1 I Y I 1 I THE CUMBERLAND COUNTY I COMPREHENSIVE PLAN I 1990 I 9 I I I Volume I: Basic Studies 1 I 11 1 I 1 I I Cumberland County Comprehensive Plan m TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE i Volume I: BASIC STUDIES Chapter 1 - Introduction 1-1 Chapter 2 - History 2-1 B Chapter 3 - Natural Environment 3-1 Chapter 4 - Population/Socio-Economic Profile 4-1 Chapter 5 - Economy and Employment 5-1 I Chapter 6 - Existing Land Use 6-1 Chapter 7 - Housing 7-1 Chapter 8 - Transportation 8-1 Chapter 9 - Existing Community Facilities and Services 9-1 1 Chapter 10 - County Administration and Finances 10-1

I Volume 2: PLAN AND IMPLEMENTATION I Introduction i Chapter 11 - Statement of Goals and Objectives 11-1 Chapter 12 - Future Land Use Plan 12-1 Chapter 13 - Transportation Plan 13-1 I Chapter 14 - Community Facilities Plan 14-1 Chapter 15 - Housing Plan 15-1 1 Chapter 16 - Plan Administration and Implementation 16-1 1 1 I 1 I I 1 u LIST OF MAPS Title Volume I: BASIC STUDIES Flood Plain Slopes Geology Soils Associations Soils Suitable For Agriculture Soil Limitations For On-Lot Sewage Systems Soil Limitations for Building Site Development Woodlands Existing Land Use Harrisburg Urbanized Area Highway Functional Classification System Carlisle and Shippensburg Urban! Areas Highway Functional Classyif ication System Rural Cumberland County Highway Functional Classification System Harrisburg, CarlisILe, and Shippensburg Urban Areas 1985 Traffyic Volumes Tri-County Region :L985 Traffic Volumes Educational Facilities, Librari.es, and Hospitals Recreation Facilities Police, Fire, and Municipal Facilities Public Sewage and I?ublic Water Service Areas Volume 11: PLAN AND IMPLEMENTATION Future Land Use Ma]? CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION The Need for Planninq Planning is a continuing process which must pay constant attention to changing conditions and new problems that may arise. This process should take into account the changes affecting growth and development in Cumberland County. To keep abreast of these changes, the County must take stock of the past and current planning efforts in order to adjust and reshape its future course. In more specific terms, planning is usually needed to prevent or solve problems created by the following: 1. Population growth which has created a need for more housing. 2. Increased demands for public services such as water, sewerage, storm drainage, parks, and other community facilities. 3. The continued dependency on the personal automobile for transportation, creating a demand for better roads and parking opportunities. 4. Expanding residential areas which create a need for properly located supportive commercial areas.

5. A changing economic base with pressures from commerce and industry wishing to locate in the County. 6. Changing agricultural patterns with the trend of decreasing agricultural employment. Benefits of Good Planninq I The following are some of the benefits of good Planning: 1. It is possible for the various segments of the County to coordinate their activities and to work toward the I achievement of common goals. Planning can prevent much duplication of effort and bring about greater 1 efficiency. 2. More efficient budgeting and capital improvements programming can be accomplished by County and local officials who know in advance what must be purchased or 1 constructed and can plan to provide the necessary funds . 1 1-1 I 3. The needs, locatioii, and priorities for the maintenance and expansion of public utilities, water, and sewers can be more effectively established. 4. Sites for community facilities can be predetermined and purchased in advance of need; resulting in savings of time and public money. .. 5. Industrial and commercial businesses may be attracted to the County, because commerce is interested in areas that have stable zoning, quality planning, and pro- fessional and orderly plan implementation. 6. The homeowner, merchant, utility company, developer, and industrialist can invest with more assurance that their investment will be a sound one. The Plannina Process The planning process is a course of action that is directed toward preparing and administering a comprehensive plan. It is a continuous process due to social and economic changes, new development policies, and changing conditions in general. The planning process contains the following major factors: 1. ASSUMPTIONS. The County makes certain basic assumptions as to how it will develop due to certain population and economic variables. 2. OBJECTIVES. Planning objectives for the County are developed to provide the best possible social, economic, and physical environment. 3. STANDARDS. Planning standards are established in terms of physical, social, and econom.ic requirements based on need. 4. SURVEY AND RESEARCEI. Research is an important part of the planning program. Information on current conditions is collected and fac:ts about the County are compiled. Population, housing, physical conditions and resources, existing land use patterns, existing and proposed highways, and community facilities and services are examples of essential data base elements. 5. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION. As part of the planning process, residents of the County should be given opportunities to express their ideas as to how they want to see the County develop. 6. POLICY AND DESIGN CONCEPT. After sufficient research has been done, the information lis analyzed and a policy and plan concept is established which should be based on the stated qoals for the County’s future development.

1-2 7. PLAN. The Comprehensive Plan is the official policy guide for influencing the location, type, and extent of future development. It establishes the basis for the County's decision-making and review process on zoning matters; location of public buildings, facilities, and activities; land uses; and provision of housing areas and commerce on need over a period of time. Leqal Standinq of the Comprehensive Plan The Pennsylvania Municipalities Planning Code (Act 247 of 1968, as amended and reenacted by Act 170 of 1988) authorizes municipalities to prepare a comprehensive plan, which is to include, but not be limited to the following elements: 1. A statement of objectives concerning the County's future development, including the location and character of future development. 2. A future land use plan. 3. A housing plan. 4. A plan for the movement of people and goods. 5. A plan for community facilities and utilities. 6. A statement describing the interrelationships among various plan elements. 7. A map or statement indicating the relationship of a municipality and its proposed development to adjacent municipalities. The Pennsylvania Municipalities Planning Code defines a municipality to include cities, boroughs, townships, and counties. When a borough, or township having a comprehensive plan is located within a county which has its own adopted comprehensive plan, both the county and the borough or township shall give the plan of the other consideration in order that the objectives of each plan can be protected to the greatest extent possible. Oraanization of the Plan The preparation of a Comprehensive Plan involves three major steps: first, the collecting of all essential information relating to the people and the land; second, after careful and thorough analysis of this information, the preparation of plans which will encourage the most appropriate future development of the County while maintaining existing property values and seeking ways to provide necessary municipal facilities and services; and third, upon completion of the planning process, putting these planning recommendations into action programs. This is accomplished through the adoption and enforcement of local zoning

1-3 ordinances, subdivision and land development ordinances, an official map, and the preparation and adoption of a capital improvements program. The Comprehensive Plan is divided into two major elements. Volume I, Basic Studies, includes the Introduction, History, Natural Environment, Population/Socioeconomic Profile, Economic Base, Existing Land Use, Housing, Transportation and Circulation, Community Facilities and Services, and County Administration and Finances. Volume 11, Plan and Implementation, includes Community Development Goals and Objectives, Future Land Use Plan, Transportation Plan, Community Facilities Plan, Housing Plan, and Plan Administration and Implementation.

