of the minor collector subclassification of the rural collector system as described in Volume 20, Appendix 12, Highway Planning Program Manual. They are to be spaced at such intervals, consistent with population density, to collect traffic and bring all developed areas within a reasonable distance I of a collector highway. I Rural Local Road serves primarily to provide access to adjacent land. Provide service to travel over relatively short distances as compared to collectors and other highway systems. I Urban Classifications

Urban Principal Arterial Routes means those public :roads that are functionally classified as a part I of the urban principal arterial system as described in Volume 20, Appendix 12, Highway Planning Program Manual. The principal arteria system should cany the major portion of trips entering and leaving the urban area, as well as the majority of through movements desiring to bypass the central I

52 I I city. In addition, significant intr-area travel, such as between central business districts and outlying residential areas, between major inner city communities, or between major suburban centers should I be served by this system. Frequently the principal arterial system will carry important intra urban as well as intercity routes. Finally, this system in small urban and urbanized areas should provide I continuity for all rural arterials which intercept the urban boundary. Urban Minor Arterial Routes means those public roads that are functionally classified as a part of the urban minor arterial system as described in Volume 20, Appendix 12, Highway Planning I Program Manual. The minor arterial street system should interconnect with and augment the urban principal arterial system and provide service to trips of moderate length at a somewhat lower level I of travel mobility than principal arterials. This system also distributes travel to geographic areas smaller than those identified with the higher system. u Urban Collector Routes means those public roads that are functionally classified as a part of the urban collector system as described in Volume 20, Appendix 12, Highway Planning Program Manual. The collector street system provides both land access service and traffic circulation within residential I neighborhoods, commercial, and industrial areas. It differs from the arterial system in that facilities on the collector system may penetrate residential neighborhoods, distributing trips from the arterials through the area to the ultimate destination. Conversely, the collector street also collects traffic from I local streets in residential neighborhoods and channels it into the arterial system. In the central business district, and in other areas of like development and traffic density, the collector system may I include the street grid which forms a logical entity for traffic circulation. Urban Local Streets The local street system comprises all facilities not on one of the higher I systems. It serves primarily to provide direct access to abutting land and access to the higher order systems. It offers the lowest level of mobility and usually contains no bus routes. Service to through I traffic movement usually is deliberately discouraged. Establishing a list of highways which serve as the essential economic transit routes for Pennsylvania was the focus of the Priority Commercial Network (PCN). PCN highways are those which carry 500

or more trucks per day and link centers of economic activity. ..

The Core Highway System was developed in 1989 by the Penn DOT Office of Planning. This highway network includes those major transportation routes which are vital to the economic growth of the state.

Specific Categories

The Penn DOT further classifies the highway network in the following categories based on a largely economic role.

Priority Chmmercial Network (PCW This category was first identified in 1982 to designate highways which carry high volumes of trucks and other vehicles that are vital to Pennsylvania’s economy.

Agri-AccessNetwork(AAN) This category was first identified in 1984 to identify highways which serve rural agricultural communities and agri-business areas.

53 I Industrial-Commercial Access Network (I-Can) This category was first identified in 1986 to designate highways serving the industrial and commercial areas of Pennsylvania’s economy. I Dual I-Can and AAN This category was designed to indicate highways serving both industrial/commercial and agriculturaVagri-business sectors. I Traffic Volumes Traffic volumes are produced for all State maintained roads beginning in 1975 by the Pennsylvania I Department of Transportation (Penn DOT). It is important to note that many smaller State maintained roads have never had an actual count taken. In the table below, if the base year of an ADT count is listed as 1973 or 1975 it is quite possible that the original count was only an estimate based on I formulas concerning population, major feeder roads, letc. Therefore, the estimates, also based on growth formulas, provide very similar projections of a 29 to 33 percent increases in traffic. Nevertheless, the estimates are still useful to mention because Penn DOT uses them to assist in I decisions concerning upgrading and maintaining the road surfaces. For this community the current ADT estimates all ranged from 30 to 3 1 percent increases in traffic volumes since the base ADT and thus were eliminated from the table. I Other than US Route 40 and PA 381 the roads in Wharton Township do not carry large traffic I volumes. In fact, even US 40 within the Township peaks at only 9,400 or so trips per day. The largest traffic count for PA 381 is over 1,200 counts at the Route 40 intersection. The other roads, although some of them are classified as major collecto:rs, all carry less than 1,000 trips per day. To I place this in context, Interstate 79 carry’s 10,000 to 20,000 vehicle trips per day. Below, Table G-1 lists all roads in Wharton Township which are maintained by Penn DOT. Traffic counts for various segments are from estimated data produced by Penn DOT for 1996. The segments 1 were chosen to represent the road areas with in the municipal limits and run lower to higher numbers from north to south or east to west. I I I I I I I I

54 I TABLE G-1 I I I I I I I I

2005 2005 10-80 1987 307 I 2006 2006 120-160 1987 246 2007 2007 10-80 1984 43 4 2008 2008 1040 1986 569 I 2009 2009 10-20 1987 135 2010 2010 10-30 1986 1.455 I I I 40- 1 10 I 1973 1 70 1-7931 I 120- 130 1973. - 49 1 2011 201 1 1040 1973 141 I 50-170 1973 56 1 2015 2015 10-80 1986 198 2021 202 1 20-50 1985 1.112 I I I I Source: Pennsylvania Department of Transportation. 1997

Existing Transportation Network I This section examines the major State maintained roads in Wharton Township in further detail. Also included is an examination of other means of ‘transportation such as rail, trails, and pedestrian circulation.’ Usually examined in this section would be mass transit and air services, however, neither I exist in the Township.

Highways Wharton Township has 74.775 miles of State roads in the municipality. The largest, I busiest and most locally significant road is State Routes 40. The road extends through the middle of I the township for 9.4 miles. The road is a major connection to Uniontown to the east. -

55 I TABLE G-2

' Segment# Segment No. Width Year Year YO Surface I inTownship Length Lanes ofRoad Built Resurfaced Trucks Type P-us 40 pnnclpal 420-600 9.393 2 19-32 1934- 1972-1977, 7-12 BitPavmnt Arterial 1936 1992for I seg. # 560-600 Major 10-90 4.19 2 16-20 1973 1994 9Bit Pavmnt Collector 100-200 6.584 2 18-20 1965 1982 9Bit Pavmnt I Local 10-60 2.903 2 16-18 1966 15 BitPavmnt I I I I I I 70-1601 4.801 2 I 16-19 I 1961 I 1991-1993 I 15 hitpavmnt I 2002 Major Collector 2003 Major 1973 it Pavmnt I Collector 2004 Local 10-30 1.04 2 1t 2005 Local 10-30 1.395 2 14- Major 40-80 2.492 2 15- Collector 2006 Major 110-160 2.581 2 I Collector 2007 Local 10-80 3.875 2 1: Local 1040 2.397 2 14- I 12009 Local 12! 1982 14 'BitPavmnt Major 1960 1993 19 BitPavmnt Collector I Major 1)10-180 8.147 2 18 1979 9Bit Pavmnt Collector I Major 10-80 2.065 2 18 1934 L978 9Bit Pavmnt Collector I 1 I I I I I Local 20-501 3.6691 2 I 18 I 1991 I 1968 I9Dit Pavmnt I ISource: Pennsylvania Department of Transportation. 1997 I Air I Air services for the region is supplied by the Fayette County Airport.

Rail I Rail service is not available.

Mass Transit I No mass transit services exist in the region.