1-4

CHAPTER 2 HISTORY - PAST AND PRESENT Historical Development Cumberland County's origin began in 1681 with the land grant to William Penn by King Charles I1 of England. Westward colonial expansion produced a flow of settlers into the Cumberland Valley, including many Scotch-Irish. James Letort established a trading post along the present-day Letort Creek in 1720. The increasing number of settlers brought about the need for a more central governmental body to provide law and order; Lancaster (City) was the nearest seat of government to the Cumberland Valley. Through the Act of January 27, 1750, Governor James Hamilton directed the formation of Cumberland County (named after Cumberland County, England) as the sixth county erected in the State. Its boundaries extended from the Susquehanna River and York County on the east and southeast to Maryland on the south, to the border of Pennsylvania on the west, and to central Pennsylvania on the north and northeast. Carlisle was established as the county seat in 1752. Other counties were later formed from Cumberland County, including Bedford (1771), Northumberland (1772), Franklin (1784), Mifflin (1789), and Perry (1820). Germans moved into the area in large numbers prior to the Revolution. Early relations with the Indians in the County were quite peaceful, but they became strained as the result of the settlers' actions, such as cheating on trade deals, selling whiskey, and encroaching on Indian land. Cumberland County was on the extreme frontier and, as the result of the Indians' severe retaliation, a large number of forts were built to provide refuge, especially important during the French and Indian Wars and the 1763 uprising led by Chief Pontiac. The earliest fort was Fort Franklin, built in 1740 at Shippensburg; Fort Morris was erected at the same site in 1755. Fort Lowther was built in 1753 at Carlisle; with other outposts in the County being Forts Groghan, Dickey, Ferguson, Letort, and McCombs. Indian councils were held in Carlisle in 1753 and 1754 in efforts to secure peace. The British used the fort in Carlisle as the beginning point for military activities in western Pennsylvania, underscoring the significance of the Carlisle Barracks as one of the oldest military posts in the country. After 1765 relations with the Indians were again peaceful, due in large part to the beginning of their westward migration. By 1775, few Indians remained in the County. Up to the beginning of the Revolution Cumberland County's economy remained basically agrarian. During the Revolutionary War several foundries were established, producing cannons from iron ore found in the South Mountain. Again, Carlisle played a prominent role in this effort as the largest armament and ordinance center where hundreds of workmen labored to make the needed arms and ammunition. This and other involvement in the War adversely affected the County's agriculture, to the point that fields often went unplowed and both plantings and harvests 2-1 were missed. Following the end of the War the County returned to its agrarian ways. The cxonomy prospered with agricultural produce exported to the east and new businesses begun. In 1790, the first U.S. Census showed Cumberland County with a population of 18,243. By 1850, significant changes had occ:urred within the County. Public schools were established. Dickinson College, which was founded in 1783, opened its School of Law in 1834. Water and gas were being piped into Carlisle Borough. Newspapers were being published, and hotels and other businesses flourished. However, the local investment in agriculture still. exceeded that which was devoted to manufacturing, which was quite varied and included metals and metal products, textiles, leather and leather goods, and milling. As thousands of settlers and frontiersmen passed through the Cumberland Valley en route West, Shippensburg and Carlisle became important way stations. Turnpike roads, which were built to connect southeastern Pennsylvania with the West, passed through the Valley, establishing the backbone for the County's transportation network and the pattern for future land use. The Civil war had a mixed effect. on Cumberland County. Daily life was disrupted because of the hundreds who went to fight; in addition, Confederate forces briefly occupied Carlisle, with minimal damage resulting. On the other hand, the war created a heavy demand for goods produced in the County; as a result, the economy prospered further. This continued into the decades following the end of the war, a:; the development of the West created high demands €or goods and services. This time period also saw the expansion of utilities, services, and facilities within the County: telephone and electric services were established, sewer and water falcilities were expanded, transportation was broadened with the inclusion of trolley service, and higher education was facilitated with the founding of Shippensburg State Normal School in 1871 (now known as Shippensburg University of Pennsylvania) and Messiah College in 1909 in Grantham. World War I had a significant impact on Cumberland County, with thousands of its residents serving in the military, with manufacturing diversifying in response to the demand for war goods. Agriculture, however, remained a dominant part of the economy. The establishment of the New Cumberland Army Depot, although located across the County bounda.ry in York County, had a strong positive influence on the County's employment and other segments of the economy. The establishment of the U.S. Naval Supply Depot Defense northeast of Mechanicsburg and the continuation of the U.S. Army War College east of Carlisle had a similar effect.

World War I1 had the most pronounced social and economic impact on the County. Again, thousands served in the armed forces and the economy was focused almost. entirely on the war

2-2 effort; producing vast amounts of food, tires, electronic equipment, and other materials to meet the demands. Following the war, there were social changes that greatly altered the face of the County and established the growth pattern that still continues. A combination of the GI bill for housing and education, low mortgage interest rates, and a rapidly improving transportation network resulted in unprecedented personal mobility. The exodus from urban areas began with a vast growing population moving further into suburban and rural areas. Agricultural acreage was reduced to accommodate new housing, utilities and services were demanded to accommodate new housing, and the economy shifted strongly from that of rural agricultural to urbadsuburban commerce, industry, and services. Cumberland County Today Cumberland County consists of about 550 square miles and is located in southcentral Pennsylvania, directly west of Harrisburg, the State capital, and close to the eastern seaboard megalopolis. The County is surrounded by Dauphin County on the east, York and Adams Counties on the southeast and south, Franklin County on the southwest, and Perry County on the northwest and north. Cumberland County's boundaries generally follow definite physical features. The west bank of the Susquehanna River forms the eastern boundary. The Yellow Breeches Creek forms the southeastern boundary from the Susquehanna River to Williams Grove. The remainder of the southeastern boundary and the southern boundary is established by Mains Run, Gum Run, Middle Spring Creek, and Laughlin Run. The ridgeline of Blue Mountain forms the northern boundary. Cumberland County consists of 12 boroughs and 22 townships. It is considered an urban county and had a 1980 population of 179,625, making it the 20th most populous county in the State. The eastern portion of the County encompasses its most densely developed areas, including Camp Hill, Lemoyne, Mechanicsburg, New Cumberland, Shiremanstown, West Fairview, and Wormleysburg Boroughs and East Pennsboro, Hampden, Lower Allen, and Upper Allen Townships. All or portions of these municipalities are within the County's urbanized area. Carlisle Borough, the county seat, which lies in the middle of the County, and Shippensburg Borough, which lies on the southwestern boundary of the County, are the two other urban areas.

2-3 CHAPTER 3

NATURAL ENVIRONMENT To assist in providing orderly, intelligent, and efficient growth for Cumberland County, it is essential that appropriate features of the natural environment be described, and that this information be integrated with other applicable planning tools and procedures. The purpose of this Chapter is to provide a practical compilation of available environmental data as an aid to planning for the County. It is important that government decision-makers and the public be aware of the constraints that the natural environment may impose upon future development of the County. Climate I Cumberland County is dominated by atmospheric flow patterns common to Humid Continental type climate. The complex weather I systems that influence the area originate in the Central Plains of the United States. As they travel eastward, they are gradually modified by the characteristics of the underlying topography. Moisture in the form of precipitation is lost due to orographic uplift, as the weather systems moving eastward are lifted over the Appalachian Mountain Chain. A secondary flow pattern, and primary source of heavy precipitation associated with cyclonic circulation, originates in the Gulf of Mexico and travels northward through the County. The moist air flow from the Atlantic Ocean is a modifying rather than a controlling climatic factor. Periodically, considerable moisture is picked up by storms developing and moving up along the southeastern coastline of the United States. A disturbance of this type usually brings moderate to heavy precipitation to the Lower Susquehanna River Area due to the general upslope motion of moist air over the area’s rugged terrain. In the colder months when temperatures are near or below freezing, these storms often deposit heavy amounts of wet snow throughout the area. The normal succession of high and low pressure systems moving eastward across the United States produce weather changes in the area every few days in the winter and spring of the year. In the summer and fall, the weather changes are less frequent due to a slowing down of the general atmospheric circulation during the warmer months. Low pressure cyclonic systems usually dominate the area with southerly winds, rising temperatures, and some form of precipitation. The high pressure anticyclonic systems normally bring west to northwest winds, lowering temperatures, and clearing skies in the area. Hurricanes or tropical disturbances, as they move northward, follow a northeasterly path in the middle latitudes and produce heavy rainfalls and strong surface winds in the study area. Frequently affecting water supplies and causing floods, these tropical storms are observed during the hurricane season - June through November. 3-1 Weather elements or activities of the atmosphere, such as precipitation, temperature, wind direction and speed, relative humidity, and sunshine are measurable quantities which affect the study area. The study area norma.11~receives about 46 inches of precipitation annually. Normal month.ly precipitation totals average from a minimum of 2.6 inches in February to a maximum of 4.3 inches in August. Snowfall is light to moderate averaging - about 30 inches annually, while the mea.n annual number of days with snow cover of one inch or more is ahout 50 days. Air temperatures are important to the management of water resources and water quality. The average annual temperature for the study area is about 50 degrees F. The mean freeze-free period is about 175 days. Because of the rugged terrain, the freeze-free season is variable; ranging between 170 days in the mountains to 180 days in the lowlands. The summer mean temperature is about 76 degrees F, and the winter mean about 32 degrees F. Winds are important hydrologic factors because of their evaporative effects and their association with major storm systems. The prevailing wind directions in the area are from the northwest in winter and from the west in spring. The average wind speed is 10 mph; with i3n extreme wind speed of 68 mph from the west-northwest reported in the Lower Susquehanna area during severe storm activity in March of 1955. Relative humidity also affects evaporation processes. The mean monthly relative humidities for the months of January, April, July, and October are about 68 percent, 62 percent, 70 percent, and 75 percent, respectively. Sunshine, which varies with latitudle and time of the year, is a factor to be considered in the various aspects of water resources. The mean annual sunshine in hours per year is about 2,500 hours. The evaporation process is controlled by temperature, wind, sunshine, and humidity. The rate of evaporation during the warmer months has an important impact on water storage in reservoirs and on irrigation. The mean May to October evaporation accounts for about 72 percent of the total annual evaporation. The climate should be considered when developing in the County. Tree lines and high ground should be on the northwest side of buildings to take advantage of the microclimates of a tract of land. By breaking the velocity of the northwest winds, energy conservation can be realized by reducing the temperature slightly. To take advantage of the sun for passive or active solar systems, buildings should havce south facing walls. Although the climate will not have a maljor effect on land uses, it should be considered in the layout of buildings for energy conservation purposes. 3-2 I