Pedestrian Circulation Pedestrian circulation is limited in the Township because of a lack of infrastructure and the very rural nature of land dotted with farms and expanses of State Game Lands.

56 I Penn DOT Twelve-Year Plan The Pennsylvania Department of Transportation Twelve-Year Program is a comprehensive approach to the maintenance and repair of the state’s transportation network. The current program focuses on bridges and highways and is scheduled for completion between 1997 and 2008. Projects are categorized by four year phases with high priority projects scheduled in the first four year segment I Penn DOT’S District 12-0 Office, located at P.O. Box 459, North Gallatin Avenue Extension, Uniontown, PA (412) 439-73 15, serves Fayette, Greene, Westmoreland and Washington Counties. I Table G-3 is a listing of adopted projects in the Township under the jurisdiction of the Penn DOT District 12 Ofice: I TABLE G-3 I Coverage Project Location Description Date I 2001- Stony Run Bridge Wharton Twp. - Over Stony Run Bridge 2004 Replacement I

I Trails The Youghiogheny River Trail in the Rails to Trails program is north east in Ohiopyle State Park. I The Quebec Run Trail is located south of Elliottsville. Summary of Findings Other than US Route 40 and PA 38 1 the roads in Wharton Township do not carry large traffic I volumes. In fact even US 40 within the township peaks at only 9,400 or so trips per day. The largest traffic count for PA 38 1 is over 1,200 counts at the Route 40 intersection. This intersection is a major safety concern. I The other roads, although some of them are classified as major collectors all carry less than 1,000 trips per day. I The Township is very rural in nature with a sparse population. Many township roads are in poor condition, unpaved and are not marked well.

57

I I I I H. COMMUNITY FACILITIES I AND I PUBLIC UTILITIES I I I I I I I I I I m I I I COMMUNITY FACILITIES AND PUBLIC UTILITIES I Community Facilities Determining an area’s current needs and anticipating its future needs for community facilities and I services are complex matters that take many variables into account -- such as the area’s current and predicted socio-economic profiles. This section will give the results of the plan’s analysis and its recommendations concerning this vital sector of Wharton Township. Note that only the facilities I which were identified as problems or potential problems in the community facilities study will be ~I mentioned here. (1) Recreation

I The recreation facilities in Wharton Township are largely in good condition and address a variety of recreational needs. Nevertheless, they should be among the Township’s most immediate community facility concerns. It is recommended that the following improvements to Wharton Township’s I recreation facilities to be undertaken: I H Acquisition of an additional ten (10) acres for additional area to the Wharton Township Park. Addition of lighting for the active recreation facilties at the Wharton Township Park.

I The Pennsylvania Department of Community and Economic Development and the Department of Conservation and Natural Resources may provide fknding for park and recreation facilities for some I of these improvements through some of its programs. I (2) Public Services Wharton Township’s public safety needs are now being met by the Township Police Force and the Pennsylvania State Police. This service appears to be adequate and should hold true for the I foreseeable future.

Public Utilities I A viable and growing population requires certain basic services and facilities. This and an array of environmental considerations warrant the provision and improvement of a utility infrastructure. Anticipating future utility needs is a complex matter that takes many variable into account -- such as I development patterns, population changes, and economic changes. This plan element will provide recommendations to Wharton Township concerning how it can maximize the effectiveness of its I public utility resources both today and tomorrow. Note that primarily those facilities which have present or potential inadequacies that were discovered in the public utilities study will be mentioned I here. (1) Sanitary Sewers

I The safe, sanitary collection, treatment, and disposal of sewage is a primary concern to every community in Pennsylvania -- but especially to those experiencing growth. Communities who have had their well water contaminated by sewage and have had to pay for expensive cleanups are all too 1 common throughout Pennsylvania. To minimize its chances of facing such a crisis, this plan

I 59 recommends that Wharton Township and its Municipal Authority make the following improvements: 1 rn Act 537 Sewage Facility Plan Update: It is recommended that Wharton Township and its Municipal Authority following the recommendations of the adopted Act 537 Sewage Facility I Plan. This will assist the Township in facing interwoven environmental, growth management, and housing issues. It identifies the best management policies for local sewer problems. These policies will include community treatment in the denser villages and perhaps in areas I identified as wellhead protection zones. They will likely include enhanced management and enforcement of on-lot septic systems in the more sparsely settled areas. They may require amending the Township’s Subdivision and Land Development Ordinance. It should be noted I that many of the physiographic and other maps completed during this planning effort, and included in this document, are useful in the Act 537 Plan administration as well. 1

rn Extending Commimity Sewer Service: Presently, sanitary sewer service is limited to a few areas within Wharton Township, primarily Nemacolim, the Boy Scouts Camp and the I Bruderhof. It is recommended that the Township and consider expanding this service to those areas that have been identified as dense residential, commercial, or industrial in the land-use section of this plan. Requiring hookups in these areas should be considered as well. I However, these hookups should be provided so that “leapfrog development” and inefficient land use is avoided. Expanding sewer service will prevent expensive and dangerous I environmental problems caused by an unchecked proliferation of on-lot septic systems. Such expansions should be planned and constructed as soon as the need arises. I (2) Water

The provision of an adequate supply of water for major land uses is another critical community issue I facing Wharton Township. Although the present system appears to be supplying an adequate amount and quality for the population, potential problems still need to be addressed in the future. Thus, the following recommendations are made: I rn Extending Commzrriity Water Service: It is highby recommended that the Township consider expanding water service to those areas that lhave been identified as dense residential, 1 commercial, or industrial in the land-use section of this plan. However, these hookups should be provided so that “leapfrog development” and inefficient contaminations, provide an extra I control over development, improve water quality in some areas, and reduce the costs of building a home. Such expansions should be planned and constructed as soon as the need arises. 1 rn Protecting Public Water Sources: It is recommtmded that Wharton Township enact a water source protection ordinance for the areas surrounding the Wharton Water Authority’s water I sources in Wharton Township. If such an ordinance will regulate or prohibit land uses (through either zoning or subdivision controls), Pennsylvania case law requires that it use a hydro geologic study to determine the extent of the lands that (1) contribute water to the I involved water source and that (2) thus can be legally regulated. However, such an ordinance would greatly reduce the risk of the area’s citizens having to pay for either a new source or expensive cleanups. Within the regulated areas, zoning overlays could be used to prohibit I

60 I threatening uses (e.g.,junkyards, gas stations), regulate threatening uses, and /or require large- lot zoning for residences that intend to use on -lot septic systems. The Township’s I Subdivision Ordinance could be amended to require that new developments not draw down groundwater levels, that new developments not overburden the Wharton Municipal Authority’s aquifers, and that new developments either provide for an adequate water supply I or show that systems are in place which will adequately serve the development’s needs. The Township should investigate the costs and benefits of such an ordinance within the next two I years. Improving Stormwater Drainage: In the face of the some flooding problems throughout, it is I recommended that the Township utilize its engineer either to design improvements to the current stormwater drainage patterns or to aid the Township in enacting an effective stormwater management ordinance. Such ordinance may require amendments to the I Subdivision and Land Development Ordinances of the Township. This is a critical public utility recommendation and should be carried out within the next two years to prevent losses of property or life. Note that the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection I (Bureau of Land and Water Conservation) may provide either a large portion of the necessary funding or low-interest loans (through the Pennsylvania Infrastructure Investment Authority, or PENNVEST) for efforts that meet the standards of the Pennsylvania Storm Water I Management Program.

61

I I I I I. MUNICIPAL FINANCIAL ANALYSIS I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I MUNICIPAL FINANCIAL ANALYSIS One of the most important factors facing local governments is the state of their financial resources. I Very few services can be provided without knowing the amount of money there is available to spend. Infrastructure such as roads and sewers, services such as police protection and refuse collection, capital expenditures for new equipment, and general government services all depend on the I municipality’s operating budget for their hnding.

With that in mind, this section will attempt to serve as an “early-warning system,” based on historical I data, to bring attention to potential problem areas within the municipal financial structure of Wharton Township. This section should help make sense of the many factors that affect financial conditions and present them in a straightforward manner. An overall picture of the Township’s strengths and I weaknesses and emerging problems should develop. The data for this section was gathered from the Township’s annual audit reports for the years 1993 through 1995 and the 1996 audits which will be I available before final production of this project. At the time this section was authored the audit reports for 1996 were not available. Additional data for 1993 was taken from the Local Government Financial Statistics published by the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania and the Department of I Community and Economic Development (formerly DCA). Information from this publication serves as a benchmark for Wharton Township and allows for comparisons to other boroughs and townships.

I Revenues and Expenditures Revenues determine the capacity of a municipality to provide services. Revenues should grow at a rate equal to or greater than expenditures. Revenues should also be diversified so as to not be overly I dependent on any one source. Expenditures are a rough measure of a municipality’s service output. In general, the more money a local government spends, the more services it is providing. However, I this does not take into account how effective the services are or how efficiently they are distributed. Total revenues for a municipality are derived from two categories: 1) taxes and 2) miscellaneous I revenues. In 1993 Wharton Township reported that out of $5 11,002 dollars in total revenue only 39.9 percent was derived from tax collection. In comparison 52.0 of the totak revenues for townships in Fayette County were derived from tax collection. Of the $198,777 of revenue derived from tax 1 collection in Wharton a low 24.6 percent were collected from taxes on real estate and another 59.6 percent from earned income taxes. In Fayette County the ratio of real estate taxes to earned income taxes are almost identical. However, Wharton Township is much less dependent on tax collection I than other townships in the County.

Townships in Fayette County have a much lower percentage of their income derived from I miscellaneous revenue sources such as sanitary sewer rents and charges, state highway aid, waste and refuse disposal fees, state and federal grants, and fines or forfeits when compared to Wharton. In fact, the average for Fayette County Townships is slightly less than 48 percent of their entire revenues are i considered to be subcategories of miscellaneous revenues and not tax based. Wharton derives almost 60 percent of its revenues from miscellaneous sources such as state and highway aid and other miscellaneous sources. Nevertheless, the internal breakdown where the miscellaneous revenues are I derived are similar. The largest of the miscellaneous revenues are clearly the state highway aid. Local townships derived slightly less than half of all revenues from highway aid as did Wharton Township. Likewise, local townships and Wharton are very comparable in the ratio of revenues received from fines and forfeits, licenses and permits, and departmental services. However, the

62 similarities end as local townships receive 15 percent more in revenues from state and federal grants than Wharton. Wharton rounds out the miscellaneous revenues with over 40 percent received under the “Other Miscellaneous Revenues” title. Local to-wnships only derived 18 percent from this I category. Overall, Wharton Township should concentrate on funding for special projects through state and federal grants. I Table J-1 shows detailed revenue of the Township’s general fund taken from the local budget for the years 1993 through 1996. Compared to 1993 the percentages of income derived from taxes are I similar for the years 1994 and 1995. The low percentage of total income derived from taxes, especially real estate and earned income taxes when compared to other townships in the County is rather exceptional for the 1993 year. Looking at the 1994 and 1995 revenues from taxes shows a very I similar distribution of income derived from taxes and miscellaneous revenues to that of the local townships in the County. 1993’s large reception of miscellaneous revenues skewed the analysis. Overall, the Township is very average in terms of income sources and ratios with the exception of I state and federal grants received.

TABLE 1-1 I

c Revenue Receipts, 11993-1997 I Wharton Township I I I 1 1 1 1

I I I * 1996 figures are not yet available. 1 Source: Wharton Township Table 1-1 shows strong gains in earned income tax revenues of over 28 percent since 1993 by far outpacing the strong growth in real estate revenues of 9.0 percent. Clearly the two categories are I primary sources of income and look to be growing very well.

Expenditures from the general fund indicate the experises the local township has in operating the I

63 I

A I township functions. The majority, over 87 percent, of expenditures for townships in Fayette County come from total operation and township maintenance. The other revenues are considered to be capital I outlays for projects involving; health and sanitation, public safety, streets and highways, parks and recreation, and public service enterprises and make up the remaining 13 percent of expenditures. Within the 87 percent of operation and maintenance expenditures are a wide variety of expenses such 1 as general administration, sewer and sewage treatment, refhe collection, health service, police, fire, streets and highways, libraries, and parks and recreation. The largest category in most townships are the outlay for streets and highways. Wharton Township’s largest expenditure by far is their outlay I for streets and highways at more than 39 percent. Other townships averages are nearly identical for this category. Another large expenditure for Wharton Township is the outlay for other miscellaneous expenditures which would have to be identified Mher but make up 37 percent of the total operation 1 and maintenance budget. The local townships make up the much lower level of other expenditures with spending almost double on general administration and slightly more on fire and public services enterprises. Wharton spends nearly double the percent of revenues on parks and recreation than other I townships. I TABLE 1-2 I Expenditures, 1993-1997 I I I t

1 Revenues and expenditures per capita are found by dividing the population into total revenues and expenditures. This figure will be derived by dividing the 1990 population of 3,390 persons by the 1 years revenues. After the 1993 large capital outlay project revenues per capita have steadied and, and assuming a continuing trend into 1996 seem to be growing at a healthy rate of 2.4 percent per year and outpacing expenditures per capita by about three dollars per person. Tables 1-3 and 1-4, below I show the revenue and expenditures per capita from 1993-1996. I I I I 64 TABLE 1-3

Revenue Per Capita, 1993-1996 I Wharton Townshio Year General Fund Revenue f Population 1993 $396,814.18 I 3,390 1 I I 1994 I $355,730.59 1 3,390 I 104.90 I 1995 $364,242.89 3,390 107.45 1 1996" NA 3,390 NA I

Expenditures per capita have dropped after large outlays in highways works in 1993. Nevertheless, they have coincided with revenues very accurately and have remained slightly greater than revenues 1 per capita since 1993. Table 1-4 shows a summary since 1993 for revenues spent per capita. Cash reserves have increased over 18 percent since 1993 from, $133,884 to $158,330 in 1995. I TABLE 1-4 1 Expenditures Per Capita, Wharton Township Year I General Fund Erpenditures I I I I' I 1993 I $433,339.28 I 3.390 I 127.83 I -101 -. I 1991 I $344.567.84 I 3.390 I 64 I 1995 $350.958.56 3.390 103.53 I I I I I 1996" I NA ' * 1996 figures are not yet available. Source: 1993 - 1996 Local Government Financial Statistics I

Tax Rates The tax rates for Wharton Township are the lowest of any municipality in the County other than I Saltlick Township who's rates are at 4 mills. The high end in the County is 17 mills in Perry and German Townships. Overall, Wharton Township taxes are very, very low. 1 TABLE 1-5 1 Tl~rRat-, 1993-1996 Wharton Township Tax Rate I 1993 I 1994 I 1995 I 1996 I 1997 LI I 1 General Purposes 5 5 5 5 5 Debt - All Other - - - - I Total 5 5 5 5 5 Source: 1993 - 1997 Local Government Financial Statistics, Fayette County I 1

65 I Operating Position Another factor that investigates the relationship between expenditures and revenues is operating position. Operating position is calculated by dividing total expenditures by total revenues. This provides a picture of the Township’s ability to balance its budget, reserve finances for future emergencies, and pay its short-term bills. An operating position greater than one indicates that I revenues exceeded expenditures for that given year, and the municipality operated at a budgetary surplus. An operating position of less than one indicates that the Township’s expenditures exceeded revenues and Wharton had an operating deficit for that year. The larger the operating position, the I greater the surplus (see Table 1-5 below). I TABLE 1-6 I Year Total Revenue Total Expenditures Position 1993 $396,814.18 $433,339.28 .92 I 1994 $355,730.59 $344,567.84 1.03 1995 $364,242.89 $350.958.56 1.04 I 1996 NA NA NA

I Some financial analysts warn that financial weakness may result from practices such as: operating two or more years with an operating deficit, a current year deficit greater than that of the prior year, operating deficits in two of the past five years, and a deficit greater than 5-10 percent of the annual I operating budget. The factors could impact a community by forcing the municipality to pay higher interest rates on money it borrows or greater debt services in general.