I Hvdroloqv Management of water resources requires a knowledge of the quantity of water which is available for use and which must be I managed in order to provide for the safety and welfare of the public. For studies of water use and quality, low flow conditions are of general concern; whereas, for flood management, I it is necessary to know the high flow characteristics of streams. Water resources are most appropriately managed by I watersheds. A watershed is the entire land area drained by a particular watercourse. Land use activities and waste water discharges within the watershed determines the quality of the water which eventually flows out of the drainage area. The I concept of the watershed has practical planning application, as it is the primary geographic region in which to collect water resource related information. Watershed associations are I organizations concerned with water quality and quantity issues within a particular watershed. They are a very efficient way of dealing with water resource issues. I There are two main watersheds in Cumberland County. The Conodoguinet Creek Watershed drains the northern half of the County and the Yellow Breeches Creek watershed drains the 1 southern half of the County. Both of these streams drain from west to east, eventually flowing into the Susquehanna River. There are numerous sub-basins within the two main watersheds. For example, the Big Spring Creek watershed is a sub-watershed 1 draining a portion of the Conodoguinet Creek watershed. The first factor affecting water flow conditions is runoff I which is primarily influenced by precipitation distribution. However, other factors such as land cover and use, geology and physiography influence the variability of flows from individual 1 watersheds. Runoff has a distinct seasonal variation; with the period of highest runoff occurring in late winter or early spring, and the I period of lowest runoff occurring in late summer and early fall. Low water flow deficiencies develop after prolonged periods ! of little or no precipitation and persist until sufficient rainfall relieves the situation. Flow deficiencies of significant duration may cause new water supply problems and may I magnify existing water quality problems, Although floods occur in all seasons, studies of the relationships among storm intensity, duration, affected area, and t seasonality suggest a tendency for flooding on principal streams to occur in winter and for floods on small streams to occur mostly in summer. Large flood areas are caused by storms of low 1 rainfall intensity and long duration covering the entire area of principal watersheds. Small area floods, on the other hand, are I' caused by storms of high rainfall intensity and relatively short I 3-3 duration. An exception to this is tropical storms, which normally occur during the summer months and cause extensive flooding over large areas. The result of such flooding over long periods of time is the creation of flood plains. Flood plains are defined as low lying, flat areas adjacent to streams, which are subject to frequent, periodic flooding. For the purpose of land use planning in Cumberland County, those areas delineated by the Fed.era1 Emergency Management Agency as within the 100-year flood boundary and those areas delineated as flood plain soils in Table 16 of the Soil Survey of Cumberland and Perry Counties, Pennsylvania, issued April 1986, should be considered as flood plains. Flood plains are an intrinsic and beneficial aspect of the natural landscape. They allow for an increase in drainage during rainy periods and buffer the stream from any detrimental effects of surrounding land uses. Every stream in Cumberland County has a flood plain adjacent to it. These flood plains should be protected for the following reasons: To prevent unnecessary property damage; To minimize danger to the public health by protecting the water supply and promoting safe and sanitary drainage ; To reduce the financial burdens imposed on communities by flooding; To comply with provisions of the National Flood Insurance Program and the Pennsylvania Flood Plain Management Act; To provide sufficient drainage courses to carry abnormal flows of storm water during periods of heavy precipitation, and;: To provide areas' for groundwater absorption for recharge of subsurface water supplies. Map 1 shows the flood pl-ains of Cumb'erland County. Groundwater The topography, or physical land features, of the study area determines the drainage patterns and surface flow character- istics. Steeper slopes cauee increased runoff and erosion and discourage infiltration to the water table. Groundwater flow directions are controlled in part by the topography. Bedrock geology has ultimate control on the storage, transmission, and utilization of groundwater. Geologic factors such as rock type, intergranual spacing, rock strata inclination,

3-4 1

I faults, joints, folds, bedding planes, and solution channels affect groundwater movement and availability. Natural groundwater quality is a result of interaction between the groundwater and the bedrock with which it is in contact. The I more soluble bedrock types will allow more compounds to become dissolved in the groundwater. For example, groundwater in highly soluble limestone aquifers will commonly have high hardness I values. Groundwater quality will eventually affect surface water quality as it percolates into surface streams as base flow. The County is located within the physiographic provinces called the Ridge and Valley Provinces. The mountains forming the northern and southern borders of the County are part of the ridge portion of the province. Rock types in the ridge section are quartzites, sandstones, and conglomerates. Most of the sandstones, conglomerates, and quartzites are tightly cemented, and in general, their primary porosity is quite low. Although these rocks are tightly cemented and have a low primary porosity, they are hard and brittle so that numerous joints have developed. These joint openings produce a secondary porosity which increases the permeability of the rock. In general, the number and size of joint openings decrease with depth. With quartzites, jointing is the most important factor in groundwater production.

A major portion of the Valley Province is composed of limestones and dolomites. Almost anywhere in these area where limestones or dolomites occur at the surface or in the subsurface , serious problems may be expected from solution opening cave-ins. Such depressions are known as sinkholes. Surface drainage passes directly into the groundwater system which means a high potential for groundwater pollution. The remaining portion of the County is composed of Martinsburg shale. The Martinsburg shale provides about half of the wells of the Great Valley with an adequate amount of groundwater for domestic needs. The pore spaces in these shales are very small. Fortunately, however, the shale is broken by joints and it is these joints, as well as spaces between bedding planes, that allow for some water movement. In hard, brittle shale, joints are more open and tend to have somewhat greater yields. Slopes - Topoqraphv The topographic features of the landscape are derived from the structure and weathering characteristics of the underlying bedrock. The more weather-resistant rock is responsible for areas of higher elevation, while less resistant rock, such as limestone, has eroded to form low lying valleys of moderate relief. The features of Cumberland County showing the most prominent topographic relief are Blue Mountain, which forms the northern boundary of the County, and South and Piney Mountains which form

3-5 the southern boundary. The terrain here is characterized by steep slopes greater than 15 percent. The foothills of the mountains consist of a 2 to 4 mile stirip of land running the length of the County and having moderate slopes between 8 and 15 percent. The central valley floor, a broad expanse of land running east to west through Cumberland County, has generally mild slopes of less than 8 percent. However, a considerable number of localized ridges and steep sl.opes are evident within the Valley, especially between Carlisle and Shippensburg. Topography has been a determining fa.ctor in the distribution of population throughout Cumberland County. Because of the relative ease of development in flatter axeas, the more desirable lands are those located in the central valley. Thus, the more densely populated and urbanized areas are located on these mostly level lands. The steeper slopes of the mountain and hill areas of the County have presented physical barriers to the development of these lands, which are, therefore, tlne least populated areas of the County. Agricultural uses also occur predominantly in the more level areas, as these lands allow for more efficient farming operations. In Cumberland County, this factor is enhanced by the occurrence of the best agricultural soils' with the lower, flatter lands. Additional competition for the flatter lands is intensified because commerce and industry, along with residential and agricultural uses, seek flatter, more easily developed areas. In planning for the development of a.n area, the slope of the land is a major factor. Map 2 shows those areas of slope between 15 to 24.9 percent and 25 percent and over. The areas between 15 to 24.9 percent should be considered with caution when considering development. Those areas :in excess of 25 percent should have severe restrictions for devel.opment. In discussing the slope of the land, it is important to keep in mind that the natural gradients were created by erosional forces trying to establish a stable condition. Sometimes when man ' alters these slopes, he upsets the balance and landslides, rock falls, mudslides, and soil creep may result as nature tries to restore equilibrium. In the County, soil creep is prevalent and may at times be severe in areas where shales occur. Adequate drainage leading water away from the face of a steep slope and keeping it from entering the top of the slope is advisable where it is necessary to curtail the soil creep. Geoloqv Geologists state that at one time the eastern part of the United States sank below sea level and farmed a great inland body of water known as the Appalachian Gulf. Sediments and dissolved material from surrounding areas settled or precipitated out in uniform layers resulting in the formation of stratified layers of 3-6 1

I shale, siltstone, and sandstone. Continued deposition of sediments exerted extreme pressure on the deeper layers forming flat hard sheets referred to as sedimentary rocks. This was followed by a period of upward movement 'caused by great horizontal compression, folding, and faulting of the flat sheets of rock, forming a series of ridges and valleys which follow a 1 parallel pattern northeast to southwest. In a later period, molten material originating within the earth heated these sedimentary rocks. The expansion of these I heated rocks and gases forced this molten material to be forced into cracks and cavities in the surface. Upon solidification, this became igneous rock. Volcanic rocks are much like igneous rocks, but volcanic rocks are spewed onto the surface and cools I more rapidly. Metamorphic rocks are the result of intense heat and pressure which has changed the texture and/or component I minerals of sedimentary or igneous rocks. The rocks found in Cumberland County were formed during five periods of geologic time; the youngest being the Triassic. This period is represented by the Gettysburg Formation, which is I composed of a red to brown, fine to coarse grained quartz or sandstone with red shale and limestone conglomerate interbeds. Because of its resistance to weathering, the limestone conglomerate has often been utilized in home construction. See Map 3. I Igneous rocks, also of Triassic Age, occupy very little of the area. One narrow dike about 100 to 200 feet wide starts at a point east and north of Donnellytown running to the south and leaving the county about one mile southeast of Goodyear. Two I small areas of diabase are found east of Shepherdstown. Quarrying of these areas for commercial purposes is too I costly because of the resistance to crushing and splitting on definite cleavage planes. Fieldstone has been used in house construction. Small pockets of sand have been quarried where the diabase weathered rapidly. Weathered fine material of the Triassic group furnishes an excellent source of water sealer in local water storage facilities. I The Silurian group is represented by one member, the Tuscarora sandstone of Silurian Age. It is a very hard, fine grained, white to gray, medium to thick bedded rock, that caps 1 Blue Mountain on the western boundary of the County. This sandstone is used as a source of silica for silica brick and sand, also the uniform layers of sandstone are used extensively in well construction. The last fifty to one hundred feet next to I the Juniata red sandstone is a mixed color of white and red; a property making it highly sought for in recent years by home I builders. The next older geologic formation is of Ordovician Age, which underlies the northern half of the County. It includes I seventeen identified formations. I 3-7 Underlying the Tuscarora sandstone i.s the Juniata Formation, a red fine grained to conglomerate quartzitic sandstone with red shale interbed. Large fragments of thi.s sandstone occupy very steep slopes near the mountain tops mixed with the Tuscarora talus. The Bald Eagle formation is gray to greenish gray, fine grained to conglomerate thic:k bedded sandstone with some shale. Little use has been made of -the Juniata a.nd Bald Eagle formations except for walls of buildings.

The Martinsburg formation is a gray to dark gray, light gray to olive, easily weathered shale underlying 30 percent of the County's land area. This highly dissectled area does not have as wide a usage as the rocks of the alkaline earth. The rolling to sharply rolling shale hills are easily adapted to real estate development. Construction of roads, cuts and fills, grading for homes, schools, and industrial sites is not difficult. The Martinsburg shale area can be developed for recreation, home development, and indust.ry with a low rate of water use and pollution. The shale is used as an ingredient in cement manufacture, and in a mixture of top soil and shale for seedbed preparation of road cuts and fills. The broken shale is used in subgrade of concrete roads t.o insure adequate under-drainage and firm foundation. Alkaline earth metals are found. in the limestone and dolomites of eight identified formations of the Ordovician period. The Chambersburg formation, a dark gray, thin bedded limestone, is at the top; a gray argillaceous in the middle; and dark gray, cobbly and thin irregularly bedded limestone at the bottom. Included with the Chamhersburg on the map are a number of other limestone and dolomites as follows: The Hershey formation lis a dark gray to black thin bedded argillaceous limestone. The Myerstown formation is a medium to dark gray, platy, medium crystalline limestone and carbonaceous at the base. The St. Paul group is a buff colored, even grained magnesian limestone, containing numerous layers of blocky chert. The Ontolawnee formation is a light to dark gray, very fine to medium, crystalline dolomite with interbeds of bluish gray limestone and interbedded with modular dark gray chert at the base. The Epler formation is a very fine crystalline, bluish gray limestone , interbedded with gray dolomite; coarse crystalline limestone lenses are present.

3-8 1

I The Rickenbach formation is a gray, very fine to course crystalline laminated dolomite; dark gray chert in irregular

beds , with strangers , nodules, bands ~ of- quartz , and grains I in the lower half. The Stonehenge formation is a gray fine crystalline limestone and dark gray laminated limestone with numerous edgewise conglomerate beds. The next older geologic period is called the Cambrian. Six identified formations of this period bring the total to twelve for limestone and dolomites. The Conococheague formation is a gray limestone with 1 siliceous and argillaceous bands, lamines, dark to light gray dolomite and sandy in lower part. I The Elkbrook formation is a light gray to yellowish gray fine laminated siliceous limestone with interbeds of dolomite; weather to earthly buff soil. I The Waynesboro formation is an interbedded red to purple shale and sandstone with some beds of dolomite and impure I limestone. The Tomstown formation is a massive dolomite with thin shaly interbeds. The limestone and dolomites of these two geologic periods form a band of fine to ten miles wide from I east to west occupying 45 percent of the area of the County. These limestones and dolomites have long been a source of I building stone, coarse aggregate in concrete, cement manufacture, and agriculture lime. Concrete, road building and steel industries have increased their use tremendously. Clay, a by-product of limestone weathering, is used in brick manufacturing. These weathered formations have given rise to a highly productive soil area. Flow from springs and streams is excellent in these limestone dolomite areas, but I pollution of springs and underground water supplies is high. The remaining Cambrian rocks are the Antietam formulation, a I gray buff weathering quartzite and quartz schist. The Harpers formation, a dark greenish gray phyllite schist with thin quartzite layers has a base known as the member

I and is a gray quartzite. ~ The Weverton formation is a gray to purplish gray, feldspathic quartzite and quartzone conglomerate. These six formations occupy 60 percent of the South Mountain area. The quartzites have been used chiefly for building stones. I The Antietam formation in highly weathered areas is quarried for sand. On top of the Antietam, asericite schist formed a white I clay which is quarried and used as a filler for paper. 3-9 Hydrous limonite, an iron bearing su.bstance, is found on the upper part of Tomstown dolomite formaticln. In the past, it was mined at Pine Grove Furnace. Magnetite, a high grade iron ore, was also mined at one time in this same a.rea. The Precambrian rock!; of the South Mountain area are represented by three formations. The metabasall is made up of altered basaltic flows. Aporphyolite, of altered gray to red ryhelite flows, shows a flow banding spherulties, quartz and feldspar phenocrysts. Greenstone schist forms belts in sporhyolite areas and is interbedded with sponhyolite. It contains many veins of mi1k:y white quartz. Green and reddish brown building stone and taluses, as a filler and carrier of chemicals, are quarried. However, the low content of copper, silver, and gold forced these enterprises out of business. The nature of greenstone schist and sporphyolite make them desirable for grit coating of roofing and siding material.* The geology of an area must be considered in land use planning, as the ultimate or best USE? of land is initially determined by its characteristics and quality. On-lot sewage disposal, drainage, and construction costs are some of the factors affected by bedrock geology. The rock types found in Cumberland County present some specific inherent limitations. For example, the porosity of the limestone formations could contribute to the rapid spread of groundwater contaminants. In some cases, on-site evaluation of geologic factors may be necessary to determine the feasibility and impacts of a proposed project. The engineering aspects of the bedrock geology is also important. These characteristics give an indication of such things as ease of excavation,,cut-slope stability, and foundation stability. Generally, the rock formatioins in the County provide strength and support for heavy structures such as dams, highways, bridges, and large buildings. Those areas which are underlain by limestone and dolomites, however, may pose some problems to foundation engineering. Cavernous areas and areas known to be susceptible to sinkholes should be investigated thoroughly before construction of heavy structures and roads. Again, most of these problems would be site specific and require an on-site evaluation to determine the appropriateness of a project. Soils The soil is that mantle of weathered material which covers the surface of the earth. It is a product of the geology, topography, climate, and vegetation. Alterations in any of these variables cause major changes in soil type. Soil formation and soil erosion are continuing actions; the latter of which has been greatly accelerated by man’s misuse of the land.

*Cumberland County Conservation District 3-10 1

I Soils have many properties by which they are identified. A knowledge of these properties is fundamental to an intelligent determination of land use. Some soils are deep and well drained and, thence suited to most, types of urban or agriculture uses. I In contrast, shallow and poorly drained soils have definite use limitations. Such soils may be altered by applying various engineering practices to the land. This is always a costly and I frequently unwarranted expenditure. It is to avoid such expenditures that people are increasingly using soil maps as a I basis for land use decisions and planning. The upland soils of Cumberland County are closely related to the underlying bedrock. Along the river valleys and on the benches adjacent to the main valleys, the soils are developed in I material transported by running water and deposited with some degree of stratification. 1 A detailed soil survey has been made of Cumberland County which classifies the soils according to depth, texture (coarseness or fineness), natural drainage, thickness, and arrangement of the various layers, kind of parent material, I slope, erosion, flooding, and other characteristics. Soils change within short distances and the detailed soil survey shows 1 many small areas. A general presentation of soil information can be made by using soil associations. These are groups of soils which I ordinarily occur together in the landscape. Each soil has its characteristic place depending on slope or kind of material. The Soil Associations Map of Cumberland County is shown on Map 4. The description of soil associations which follow the principal I soils are named in order of their importance in the association. After the soil name, there appears, in parenthesis, an estimate of the relative extent of the soil in the association. Minor I soils occurring with the association are also estimated. One soil series can occur in more than one association, depending on its relative extent, the slope, or stoniness phases which are typical within the areas of the different associations. The I following Soil Associations occur in Cumberland County: BERKS-WEIKERT-BEDINGTON Association: Shallow to deep, I gently sloping to very steep, well drained soils that formed in material weathered from gray and brown shale, siltstone, I and sandstone; on uplands. HAGERSTOWN-DUFFIELD Association: Deep, nearly level to moderately steep, well drained soils that formed in material 1 weathered from limestone; on uplands. HAZLETON-LAIDIG-BUCHANAN Association: Deep, nearly level to very steep, well drained to somewhat poorly drained soils I that formed in material weathered from gray and brown quartzite, sandstone, siltstone, and shale; on uplands. 1 I 3-11 I