I In order to combat fbture operating deficits, financial analysts recommend maintaining a fund balance of 5 percent of the general operating budget. Any surpluses greater than 5 percent should be used to fund one-time capital expenditures. If surpluses are used to artificially balance the budget, the i Township would have to raise enough revenues to cover the surpluses when they run out. Although difficult to achieve, moderate fund balances are good insurance.

I One practice that should always be avoided is borrowing money for greater than one year to fund operating expenses. This practice allows a municipality to avoid the reality of either cutting services I or raising revenues sufficient to pay for current service levels. This practice is discussed in depth in the next section, Debt. I Debt Debt is important to analyze because it is an expenditure obligation which must be paid when due. Debt is an. effective means of financing capital improvements, but its misuse can cause serious I financial repercussions. Even temporary inability to repay incurred debt can result in loss of credit rating and increased cost of future borrowing. Currently the Township does not report any debt i service nor has it dating back to 1993.

66 I Property Value This factor measures the growth in property value over time and is designed to indicate growth from year to year. Since property taxes represent a major source of revenue for local governments in I Pennsylvania, growth in property value is considered a key sign of economic health. The property value factor is calculated by taking the current year’s assessed property value, subtracting last year’s I assessed property value and dividing by last year’s assessed property value. For this factor, any positive number indicates a percentage growth in the assessed property value. I Wharton Township’s property values have remained very steady for the past three years and seem to be growing unevenly but positively every year. The assessment is using a 35 percent rate of assessment for all three years and will use the same figure for 1996. I TABLE 1-7 I

Year Current Year Assessed Previous Year’s Assessed Rate of Change of I Property Value ($000) Property Value ($000) Property Value 1993 $10,264 $9,977 2.8% 1994 $10,274 $10,264 .0 1% I 1995 $10,608 $10.274 3.1% 1996 NA $10.608 NA 1

Fiscal capacity Fiscal capacity computes the relationship between population and the assessed property value in the 1 Township. This gives an idea of the contribution of pro’perty value to the ability of the community to meet its obligations. Fiscal capacity is calculated by dividing the assessed valuation of real estate I by population as a measure of the growth in assessed valuation per capita. TABLE 1-8 I

Fiscal Capacity, 1993-1996 Wharton Township 1 Population real estate ($000)

I I I 1994 I $10,274 I 3,390 I 3.03 I 1995 $10,608 3,390 3.13 1996 NA 3,390 NA 1 I I Source: 1993 - 1996 Local Government Financial Statistics 1 Summary of Findings 1 Overall, the Township is very average in terms of income sources and ratios with the exception of state and federal grants received. The Township shows strong gains in earned income tax revenues with over 28 percent growth 1 since 1993 by far outpacing the strong growth in real estate revenues of 9.0 percent. Clearly the two categories are primary sources of income and look to be growing very well. I Revenues have outpaced spending since 1993 anal both appear to be growing at approximately 67 I 2,5 percent per year. 8 Cash reserves have increased over 18 percent since 1993 from, $133,884 to $158,330 in 1995. 8 Wharton Township’s property values have remained very steady for the past 3 years averaging about $10,500,000 at 35 YOassessment evaluation rates and seem to be growing unevenly but positively every year between .01 and 3.0 percent. The tax rates for Wharton Township are the lowest of any municipality in the County other than Saltlick Township who’s rates are at 4 mills. I I I I I PHASE 11: COMPREHENSIVE PLAN I I I ~I ‘I I I I PHASE 11: I COMPREHENSIVE PLAN Following the initial step of the completion of Background Studies in Phase I of the comprehensive I planning process, the Comprehensive Plan can be formulated. For this municipality, the following Plan Elements have been included: Community Development Goals and Objectives, Land Use Plan, Housing Plan, Economic Development Plan, Transportation Plan, Community Facilities and Public I Utilities Plan, Environmental Plan, Plan Component Interrelationship Statement, Contiguous Municipalities Statement, Implementation Tools and Strategies. I I 1 I I I A. GOALS AND OBJECTIVES I ,I I I ‘I I I I I I I I - I COMMUNITY GOALS AND OBJECTIVES I The purpose of this Plan is to help the Supervisors and Planning Commission of Wharton Township establish the Township as a place where people want to live. To this end the several goals and their I more specific objectives have been formulated. The various Plan elements which follow this section are developed with these goals in mind. The action items within the Plan Element are reflections of I the specific objectives. Land Use I GOAL: To ensure the orderly and efficient development of Wharton Township. a: Develop areas adjacent to existing development, where feasible, to enable the most I efficient and economical provision of basic community services. b. Discourage future “strip” development along highways, especially U. S. 40, and I encourage “infill” development within existing settlements. Promote the development of a village center at Farmington.

I C. Zone for additional commercial activity off of U.S.40 and reserve a suitable area of the Township for future industrial development.

I d. Provide adequate oversight of subdivision and land development to assure that public concerns with accessibility, setback, storm water management, on-lot sewage disposal, I water supply, and other factors are taken into account. e. Update and enforce land use ordinances as necessary to assure the orderly I development of the Township. Puhlic Utilities I GOAL: To provide adequate water and sewerage services to the developed and developing areas of the Township to insure a safe and sanitary environment in which to live and I work. a. Promote the development of a regional water system with Henry Clay and Stewart I Townships. b. Monitor water quality throughout the Township.

I c. Assure that malfunctioning septic systems are dealt with in an environmentally sensitive manner.

I Commuriity Facilities and Services GOAL: To provide an adequate level of community facilities which are easily accessible to the I citizenry. a. Provide adequate maintenance for existing community facilities to assure their I longevity.