MONONGAHELA-ATKINS-MIDDLEBURY Association: Deep, nearly I level and gently slopicig, moderately well drained to poorly drained soils that formed in alluvium; on terraces and flood plains. I MURRILL-LAIDIG-BUCHAN Association:: Deep, nearly level to moderately steep, well drained to somewhat poorly drained soils that formed in colluvium from gray sandstone, I conglomerate, quartzite, and limestone, on uplands. ATHOL-NESHAMINY Association: Deep, gently sloping and 1 sloping, well drained soils. that formed in material weathered from conglomerate, breccias, and diabase; on uplands. 1 HAZLETON-CLYMER Association: Deep, nearly level to very steep, well drained soils that form.ed in material weathered from gray sandstone and quartzite; on uplands. 1 HIGHFIELD-GLENVILLE Association: Deep, nearly level to moderately steep, well drained to somewhat poorly drained soils that formed in material weathered from schist and I rhyolite; on uplands. The Soil Survey of Cumberland and Perry Counties , published I in April 1986, is the primary source for information regarding soils in the County. Approximately 110,000 acres or 31 percent of the County is defined hy the Soil Conservation Service as I prime farmland. These are the most productive soils for crop production, are well drained, not highily erodible, and do not flood during the growing season. Agricultural capabilities of soils are referred to by grouping the soils into classes; all I soils in a single class have similar limitations and management problems. There are seven capabi1it.y classes of soils in Cumberland County. Classes I, 11, and I11 have few limitations I for crop production. About 60 percent of the County is covered by these prime agricultural soils. Most of this land is currently in crop production, however, recent trends indicate U that much of this land is being lost to development. Because these desirable agricultural soil areas coincide with flat, level topographic features, development pressure will continue to affect the prime farmlands. Refer to Map 5, "Soils Suitable for I Agriculture". Historically, agriculture has been very important to the I culture and economy of Cumberland County. Agriculture is dependent upon the quality of the soil, and once prime agricultural soils are taken out of production by development they cannot be replaced. Therefore, development should be I directed toward the marginally productivle soils of the County in order to preserve prime farm.Land. I A few of the soil types are known to pose severe limitations on development and major construct-ion pro-jects. These limitations include such factors as slow percolation rates for I 3-12 I I

on-lot sewage disposal, shallow depth to bedrock, and I erodibility. Individual soil tests are recommended prior to construction on sites where the soil type indicates that such I limitations may exist. Map 6, "Soils Suitable for On-Lot Sewage", indicates that a majority of the County can expect unsatisfactory performance of I septic tank absorption of effluent; surfacing of effluent, and hillside seepage all of which can effect public health. Groundwater can be polluted if highly permeable sand and gravel or fractured bedrock is less than 4 feet below the base of the I absorption field; if slope is excessive; or if the water table is near the surface. There must be unsaturated soil material beneath the absorption field to filter the effluent effectively 1 or the groundwater will become polluted. Map 7 "Soils Limitation Map, Building Site Development" shows that much of the County has at least moderate limitations. I This mapped feature keys on residential development with basements, since this is the major type of construction in the County. - The area designated as severe does not mean no I construction is possible, but that construction costs will increase and possibly increased maintenance will be required. I Woodlands Prior to clearing by European settlers, most of Cumberland County was covered by forests. Today about 107,500 acres or 46 1 percent of the land area is wooded. Most of the forested areas are concentrated on the slopes and ridges of the mountains on the I northern and southern boundaries of the County. There are scattered areas of woodland throughout the remaining areas of the County. The Micheaux State Forest, part of which lies in the County, accounts for 33,600 acres of I woodland on South Mountain. Smaller acreages of woodland are contained within the boundaries of Tuscarora State Forest on Blue Mountain. The main forest cover type is mixed oak-hickory stands I consisting mainly of white oak, red oak, hickory, black oak, and chestnut oak. Other species to be found include yellow poplar, shagbark hickory, white ash, red maple, beech, elm, birch, I sycamore, hemlock, white pine, and Virginia pine. Forests affect water resources in both a protective and a depletive manner. They offer protection from floods and erosion, I while at the same time contributing to the depletion of streamflows. The latter occurs primarily during the growing season. Forest soils are covered with litter (leaves and twigs), I which acts as a protective layer to the soil and reduces the possibility of sheet erosion caused by raindrop splash and impact on soil. In addition, litter decays and becomes humus, which helps to form a highly permeable layer of soil, in which I infiltration rates usually exceed rainfall intensities. This retards runoff from heavy rainfall, this reducing downstream I flood peaks. However, where the forest floor becomes disturbed, 3-13 I ~ I particularly through activities associated with the construction I of roads and basements, the potential for erosion increases. Soil loss then becomes a function of soil erodibility, as well as, the length and steepness of slopes. I Map 8 shows the woodland in Cumberland County. The wooded areas on steep slopes and along streams should be preserved to prevent erosion and reduce flooding. I Wildlife Cumberland County has an abundance clf wildlife. There are a I variety of non-game species of birds, amphibians, reptiles, and small mammals. Game speci.es include white-tailed deer, gray squirrel, cottontail rabbit, turkey, grouse, ring-neck pheasant, I woodcock, mourning dove, and various waterfowl. There are also red and gray fox, mink, muskrat, raccoccn, weasel, opossum, and beaver. There is a total of 3,392 acres managed as State Game 1 Lands in Cumberland County. Wetlands I Wetlands are low lying, swampy areas usually associated with larger bodies of water such as lakes and streams. Wetlands have unique environmental characteristics which include various plants i and animal species peculiar to these areas. Significant wetland areas in Cumberland County are associated with the Yellow Breeches Creek near its confluence with the Susquehanna River. I Mineral Resources Important mineral reserves within Cumberland County are I extremely limited. Although many types of minerals can be found in the County, most of these are of interest only to the student or collector. Limestone is quarried for use in construction and I industrial operations. Sand and gravel are also extracted on a limited basis for use in building and manufacturing. Environmental Limitations I Upon review of the various individual elements of the natural environment of Curnberland County, the elements were I reviewed in conjunction with each other. By grouping several elements, four groups were created which have a limiting effect on the environment. I Group one consists of those areas with slopes in excess of 15 percent, where the soils show homesite locations with severe limitations and covered by ?woodlands. These areas should have I restrictions on construction and only be considered for low density residential development. I Group two consists of the flood plains where development is already restricted through the Federal Flood Plain Insurance Program. I 3-14 I I

Group three consists of those areas with slopes in excess of I 15 percent, where the soils show homesite locations with severe limitations and excavation problems due to the geology. This I area should have severe limitations on any building construction. Group four consists of the soil and geology limitations on construction and only low densities should be considered for I those areas. Upon review of the environmental limitations in conjunction with the existing land use map, the County should be better I prepared when reviewing zoning requests. I I I I I I I I I I 1 I 1 3-15 I I MAP 2

RLAHD !RLAND

'IONS MAP 4

'AN m NO MAP, 6

RLAND

'E MAP 7

:RLAND

1

1 CHAPTER 4 POPULATION/SOCIOECONOMIC PROFILE I In order to establish guidelines for planning decisions involving the physical, economic and social development of the County, it is important to study the population and its relation to I the surrounding region. A quantitative analysis of population trends and a qualitative analysis of population composition enable us to make reasonable projections for future population levels and I associated needs. Analysis and projections such as these are a basic prerequisite for the development of a sound Comprehensive Plan. 1 Land area requirements, for example, for future residential, commercial, industrial and other development needs are directly related to the amount and type of population which must be served. I Future population demands will also determine the amount and scope of future school, park, playground and other public facilities needs. If those who make the decisions that guide future development are adequately informed of population and socio- I economic profiles and trends, they will be able to make more effective plans and help create a more suitable environment for I future residents of Cumberland County. National Trends I When the 1930 Census was taken, our nation was entering the Great Depression era of the 1930's (see Table 4-1). The economic hardships of the Depression had a significant impact on population growth by forcing young adults to postpone marriage and family 1 plans. The subsequent decline in the birth rate (18.4 births per 1,000 population in 1933) netted a relatively low population increase of 7.2 percent for the decade. In the 1940's the nation I was to undergo more hardship as it went to war. Despite bolstering the economy, the war had a negative impact on population growth, as the formation of new households was delayed and family plans were I again postponed. When the war ended, however, these family plans were put into high gear and the postwar "baby boom" began. The sudden increase in the birth rate, reported at 26.6 births per 1,000 population in 1947, contributed to a 14.4 percent increase in I population by 1950. With a strengthened economy, this growth was to continue into I the 1950's. The birth rate remained at about 24 per 1,000 population until 1959; resulting in an increase in population in 1960 of 19.0 percent. The 1960 Census also showed an increase in household formation and redistribution of the population. Seeking I the best employment opportunities, young couples had begun to migrate away from rural areas toward the cities. No longer plagued by war or depression, these young couples, who had previously been I forced to live with parents or others, sought their own homes. I 4-1 I Housing opportunities in the cities were generally not attractive to this group, and land for new housing wals not available within I the existing boundaries of the urban area. The "housing boom" that resulted saw developers constructing single-family detached dwellings on previously undeveloped land which lay in close I proximity to the urban centers. In this mariner, the boundaries of urbanized areas were expanded and the suburbs were born. I During the 1960's we saw continued growth, but at a reduced rate. The 1970 Census reported a 13.3 percent increase for this period, despite a constant decline in the birth rate. In 1960, the birth rate was 18.2 births per 1,000 population, the lowest since 1 the Depression. In 1964, a typical household included 3.33 people, of which 2.10 were adults and l.23 were under the age of 18. The postwar "baby boom" had run its course in the early 1960's and in I the latter part of the decade a smaller family pattern began to appear. Population experts theorize that the number of children, both desired and actually born, declined due to a lower infant mortality rate, the diminishing economic value of children, upward I spiraling costs of raising children in a post: industrial, urbanized society, and improved methods of birth control. 1 The population increase from 1970 to 1980 dropped to a level of 11.4 percent. The birth rate continued to decline in the 1970's. In 1972, the birth rate was reported at 15.6 births per -1 1,000 population. The reasons are varied, but the most significant appear to be the new thinking j-n family planning and the changing role of women in the society. As the employment opportunities of women improved, the attractiveness of work began to compete with 1 childbearing. The postwar "baby boom" generation reached the age of household formation, adding significantly to the number of couples at childbearing age. More people, hoth young and elderly, I are living alone. In addition to couples having fewer children, an increase in the number of non-family households and single-parent families led to even smaller households. The 1970 Census revealed I that there were 3.18 persons per household, while the 1980 Census indicated a reduction to 2.76 persons per household. The period from 1980 to 1990 saw the tail end of the "baby I boomers" enter the childbearing years. During this decade, the rate of the nation's population growth decreased from 11.4 percent to 9.8 percent, while the birth rate actually increased from 15.6 I births per 1,000 persons to 15.9 births per :L,OOO persons. Despite a general decline in the rate of population growth, the population in the United States is expected to continue its growth, perhaps at I a significant rate. The nation's work force is swelling dramatically due to a higher percentage of women working outside the home and the "baby I boomers" still entering the job market. An increasing percentage of this work force is employed in the suburbs. Growth in housing persists due to the continuing increase in households and decrease I 4-2 I I I

I in household size. The extra pressure means that new houses are being built further away from the Region's center, in rural rather than suburban areas. The convenience of automobiles is causing a continual increase of commuting distances for workers, however, the I direction has changed. Most workers travel from suburb to suburb, instead of from suburb to city. The end result is a more sprawling 1 metropolitan area of lower overall density. Population experts are beginning to speak of population stabilization rather than growth. A stabilized population exists when the number of births equals the number of deaths, and the net I migration is equal to zero. The consensus on population growth is that its continuation will not provide any significant benefits to the nation. In fact, some demographers feel that population I stabilization is a key factor in solving many of the nation's problems. I These national population trends can be seen at all geographic, economic, and social levels within the country. As communication improves and nationwide travel becomes quicker and more common, the population trends and profiles become more I homogeneous. Therefore, an understanding of national patterns can assist in explaining present conditions and provide one of the 1 bases for future population projections in Cumberland County. State and Reqional Trends I Population trends within the State and the Tri-County Region have been affected in many ways by these national trends. Pennsylvania is considered a part of the Northeastern Urban Complex of the United States. Since 1920, this complex has grown at i approximately the national rate (see Table 4-1). It has not experienced the rapid growth rates that have occurred in California, the Southwest, and Florida, whose growth patterns have I been generated by significant in-migration. The Northeastern Urban Complex has shown some in-migration, but its growth has been determined, rather, by a strong natural increase; a considerable I surplus of births over deaths. Pennsylvania's population was characterized by steady growth from 1940 to 1970, however, the rate was below the national level I for that period. The next decade showed signs of a possible population stabilization, as the growth rate fell to 0.6 percent. These fluctuations were similar to those of the Northeastern 1 States, which experienced a stabilization in natural growth rate and an out-migration of people to the "Sunbelt" states during the I same period. 1 I 4-3 I TAElLE 4-1 1 POPULATION TRE:NDS - 1820 TC) 1990 CUMBERLAND COUNTY, DAUPHIN COUNTY, PERRY COUNTY CUMBERLAND-DAUPHIN-PERRY REGION, PENNSYLVANIA 1 MIDDLE ATLANTIC RElGION AND UNITED STATES

Cumberland-Dauphin- 1 Cumberland County Dauphin Count.yq I N;;ry County Perry Region Year Number % Change Number % Cham e % Change Number % Change 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

I Pennsylvania I Middle Atlantic Region'') I United States Year Number % Change Number % Change Number % Change

1830 1,348,233 28.5 3,587,664 32.9 12,866,020 33.6 1840 1,724,233 27.9 4,526,260 26.1 17,069,453 32.7 1850 2,311,786 34.1 5,898,735 30.3 23,191,876 35.9 1 1860 2,906,215 25.7 7,458,985 26.4 31,443,321 35.6 1870 3,521,951 21.2 8,810, 806 1.8.1 38,558,371 22.6 1880 4,282,891 21.6 11,234,968 217.5 50,155,783 20.0 1 1890 5,258,113 22.8 12,706,220 1.3.0 62,947,714 25.5 1900 6,302,115 19.9 15,454,678 i!1.6 75,994,575 20.7 1 1910 7,665,111 21.6 19,315 ,892 2!4.9 91,972,266 21.0

1920 8,720,017 ' 10.5 22,261,244 3.5.2 105,710,620 14.9 1930 9,631,350 10.5 26,2601,750 1.7.9 122,775,046 16.4 1J 1940 9, goo, 180 2.8 27,539,487 4.9 131,669,275 7.2 1950 10,498,012 6.0 30,1628,533 9.5 150,697,361 14.4 1960 11,319,366 7.8 34, i68,452 113.5 179,323,175 19.0 1 1970 11,794,005 4.2 37,2 13,O 00 8.9 203,320,000 13.4 1980 11,864,751 0.5 36,787,000 -1.0 226,546,000 11.4 1990 11,881,640 0.1 37,602,000 2.2 248,710,000 9.8 1

4-4 I

I The Tri-County Region, which forms the Harrisburg SMSA (Standard Metropolitan Statistical Area), has also shown steady growth during this period, but at more than twice the rate of the state. The predominant reason for this regional growth has been an I expanding diversified economy. The three counties forming the Region have experienced varying degrees of population growth. Cumberland County has shown a high rate of growth since 1940, I paralleling the State and national growth patterns, albeit at a higher rate. Dauphin County has fluctuated from a strong pattern of growth in the 1940's and 1950's to a growth rate that was I significantly reduced in the 1960's. By 1980, the rate had recovered to 3.8 percent. Perry County's growth has been modest, yet stable over the past four decades. I During the period from 1980 to 1990 the region's population continued to increase, but at a slower rate than the previous decade. Throughout the 1970's the population of the Tri-County I region had increased by 8.8 percent, while the 1980's experienced a 5.9 percent increase. The national trend of population movement from central cities I to suburban areas and the resulting spread of suburban development into surrounding rural fringes, is evident in the Tri-County Region. The declining population of Harrisburg City and the growth I of the surrounding suburbs has resulted in a low growth rate for Dauphin County and a high growth rate for Cumberland County, until 1980, when Cumberland County's growth rate dropped to half that of I the previous decade. From 1970 to 1980 the population within the City of Harrisburg also dropped 21.7 percent, while the suburban population surrounding the city has increased significantly. Similar trends were present in all but two of the other SMSA's in 1 Pennsylvania during the same time period. The population of Harrisburg City has continued to drop during the 1980's, but only by 1.6% and may indicate a period of population stabilization. The I socioeconomic forces generated by the Harrisburg Urbanized Area have been, and will continue to be a major influence on population 1 growth in Cumberland County. CHARACTERISTICS OF POPULATION I Population Density and Population Cumberland County contains about 550 square miles of land area and was inhabited by 195,257 persons in 1990; producing a I population density of 355 persons per square mile and placing it as the 17th most densely populated County in Pennsylvania. (See Table I 4-2 and Exhibit 4-A.) Between 1980 and 1990 the percentage of population increase continued to decline to a level of 8.7 percent. This'trend has continued for the last several decades in Cumberland County. Birth I rates also continued to decline until they reached an estimated low I 4-5 I I

in 1987 of 11.2 births per 1,000 population. Since then, the birth rate trend has reversed itself and Clamberland County has I experienced a moderate increase in its birth rate.