69 I b. Develop parks for active and passive recreation within or near major settlement areas.

c. Add lights to existing Township Park to increase usability. d. Work with Park Service to allow and promote an increase in local use of Fort I Necessity National Historic Site. e. Increase recreational facilities around schools for increased community use. I f. Improve police services throughout the Township. I Housing GOAL: To assure that opportunities for adequate housing are available for all residents of the Township. I

a. Provide a mechanism for housing rehiabilitation for low- and moderate-income homeowners and make special provision for senior citizen housing rehabilitation I financing . I b. Provide opportunities for the development of all forms of housing within the Township. I c. Encourage the development of senior citizen housing as necessary.

d. Remove dilapidated housing and other unsafe structures. I e. Monitor seasonal housing construction and enforce codes on these. I Transportation GOAL: To assure that a safe and efficient transportation network is maintained throughout the Townships. I a. Work to improve and maintain U.S.40 over its entire length in the Township. 1 b. Work to assure that State and Township roads are maintained at an acceptable level throughout the Township. I c. Assure that adequate signage and signalization is provided for all roads. I d. Improve intersections as indicated in the: transportation plan.

e. Work with County to identify and prioritize bridges for maintenance and upgrading. I

f. Assure that all private roads built in subdivisions are built to acceptable PennDOT standards. I 1

70 I Economic Development and Quality of Life GOAL: To take an active developmental role to promote and improve the standard of I living and quality of life of residents in the Township.

a. Work to improve the image of the Township by promoting clean-up, paint-up, I and fix-up campaigns and by enforcing all appropriate ordinances. I b. Work to improve and enhance inter-governmental cooperation. c. Work to expand the economic base (and tax base) by encouraging new I commercial and industrial locations in the Township through provision of infrastructure and a cooperative attitude toward business.

11 d. Promote a good educational experience for all children of the township ~ I I I I I I ~I ~I ‘I I I I

71 I I I I I B. FUTURE LAND USE PLAN I I I I I 'I I I I I I I I I i FUTURE LAND USE PLAN Topography, limited transportation comdors, environmental factors, and past development practices I limit the options available for the future land use of Wharton Township. The same constraints also mandate careful planning to assure that the Township’s development leads to a high quality of life I for all residents and visitors. The Land Use Goal for Wharton Township is simple: To ensure the orderly and efficient development of Wharton Township

I The Objectives under this Goal hint at some of the difficulties involved in its realization:

a. Develop areas adjacent to existing development, where feasible, to enable the most I efficient and economical provision of community services.

b. Discourage future “strip” development along highways, especially U. S. 40, and I encourage “infill” development within existing settlements. Promote the development I of a village center at Farmington. c. Zone for additional commercial activity off of U.S. 40 and reserve a suitable area of I the Township for future industrial development. d. Provide adequate oversight of subdivision and land development to assure that public concerns with accessibility, setback, storm water management, on-lot sewage disposal, I water supply, and other factors are taken into account.

e. Update and enforce land use ordinances as necessary to assure the orderly I development of the Township.

The most significant concern for land use in the Township is the concentration of development along I U.S. 40. The long history of this corridor combined with a lack of other.east-west transportation has led to significant strip development, a mixture of highway commercial and residential uses, and heavy congestion during peak tourist weekends. Ifhture development is allowed to continue the past trend, I there will be a significant lessening of the overall ambience of the Township and a long-term reduction in the visual amenities which contribute to quality of life for residents and the quality of the I trip experience for visitors. Recommendation: Use zoning and land development controls to slow development on U.S. 40 and I encourage development on the north-south corridors which intersect with it by designating all new commercial areas on side roads.

I Recommendation: Work with the owners ofNemacolin to limit the number of access points on U.S. 40 and encourage the resort’s development away from the highway.

I Recommendation: Work with the Pennsylvania Department of Transportation to develop an alternate East-West route around Farmington on the south side of the village.

I Recommendation: Amend the subdivision ordinance to require a minimum number of road cuts be

72 installed for commercial developments and encourage developers to use access roads.

Because of the spread out nature of strip development in the Township there is not a strong center of I retail and service activity. The village of Farmington provides the best opportunity for such development in the hture. Care should be taken to zone the areas immediately surrounding the U.S. 1 40 - S. R. 381 intersection as commercial and to provide for denser residential development in this area. I Recommendation: Despite the desire to protect U.S. 40 from additional commercial traffic, it may be necessary to allow approximately one-half mile of frontage on U.S. 40 on either side of the U.S. 40 - S. R. 381 intersection to develop as commercial. Ifthis area is zoned for commercial very strict I ingress and egress regulations should be followed.

Recommendation: Provide a village style development zone within one mile of Farmington to allow 1 denser residential development with community septic o:r another alternative sewage disposal system.

Elsewhere in the Township the greatest concern should be with protection of the natural environment. I Unconstrained strip development along the minor highways and Township roads will lead to a loss of access and visual amenity. In addition, such development makes the costs of delivering services I substantially higher than it is in more concentrated developments. Cluster development to preserve green space, limited road cuts in major subdivisions, restricted development in all sensitive environmental areas (steep slope areas and floodplairis in particular), and carehl control of all I seasonal and second home development through the use of updated subdivision and zoning ordinances, are among the needed elements of a comprehensive approach to save the environmental integrity of the Township. I

Recommendation: Encourage the use of cluster developments which preserve at least fifty percent of total developable land as common green space through the use of density bonuses. I

Recommendation: In major subdivisions, if new roads are to be built, encourage double loading of such roads and limit the number of highway access points to reduce strip development. I Recommendation: Allow only large lot development (ten or more acres) in areas of steep slope. I Restrict or prohibit development in the 100 year floodplain. Recommendation: Since one of the largest pressures fbr new development in the next two decades 1 is likely to come from second home and seasonal developments, it will be necessary to treat these as stringently as any other type of residential development. In particular, environmental concerns should be paramount. The subdivision ordinance should address these developments directly. Further, 1 building codes should be strictly enforced and sewage disposal systems should be inspected periodically. I Other land use concerns deal with having appropriate land for industrial development, assuring that extractive industries (logging and coal mining) present no threat to the environment, and that all of the above can be dealt with by appropriate land use controls. I

Recommendation: Reserve an appropriate area of the Township near the eastern border for potential industrial development. This should be a reasonably flat, well-drained parcel of at least fifty acres I

73 I I with good access to U.S. 40.

I Recommendation: Work with the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection to assure that extractive industries clean-up after their operations are completed.

I Recommendation: Rewrite and revise both the Zoning Ordinance and the Subdivision Ordinance to 1 provide the mechanisms to enforce these goals and objectives. I I 1 1 I I I I I I I I I I

74

I 11 I C. HOUSING PLAN I I I I I i I I I 1 I I 1 I HOUSING PLAN

As part of the Comprehensive Plan for Wharton Township, a Housing Plan has been developed and is presented below. Information concerning the housing stock in the Township has been obtained from U.S. Census data. In addition, a housing conditions survey was conducted as part of the data gathering for this study. The goal of this plan component is:

Goal: To assure that opportunities for adequate housing are available for all residents of the Township.

Five Objectives frirther specify the intent of this goal:

Objective: Provide a mechanism for housing rehabilitation for low- and moderate-income homeowners and make special provision for senior citizen housing rehabilitation financing.

Objective: Provide oppoflunities for the development of all forms of housing within the Township

Objective: Encourage the development of senior citizen housing as necessary.

Objective: Remove dilapidated housing and other unsafe structures

Objective: Monitor seasonal housing construction and enforce codes on these units

These addressed below:

Through the undertaking of a concerted rehabilitation effort, the Township will attain an upgraded housing stock which will improve property values and prnvide a higher quality of life for the residents of Wharton Township.

Housing rehabilitation can be flinded by using a variety of Federal and state grants. Two of the most widely used are the Pennsylvania Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Program and the Pennsylvania Housing and Community Development Grant (H&CD) Program. (The latter is being renamed and restructured. This will be updated). The CDBG program provides funds to address community needs such as street improvements, water and sewer improvements, housing rehabilitation, as well as many other activities. Because Wharton Township is not an entitlement community, i.e., the Township does not receive its own annual CDBG funds, the Township officials could submit a proposal to Fayefte County requesting an allocation of the Coun-yt5 entitlement funds. The request would be for funds which are set aside for non-entitlement communities.