BIRTH RATE I 19 87 - 19 90 CUMBERIAND COUNTY I Date Births E'er 1.000 Pormlation I 1987 11.2* 1988 11.4" I 1989 11.8* 1990 12.5 1 *Estimated Figure SOURCE: State Health Data Clenter, Count:y Planning Data Kit, Commonwealth of Pennsylvania I I Although the birth rate has recently shown an increase, the trend toward smaller households continues throughout the County. The 1990 Census revealed another decrease in the number of persons I per household from 2.76 persons in 1980 to 2.51 persons per household in 1990. The County's twelve boroughs contain the greatest population I densities; ranging from Newburg at 1,040 persons per square mile to Shiremanstown at 5,223. Carlisle, with 5.4 square miles, is the largest borough. The average size of a Cumberland County Borough I is 1.5 square miles. Among the townships, the highest density of 1,842 persons per square mile belongs to Shippensburg Township, which surrounds Shippensburg Borough at the southwestern boundary I of the County. The other high density townships are located within the Harrisburg Urbanized Area; ranging from Upper Allen at 1,011 persons per square mile to Lower Allen at 1,481. The average size of a Cumberland County township is 24.1 square miles. I I I 1 4-6 I I 1

I TABLE 4-2 POPULATION DENSITY AND LAND AREA - 1990 CUMBERLAND COUNTY I SQUARE POPULATION 1990 POPULATION MILES DENSITY I CUMBERLAND COUNTY 195,257 550.2 355 CAMP HILL BOROUGH 7,831 2.1 3 ,729 CARLISLE BOROUGH 18,419 5.4 3,411 I COOKE TOWNSHIP 90 19.9 5 DICKINSON TOWNSHIP 3 ,870 45.6 85 EAST PENNSBORO TOWNSHIP 15,185 10.6 1,432 I HAMPDEN TOWNSHIP 20 , 384 17.8 1,145 HOPEWELL TOWNSHIP 1,913 28.0 68 LEMOYNE BOROUGH 3 ,959 1 ..6 2,474 I LOWER ALLEN TOWNSHIP 15,254 10.3 1,481 LOWER FRANKFORD TWP. 1,491 15.0 99 LOWER MIFFLIN TOWNSHIP 1,700 24.0 71 MECHANICSBURG BOROUGH 9,452 2.6 3 , 635 I MIDDLESEX TOWNSHIP 5 ,780 26.0 222 MONROE TOWNSHIP 5,468 26.1 21 0 MOUNT HOLLY SPRINGS BOROUGH 1,925 1.5 1,283 I NEWBURG BOROUGH 31 2 0.3 1,040 NEW CUMBERLAND BOROUGH 7,665 1.7 4,509 NEWVILLE BOROUGH 1,349 0.4 3 ,372 I NORTH MIDDLETON TOWNSHIP 9 , 833 23.4 420 NORTH NEWTON TOWNSHIP 1,779 22.5 79 PENN TOWNSHIP 2,425 29.3 83 SHIPPENSBURG BOROUGH 4,328 1.3 3 ,329 1 SHIPPENSBURG TOWNSHIP 4 ,606 2.5 1,842 SHIREMANSTOWN BOROUGH 1,567 0.3 5,223 SILVER SPRING TOWNSHIP 8,369 32.5 257.5 I SOUTHAMPTON TOWNSHIP 3 ,552 52.5 68 SOUTH MIDDLETON TOWNSHIP 10,340 49.5 209 SOUTH NEWTON TOWNSHIP 1,153 11.0 105 I UPPER ALLEN TOWNSHIP 13,347 13.2 1,011 UPPER FRANKFORD TOWNSHIP 1,703 19.5 87 UPPER MIFFLIN TOWNSHIP 1,013 21 -9 46 WEST FAIRVIEW BOROUGH 1,403 0.3 4 ,677 I WEST PENNSBORO TOWNSHIP 4,945 30.5 162 WORMLEYSBURG BOROUGH 2,847 0.9 3,163 I SOURCE: U.S. CENSUS, 1990 1 I I 4-7 I EXHIBIT 4-A

N. MIDDLETON SILVER SPRING

UPPER MlF"

P I c-2 S. MIDDLETON

CUMBERLAND COUNTY

SOUMAMPTON POPULATION DENSITY BY MUNICIPALIW IN 1990

m=PERSONS PER'SPUARE MILE IN CUMBERLAND COUNM The general trend throughout the County is that the eastern townships have the greatest densities, with townships becoming less densely populated in a westward direction. The greater densities are caused by suburban development pressures generated in the Harrisburg Urbanized Area. High population density patterns have also developed along the major transportation corridors connecting Carlisle with the Harrisburg Urbanized Area. Suburban development pressures in areas surrounding Carlisle Borough have also increased the population densities of adjacent townships. Population density is kept low in the southwestern townships of the County by the presence of Michaux State Forest and the steep slopes of South Mountain, which limit development intensity. Western and central townships of the County are prime agricultural activity areas, which has helped to preserve their low densities. The northern fringes of the northern townships lie on the flanks of the Blue Mountain. State Forests, State Game Lands, and steep slopes account for the low density in those municipalities. Aqe Distribution Age distribution trends and patterns within Cumberland County reflect a strong similarity to national and statewide characteristics. The County is not isolated fromthe factors that are shaping the states' and nation's age structure of the future. Exhibit 4-B is a population bar chart, which illustrates the distribution of persons by percent of total population for five and ten year age groups in 1980 and 1990. Table 4-3 and 4-3A shows detailed age-by-sex data for each municipality, and County totals are shown in Table 4-3B. The Population Bar Graph shows that the age group of 0-4 has remained stable between 1980 and 1990. The age groups between 5 and 29, both male and female, experienced a decrease in percent of total population between 1980 and 1990. In that same period ages 30-44 saw increases in percent of total population. The 60 and over age groups also realized an increase in percent of total population. The Preschool age group (0-4 years) increased from 10,542 persons in 1980 to 11,607 persons in 1980. This reverses a trend which showed a decrease between 1970 and 1980. Families though, are still choosing to have fewer children, and are generally having them later in life. This trend is significant to future population structures and projections. The School age group (5-19 years) decreased in size between 1980 and 1990 from 43,553 persons to 39,439 persons. The population in this age group is expected to increase at a consistently slow pace as the slightly higher birth rate starts affecting the upper grade levels.

4-9 EXBIBIT 4-B POPULATION BAR CHART CUMBERLAND COUNTY

0 II ......

...... P I -.. 0 ......

......

0-4 5-9 10-14 15-19 20-24 25-29 30-34 35-44 45-54 55-59 60-64 65-74 75-84 85+ AGE COEERTS

1980 Male 1980 Female 1990 Male 1990Female

SOURCE: 1980 and 1990 Census, STF 3-A I TABLE 4-3 POPULATION BY AGE - 1990 I CUMBERLAND COUNTY

I Municipality 0-4 5-9 10-14 15-19 20-24 25-29 30-34 35-44

Camp Hill Borough 371 429 413 399 337 480 483 1,202 B Carlisle Borough 948 932 891 1,750 2,444 1,420 1,200 2,336 Cooke Township 7 5 12 3 3 9 11 11 ,IDickinson Township 257 323 324 260 209 221 366 731 East Pennsboro Township 944 889 845 1,167 1,136 1,515 1,202 2,388 Hampden Township 1,365 1,511 1,400 1,420 1,184 1,493 1,413 3,676 ~IHopewell Township 14 9 126 185 169 108 157 140 347 I Lemoyne Borough 238 196 232 166 311 490 351 562 ~ILower Allen Township 760 739 706 837 1,139 1,479 1,305 2,151 Lower Frankford Township 108 110 128 87 84 135 134 277 Lower Mifflin Township 175 131 158 115 133 147 199 251 Mechanicsburg Borough 534 575 561 598 697 909 713 1,511 ~'Middlesex Township 4 12 335 378 360 378 604 530 942 ~IMonroe Township 372 393 450 408 295 409 443 979 Mt. Holly Springs Borough 155 126 115 116 171 208 153 273 I Newburg Borough 28 40 14 13 17 15 40 61 New Cumberland Borough 435 439 375 390 395 616 730 1,237 Newville Borough 90 105 .83 88 102 14 1 99 216 ~B North Middleton Township 628 660 777 783 569 654 831 1,817 North Newton Township 12 1 164 125 128 114 124 176 285 I Penn Township 164 198 230 193 153 178 227 451 Shippensburg Borough 168 165 151 281 1,328 336 171 287 Shippensburg Township 74 123 151 1,675 1,564 . 206 185 229 I Shiremanstown Borough 96 67 65 73 115 163 129 203 Silver Spring Township 602 663 481 554 446 636 755 1,604 I Southampton Township 261 329 282 298 223 224 319 648 South Middleton Township 635 705 703 726 536 775 913 1,531 I South Newton Township 97 116 89 82 58 102 88 186 Upper Allen Township 605 670 804 1,542 1,698 997 798 2,030 Upper Frankford Township 123 115 150 12 6 150 169 131 261 I Upper Mifflin Township 71 76 84 87 76 81 100 139 West Fairview Township 82 119 76 107 14 0 12 1 124 204 I West Pennsboro Township 3 12 408 307 363 309 362 402 885 Wormleysburg Borough 159 159 .98 132 221 359 223 451 I I 4-11 I TABLE 4-3A POPULATION BY AGE - 19!3O CUMBERIAND COUNTY I

Municipal Total I Municipality 45-54 55-59 60-61 62-64 65-74 75-84 85+ PoDulation