The Township may also apply directly to the Pennsylvania Department of Community and Economic Development for competitive CDBG funds. This is another pool of federal CDBG money set aside by the Department of Community and Economic Development for housing and community development activities.

75 The Department also has the Housing and Community Development (H&CD) program. The H&CD Program is a competitive program which provides funds to communities for four general purposes: (1) Housing Assistance, (2) Community Development, (3) Downtown Pennsylvania Assistance, and 1 (4) Economic Development. A housing rehabilitation program would fall under the category of Housing Assistance. Each year the Township can apply for up to $350,000. Application must be made 1 to the Pennsylvania Department of Community and Economic Development.

It is recommended that the Township apply for both CDBG and H&CD hnds to initiate the housing I rehabilitation program.

Guidelines I A Wharton Township housing rehabilitation program must be concentrated on low/moderate income families according to state and Federal guidelines. Forgivable loans can be made available to low- moderate income households to rehabilitate their housing units. It is recommended that the Township 1 make the housing rehabilitation program township-wide and that it be limited to owner-occupied housing. 1 Conditions for participation in the program should include: 1 Homeowners must have resided in their homes for at least one year prior to making application for rehabilitation assistance. The owner must remain in his property and maintain it in accordance with Section 8 I Housing Quality Standards of the Department of Housing and Urban Development for five years to receive the full benefit of the loan from the Township. I Eligibility for the loans is based on the income categories established by the Department of Community and Economic Development. If the owner of a dwelling is eligible fbr a loan, he/she will borrow the full amount of the loan from the Township. As long as the owner remains in and maintains I his property as determined by annual inspection by the Planning Commission or other designated agency, one-fifth of the amount of the loan will be forgiven annually for five years. I If the owner sells or transfers his property, the outstanding amount of the loan will be paid from the proceeds of the sale. Any funds that are recouped in this fashion will be used for additional rehabilitation activities throughout the Township. Loans should oniy be given to rectify deficiencies I and to weatherize the property. Critical deficiencies such as roof or foundation must be corrected first along with electrical, heating, and plumbing deficiencies. 1 Loans are to be made up to $8,500. If a balance of the $8,500 maximum remains after the critical deficiencies are corrected, then those funds can be spent for other code deficiencies and I weatherization improvements. It is important to note that when a unit is eligible for rehabilitation assistance, the unit must be brought up to the HUD Section 8 Quality Standards. If the maximum amount of the loan is not sufficient to cover these expenses, the owner of the home must come up with I the additional amount needed to bring the unit into compliance. 1 I

76 1 Housing Rehabilitation Needs A windshield survey of all of the housing visible from public roads revealed that there were about32 housing units which suffered from one deficiency or another. These housing units showed moderate and slight deterioration and are prime candidates for the rehabilitation program. Because the interiors of the houses were not inspected, it is likely that there are more than 32 units with deficiencies. These additional units should show up when applications for loans are filed by residents of the township.

Assurring that there are 32 units in the moderate and slightly deteriorated categories, a cost estimate to rehabilitate those units is as follows.

TABLE C-1 PROJECT COST ESTIMATE HOUSING REHABILITATION PROGRAM

Rehabilitation of 32 housing units @I$8,500 per unit $272,000 Administration @ $1,000 per housing unit $32,000 including work write-ups, awarding contracts, construction observation, and reporting. Total $304,000

It should be expected that more than 32 households will apply for the housing rehabilitation program. Each house will have to be examined before it is to be included in the program. Work write-ups and cost estimates will be needed for those units which are to receive funds.

Advisory Subcommittee The Township Planning Commission (or other group) should be appointed as the Housing Advisory Committee and would ideally include persons knowledgeable about the many different aspects of housing including:

* the private housing market * the public housing market * real estate practices * federal or state grant programs * housing rehabilitation or construction * municipal government procedures

Experienced or not, the key to the success of the Housing Advisory Committee is the commitment to serve and to be available for meetings.

I 77 Implementation The first step in implementing any housing rehabilitation plan is to secure the needed flinds. The applications, CDBG and H&CD, which must be completed are lengthy and involved. It is 1 recommended that a consultant that is experienced with the application procedure be retained to prepare the applications. Because of the Township's limited staff, it may be necessary or advantageous I to contract with a County level agency to actually implement a housing rehabilitation program once funding is secured. I The second step in implementing the program is for the housing advisory committee to take the initiative to provide the public with information they need to participate in the program. Step three is to begin accepting applications and reviewing and approving rehab work. Finally, the committee I will be responsible for reviewing work write-ups, securing bids from contractors and then monitoring and inspecting the umts. 1 Elderly Housing andspecial Rehabilitation Programs:.One important reason for the concern about home-ownership among the elderly is that many of these home-owners are not able to care for their properties because of financial and/or physical limitations. To alleviate the financial aspect of this 1 problem, special financing options within the housing rehabilitation program may be necessary. For example, some form of insurance might be created to play-off the remainder of the loan if a home- I owner who participates in the rehab program dies or becomes physically unable to live in their home and maintain it to the required level. Another possibility might be to place a lien on the property for all home-owners over a certain age. I Housing Variety: As in most rural Townships there is little rental or multi-family housing in Wharton Township. Zoning and sub-division ordinances should reflect the desire of the community 1 to accommodate this type of housing by providing a higher density residential zone near Farmington. If sewer is ever provided lot sizes in the Farmington area should be smaller to allow small single family and garden apartment development. 1

Senior Housing: There is a fairly high percentage of elderly or near-elderly among the home owners in the Township. It may well be desirable to consider the construction of-subsidized elderly housing 1 in the near future. The purpose of this program would be to allow elderly members of the community to continue to reside in the Township without having to maintain their own single family dwellings. If such construction is contemplated it will be necessary to undertake a feasibility study to determine 1 whether sufficient market exists to make the project economically feasible. I Dilapidated Structures: The funding from CDBG and the state may be used for the removal and demolition of dilapidated structures with the provision that any habitable unit is replaced with another habitable unit. i

Seasonal Housing: Seasonal Housing is a concern in the Township because it is growing rapidly as a portion ofthe total housing stock, because older units often were not built to code, and because these I units are often allowed to deteriorate. Since most seasonal housing is not eligible for the rehabilitation programs strict code enforcement may be the most appropriate mechanism to assure the maintenance of these structures. I I

78 I I

II I D. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PLAN i i I I I I I 1 I I 1 1 I I ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PLAN The following Goal and its accompanying Objectives were derived by the Planning Commission and 1 the Consultant from an analysis of the strengths and weaknesses of the Township based on the Background Studies of this Plan.

I Goal: Encourage an economy which is compatible with the character of the community and the quality of the environment.

I Obj: Promote the establishment of significant employment opportunities within the Township.

I Obj: Enhance, protect, and promote the historical and natural resources of the Township within the context of increasing recreational and cultural tourism.

I Obj: Promote the Township as a good place for local-serving businesses and low impact I manufacturing and service sector employers. Obj : Promote secondary processing of timber, minerals, and crops within locally acceptable I limits concerning the environment and quality of life. The residents of Wharton Township have indicated a desire to keep the Township rural and agricultural. There is apparently little sentiment for rapid expansion of the economic base. At present I over 80 percent of the employed residents of the Township are employed outside of its borders. This will change somewhat as the Township grows in population. Even without a specific economic development thrust employment will increase as a greater percentage of local-serving retail and I service activities are established in the Township to meet the needs of the expanding market. This type of growth in employment is probably an inevitable side effect of population growth. It is also probably a net “good” for the Township as it will reduce travel costs to other shopping areas for 1 consumers. However, the increase in retail and service employment is likely to be fairly modest for the foreseeable hture because the Township is located near Uniontown which will probably get the I bulk of the large scale commercial activity. Local-serving activities aside, there is some question about what - if any - growth should occur I in other sectors of the economy. The goals of the Township indicate that preservation of the natural environment, the historic and cultural resources, and the rural lifestyle are primary concerns. Some types of economic development are compatible with those goals. In the interest of improving the tax I base and reducing overall commuting costs and the associated energy use these should be considered. First, small scale, non-intrusive, manufacturing - especially that associated with the wood resource base of the Township - would be appropriate. In particular saw mills and value added lumber I products would be natural complements to the extractive industries in the Township. Second, small but high-tech service industries should be considered. Third, home based occupations which rely on electronic communication would be ideal if the telephone infrastructure could be improved and the I local calling area enlarged. Fourth, increased and expanded, non-dairy based, agricultural activities should be encouraged. Finally, those tourism activities which have a relatively low impact on the I environment should be considered.

80 Y I The Township’s transportation system is not appropriate for any industrial or heavy commercial activities which generate substantial truck traffic. Now., and for the foreseeable future, the Township is dependent on U.S. 40 for carrying the majority of its through traffic. This two-lane road would I need to be substantially upgraded to handle either large quantities of trucks or a major influx of commuters or shoppers. I Recommendation: Use the Future Land Use Plan, and possibly other land use controls, to establish areas for small scale industrial and commercial development which will serve the residents of the I Township, minimize the impact on sensitive environmental areas, and keep congestion to a minimum.

Recommendation: Work with the County Planning Department and County development agencies I to encourage the appropriate types of development in the Township.

Recommendation: Work with local farmers and the Commonwealth’s Cooperative Extension Service I to develop new markets for agricultural produce other than dairy in the area.

Recommendation: Work with the Ben Franklin Partnership and various universities to encourage I small high tech or back-office operations to locate in tlhe Township.

Recommendation: Work with the local tourist businesses and facilities and the Tourist Promotion I Agency of the County to increase the visitation of existing sites and create other opportunities for low impact tourism. I I I I B I 1 I I I

81 I I I I E. TRANSPORTATION PLAN I I I 1 TRANSPORTATION PLAN

I One of the major overall goals of the planning program is the provision for the expeditious and safe movement of traffic throughout the Township. Having examined the existing transportation situation of the Township in the transportation study section of the planning program, the formulation of a plan 11 for the future transportation can now be undertaken.

The Goals and Objectives of the Future Transportation Plan include:

Goals: To provide a transportation system which will assure the safe and convenient I movement of traflc within and the through the Township. Obj: Work to develop long-term alternative transportation corridors to reduce the I Township's dependence on U.S. 40. Obj: Develop long-term solutions to efficient and equitable Township road concerns by I devising a prioritized schedule of maintenance and upgrades.

Obj : Encourage Park-and-Ride, car-pooling, and ride sharing to minimize automobile I commuting.

Obj : Explore potential for alternative modes of transportation including bike paths, I commuter rail, and public transportation. m The following Transportation recommendations are presented as a result of the study and analysis of existing conditions and anticipation of future conditions throughout the Township: I Recommendation: Study by PennDOT of the feasibility of a By-Pass around Farmington

I Recommendation: Undertake improvements to the U.S. 40 and SB 81 intersection in Farmington.

I Recommendation: Replace a number of substandard bridges throughout the Township.

I Recommendation: Prepare and establish an ongoing maintenance program for township roads according to a I priority ranking system. Recommendation: I Eventually pave all township roads. Recommendation: I Enforce existing speed limits throughout the township particularly on U.S. 40.

I Recommendation:

82 Further identify problem intersections and take steps to rectify their deficiencies, e.g. site distance, grades angle of approach, etc. 1 Recommendation: Identify and develop a park and ride lot for use of township residents in the vicinity of I Farmington and Deer Park.

Recommendation: 1 Prepare a list of candidate projects every two (2) years for submission to the Fayette County Planning Commission and PennDOT for placement upon the PennDOT Twelve (12) Year Program. I

For an indication of the location of the foregoing recommended transportation improvements, refer to the map on the following page. 1 I I I I I I I I I I I

83 I

I I 8 F. COMMUNITY FACILITIES 1 AND I 1 PUBLIC UTILITIES PLAN 1 1 8 1 t I I 8 I I

I 1 COMMUNITY FACILITIES AND PUBLIC UTILITIES PLAN 8 The following recommendations are necessary to improve the availability, quality, and adequacy of Community Facilities and Public Utilities. Some of the recommendations are rather obvious while 1 others are more obscure. In some cases a comparison with accepted standards will determine where deficiencies exist. In other cases recommendations will be closely related to the implementation of the proposals presented in the other plan elements of this Comprehensive Plan. In making the recommendations for the Community Facilities and Public Utilities for the Township, the facilities will appear in the general sequence as they did in the Community Facilities and Public Utilities section of the Background Studies section of this Plan.

The Goals and Objectives for the Future Community Facilities and Public Utilities Plan include:

Goals: To assure that inj-astructure (sewer, water, stormwater) and public utilities (electricity and communications) met the needs of the populace.

Obj : Monitor the quality, capacity, cost, and accessibility of water service throughout the areas of the Township currently served by water companies.

Obj: Monitor the need for public sewer in the developed and developing areas of the Township. Follow the recommendations of the adopted set 537 Sewerage Facilities Plan.

Obj: Prepare and adopt a stormwater management plan.

Obj: Work to assure a high level of service from electric, telephone, cable, and associated uti 1 i ties.

Goals: To provide those services required by a growing and responsive Township in a manner which is equitable to all residents and isfiscal& sound

Obj : Acquire, develop, and maintain adequate park and recreation facilities for the present and future residents of the Township.

Obj: Assure the efficient functioning of Township services and business by continuing to provide adequate space and staff.

Obj: Maintain and expand the educational and cultural amenities in the Township by supporting the local library and museum.

Obi: Assure that emergency medical services and fire protection remain at their current level.

Obj: Establish and maintain an appropriate level of police services.

Obj: Promote the provision of adequate day care and elder care within the Township.

84 Obj: Provide for the efficient provision of important community services such as snow and solid waste removal.

The following Community Facilities and Public Utilities recommendations are presented as result of the study and analysis of existing conditions and the expected future conditions throughout the Township:

Recommendation: Improve the water supply in Farmington and Deer Park areas of the Township. This would involve finding a new sources of water supply and constructing a distribution system within these areas of the Township.

Recommendation: Insure that all on-lot water supply systems are installed to accepted standards.

Recommendation: Insure that all on-lot sewage disposal systems are installed to standards set forth in the Pennsylvania Sewage Facilities Act 537.

Recommendation: Explore the feasibility of a joint municipal authority for the township to address the foregoing recommendations. A joint authority with neighboring Henry Clay Township is being advanced.

Recommendation: Apply for State and Federal grants to undertake needed improvements for water and sewer service facilities.

Recommendation: Undertake and implement a plan for stormwater management throughout the township.

Recommendation: Prepare, adopt, and enforce a well head protection ordinance for the Township.

Recommendation: Support of a Library by the Township.

Recommendation: Acquire and develop an additional township park and active recreation area for use by township residents.

Recommendation: Consider development and improvement of recreational hikinghiking trails throughout the Township.

For an indication of the location of the foregoing Community Facilities and Public Utilities recommendations refer to the map on the following page.

85 I

I I 4 1 G. ENVIRONMENTAL PLAN I 8 1 I 1 ENVIRONMENTAL PLAN

The abundant natural resources of Wharton Township provide the township with its primary character, its recreational opportunities, and contribute significantly to its quality of life. Consequently, residents must make a conscious effort to protect the environment that makes their lifestyle, quality of life, and recreational pursuits possible. As economic and development pressures continue to grow, a clear plan for ensuring that significant environmental resources will exist for future generations to enjoy becomes increasingly important. Steps should be taken to protect these resources, to improve their quality, and to maximize their benefit to the region through environmentally sensitive development. This Environmental Plan is intended to guide the township in its efforts to enhance the use and treatment of local natural resources.

CHALLENGES AND OPPORTZTNITIES FOR WHARTON TOWNSHIP ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES: e Wharton Township encompasses a wide variety and number of important natural sites and natural resources. e Vast amounts of agricultural and forested land exist in the township, and are the primary contributors to the scenic landscape that characterizes the area. e The existence of significant natural resources draws users to the township, which in turn brings the potential for exploitation of the resources without proper protection.

Development pressures will continue to threaten the agrarian character and lifestyle of the township and the natural resources that make that character and lifestyle possible.

GOAL: Protect the existing natural sites and resources of Wharton Township.

Objective: Recognize the natural sites and resources of the Township.

Recommendation: Promote the recognition of valuable natural sites and resources through educational and promotional programs.

Recommendation: Establish programs to promote a greater understanding of local environmental concerns, including but not limited to positive visual character and the importance of farmland and woodlands.

Recommendation : Use the natural resources of the township, without compromising their quality or ability to be used in the future, to attract visitors to the region and to maintain the quality of life of township residents. Recommendation: Promote the educational opportunities of the township’s landscape and natural resources. 8 Create school programs based on the significant resources identified in the county’s Natural Heritage Inventory.

E Recommendation: ~I Create scenic overlooks and pull-offs in the township, with appropriate signage. Objective: Protect specific natural sites and resources in the township. I Recommendation: Maintain an updated list of threatened township natural resources.

I Recommendation: Place limitations on development in sensitive areas of the township through appropriate 8 ordinances. Recommendation: Work to maintain the high quality of streams and other water resources in the township.

Recommendation: Prevent encroachment on, and associated pollution of, waterways, watersheds, and wetlands by development.

Recommendation: Avoid development in agricultural security areas and on prime farmland wherever possible.

Recommendation: Encourage timber harvest in concert with forest stewardship.

GOAL: Preserve the scenic quality of agricultural and forested land in Wharton Township.

Recommendation: Pursue the establishment of a rural historic landscape in the township.

Recommendation: Coordinate landscape and natural resource identification and recognition with other cultural resource work in the township.

Recommendation: Incorporate the protection of scenic resources and cultural resources into combined preservation plans.

Recommendation: Prevent the deforestation/clear cutting of the mountains in the township.

B 87 Maximize the potential of township resources through coordination and cooperation with other federal, state, and local resource protection agencies. 1 U 1 i i 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

89 I

8 8 PLAN COMPONENT 18 INTERRELATIONSHIP STATEMENT 8 1 t I S 8 I 1 I I 8 t PLAN COMPONENT INTERRELATIONSHIP STATEMENT

The synthesis of interrelated activities to resolve issues and problems is the thrust of community planning. In this regard, there are linkages among the elements of the goals and objectives and recommendations of the Comprehensive Plan. All are related and should further the overall goal which is to maintain in a rural region with complementary orderly growth and development. This clearly underlies all future land use recommendations which attempt to protect environmental features, preserve agriculture, encourage low intensity economic development, and discourage sprawl and strip development.

The Zoning Ordinance and Subdivision and Land Development Ordinance place the land use, division of property, and land development recommendations in a regulatory framework. Housing recommendations not only come to terms with demographic trends, agricultural needs, existing housing conditions, but also further the goals of low-intensity and complementary residential development and the conservation of the existing way of life throughout the Township. Transportation recommendations not only address safety issues and strengthen and improve the existing transportation system, but seek to enhance future land use recommendations and economic development potentials as well.

The community facility and services recommendations reflect the land use recommendations related to the enhanced village center concept, the avoidance of sprawl, and strip development, and the preservation open and agricultural areas. Finally, water conservation and service recommendations emphasize the protection of surface and groundwater sources for public consumption, recreational use, and aesthetic enjoyment which again reflect land use and housing recommendations and development recommendations have obvious impacts on future economic development potentials. CONTIGUOUS MUNICIPALITIES STATEMENT I CONTIGUOUS MUNICIPALITIES STATEMENT Planning provides the luxury of facilitating the coordination of: land use, transportation, community facilities, public utilities, and other planning components among those municipalities included in the planning effort. In this case, recommendations for Wharton Township have been coordinated and are consistent. In addition, the municipalities surrounding the Township are more similar than dissimilar I to it.

It is believed that the goals, objectives, and recommendations of this Plan are consistent with those 8 of neighboring municipalities located in this multi-municipalities section of the South central Pennsylvania region. The neighboring municipalities include the townships of Springhill, Georges, South Union, North Union, Dunbar, Stewart, and Henry Clay, and the State of West Virginia. Each I of these municipalities as well as the County and the School Board will have an opportunity to I comment on this Plan before its final adoption. Of special interest, the land use recommendations of this Plan are in conformance with and/or respond I to land use patterns in evidence in the adjacent municipalities. 8 1 8 8 I 8 I I 8 1

I 91 I 8 8 IMPLEMENTATION TOOLS AND 8 STRATEGIES I 8 8 I 8 I 8 I I I 8 1 8 I IMPLEMENTATION TOOLS AND STRATEGIES

The Comprehensive Plan Elements are prepared as a guide for the future orderly growth and development of the Township. The Plan is primarily advisory in nature and has no legal enforcement status to insure its implementation. The wholehearted support of the Plan by Township Board of Supervisors, the Township Planning Commission, appointed public officials, citizen organizations, and the general citizenry is, therefore, most important if the recommendations and proposals of the Plan are to be implemented.

In addition to this support, there are a number of other strategies and tools which can be used to implement the Plan. These include:

Zoning Ordinance: Wharton Township presently has a Zoning Ordinance and Zoning Map. Serious consideration should be given by the Township to the preparation and adoption of an amendment to this Zoning Ordinance and Map to bring it into line with the recommendations and proposals of this Comprehensive Plan, in particular the Future Land Use Plan and Map.

Subdivision and Land Development: Wharton Township presently has a Subdivision and Land Development Ordinance. This ordinance should be reviewed by both the Township Planning Commission and the Township Board of Supervisors in light of the recommendations and proposals of the Comprehensive Plan. Serious consideration should be given by the Township to the preparation and adoption of an amendment to this Subdivision and Land Development Ordinance to bring it into line with the recommendations and proposals of this Comprehensive Plan.

Capital Improvements Program: The Capital Improvements Program (CIP) is a list of municipal projects with their respective priority, cost, and proposed method of financing listed. The program covers a period of five (5) years into the future. Through this program, the recommendations of the Transportations Plan, Community Facilities and Public Utility Plan, and Housing Plan can be camed out and financed thereby prpmoting the implementation of most all the recommendations and proposals of the Comprehensive Plan.

Comprehensive Plan Implementation Schedule: This schedule lists according to priority time frames for each of the Comprehensive Plan Elements the major recommendations within each of the Plan Elements. This schedule should be prepared by the Township Planning Commission. It should be updated annually by the Commission and an annual measure of attainment published and included in the Annual Report of the Planning Commission to be published by March of each year.

92

Top View