Camp Hill Borough 854 421 188 . 298 1,104 655 197 7,831 I Carlisle Borough 1 ,688 727 342 458 1,543 1,153 587 18,419 Cooke Township 12 2 2 4 9 0 0 90 Dickinson Township 469 198 52 96 225 124 15 3 ,870 I East Pennsboro Township 1,588 534 278 556 1,239 665 239 15,185 Hampden Township 2,840 1,080 36400 552 1,392 565 129 20,384 I Hopewell Township 267 101 30 37 113 41 11 1,910 Lemoyne Borough 361 139 93 12 6 411 216 59 3 ,959 I Lower Allen Township 1,689 865 274 540 1,539 972 259 15,254 Lower Frankford Township 176 53 25 46 82 44 2 1,491 Lower Mifflin Township 166 71 21 32 68 25 8 1,700 I Mechanicsburg Borough 1,052 526 140 304 843 392 97 9,452 Middlesex Township 586 300 93 162 364 240 169 5,,853 I Monroe Township 780 236 133 118 317 108 27 5,468 Mt. Holly Springs Borough 200 75 31 59 156 72 15 1,925 Newburg Borough 26 12 6 5 25 12 1 '315 I New Cumberland Borough 681 387 217 307 979 382 95 7,665 Newville Borough 105 785 15 18 132 63 14 1,349 1 North Middleton Township 1,312 466 137 286 573 253 14 9,760 North Newton Township 249 185 38 39 98 57 4 1,779 I Penn Township 237 67 37 74 166 37 13 2,425 Shippensburg Borough 336 14 2 77 122 359 242 60 4,328 Shippensburg Township 95 74 27 23 124 48 8 4,606 I Shiremanstown Borough 165 94 55 64 171 86 21 1,567 Silver Spring Township 976 521 178 171 596 162 24 8,369 I Southampton Township 330 189 77 64 244 64 0 3,552 South Middleton Township 1 ,386 519 136 419 833 426 97 10,340 South Newton Township 103 43 18 41 86 38 6 1,153 I Upper Allen Township 1,406 668 14 3 351 848 503 284 13,347 Upper Frankford Township 228 77 21 25 76 44 7 1,703 I Upper Mifflin Township 135 39 17 32 37 32 7 1,013 West Fairview Township 137 83 21 19 113 44 13 1,403 I West Pennsboro Township 496 222 96 155 349 2 12 67 4,945 Wormleysburg Borough 288 192 59 126 247 119 14 2,847 I 4-12 I I

1 TABLE 4-3B POPULATION BY AGE BY SEX - 1990 I CUMBERLAND COUNTY Age # % # % Total % Total Group Male Male Female Female Pop. Pop. I In Group In Group 0-4 5,926 3.0 5,681 2.9 11 ,607 5.9 I 5-9 6,269 3.2 5 ,815 3.0 12 ,084 6.2 10-14 6,190 3.2 5,691 2.9 11,881 6.1 15-19 7,547 3.9 7,927 4.1 15,474 7.9 I 20-24 8,319 4.3 8,601 4.4 16 ,920 8.7 25-29 7,819 4 -0 7 ,567 3.9 15 ,386 7.9 I 30-34 7,583 3.9 7,814 4.0 15 ,397 7.9 35-44 15,091 7.7 15 ,445 7.9 30 ,536 15.6 I 45-54 10,395 5.3 10,792 5.5 21,187 10.9 55-59 4,438 2.3 4,728 2.4 9,166 4.7 60-61 1 ,709 .9 1,910 1.0 3,619 1.9 I 62-64 2,568 1.3 3,125 1.6 5 ,693 2.9 65-74 6,797 3.5 8,543 4.4 15 ,340 7.9 I 75-84 2,845 1.5 5 ,173 2.6 8,018 4.1 85+ 710 .4 2,073 1.1 2,783 1.4 I TOTALS 94,366 48.3 100,891 51.7 195,257 100.0 I SOURCE: U.S. Bureau of Census, 1990 The Work Force (20-64 years) is the largest age group. It increased 11.9 percent, from 105,360 to 117,904, between 1980 and I 1990. These numbers reflect the fact that the "baby boom" generation is in this age group. This age group is expected to grow by 5 or 6 percent every 5 years until 1995, or about the same I rate that the entire County is expected to experience. The Elderly age group (65 years and over) increased by 36.9 percent in the ten years preceding 1990; from 10,086 persons to I 26,141 persons. This segment of the population is projected to increase by about 21 percent between 1990 and 2000. It is estimated that the elderly will comprise nearly 15 percent of the I total population of the County by the year 2000. I I 4-13 I I

The median age within Cumberland County was 31.2 years in 1980 and 34.6 in 1990. The County has a broad spectrum of age groups, I but it ranked very high with the 18 to 64 year old group in 1990. The County has 64.6 percent of its population in this range, which was the third-highest percentage within the State. Of the 67 I counties in Pennsylvania, the under 18 group (22.0 percent) ranked 62nd; and the 65 and older group, at 13.4 percent, ranked 56th. On the municipal level, the boroughs contain the older population; 1 with an average median age of 34.0 years. Camp Hill leads with 44.1 years, while Shippensburg is the youngest at 28.9. The townships average is 29.0 years; with Lower Allen the oldest at 33.8 years, and Shippensburg the youngest at 20.2. I Male-Female Composition I The male-female composition affects future household formation and subsequent birth rates. It is necessary for the 19-44 years age group to maintain a male-female balance in order to assure maximum household formations and consistent natural birth rates. I It is commonly recognized that a slightly' higher proportion of females to males is a favorable environment for a more stable population. 1 Cumberland County has a sex ratio (number of males per 100 females) of 93.5, ranking 43rd among Pennsylvania Counties. Males I total approximately 94,366, while females total approximately 100,891. In 1980, the sex ratio was also 93.5, with 86,800 males and 92,825 females. This means that the number of males to females remained constant between 1980 and 1990. !Thirteen municipalities I (one of which is a borough) has more males than females; however, only one of them has a difference of approximately 100 or more: Lower Allen Township with 562 more males. The remaining 21 I municipalities have more females than males, with 14 of them having a difference of approximately 100 or more: Camp Hill (+715), Carlisle (+1,715), Lemoyne (+301), Mechanicsburg (+444), New I Cumberland (+335), Shippensburg (+234), Shi.remanstown (+129), and Wormleysburg (+169) Boroughs and East Pennsboro (+1,125), Hampden (+418), South Middleton (+198), Shippensburg (+416), Silver Spring (+125), and Upper Allen (+1,01!5) Townships. I In 1980, 61.3 percent of the 65 years and older population was female. By 1990, 60.4 percent of the same age group was female. I The characteristic of females outnumbering inales in this age group exists at the state and national level as well. This phenomenon is explained by the fact that women have a longer life span than men I do. Racial and Ethnic Characteristics I The non-white population consists of EL very small proportion of the total population of Cumberland County. In 1990, non-whites represented 3.1 percent of Cumberland's total population, I 4-14 I I I

I contrasted with 17.6 percent of Dauphin County's total population that year. Table 4-4 displays racial data for 1990 by municipality. The black population totaled 2,875 or about 1.4 percent, while other minorities totaled 3,153 or 1.6 percent of the I total County population. In 1980, the black population totaled 2,457 or 1.3 percent of the total County population, while other minorities totaled 1,918 or 1.0 percent of the population. This I increase reflects a higher birth rate among the minority population, as well as, increased minority in-migration. During this period, the Asian population had the largest numerical 1 increase of the minorities (+1,114). The largest concentrations of black population were in Carlisle Borough (l,OOl), Lower Allen Township (852), North I Middleton Township (347), Shippensburg Township (136), and Upper Allen Township (71). I The 1990 Census listed ancestry groups in Cumberland County. The three largest groups which residents claimed full or partial ancestry were: German with 104,851 persons (53.6 percent); Irish with 35,181 persons (18.0 percent), and English with 23,578 persons 1 (12.0 percent). Some 1,395 persons within Cumberland County are of Spanish Origin. As Cumberland County experiences population growth, it is anticipated that more racial and ethnic diversity I will be experienced. I Education Table 4-5 lists educational enrollment totals for 1980 and 1990 in Cumberland County. The fluctuations of age group populations are reflected in the enrollment data. The enrollment I decreased in size at the pre-primary school, elementary, and high school levels, due to the drop in population in the respective age groups. A large number of pre-primary school students are in I nursery school. Since participation at this level is voluntary, the large enrollment is probably explained by a greater demand for this educational service created by the larger number of working I mothers. The educational background of Cumberland County residents 25 years and older is presented in Table 4-6. The County has the best 1 high school graduation rate in the Tri-County Region at 81.0 percent. This reflects a substantial increase from the 72.9 percent in 1980. About 19.0 percent of persons over 25 years I graduated from college in 1980. However, 22.9 percent of this age group received college degrees in 1990. I I I 4-15 I TAI3LE 4-4 I PERSONS BY RACE ANI) SPANISH ORIGIN - 1990 CUMBERIAND COUNTY

RACE

Persons Total American . of Municipality Population hhite Black Indian Asian Other Spanish - Origin

Camp Hill Borough 7,831 7 ,785 0 0 46 0 11 Carlisle Borough 18,419 iL7 ,093 1,001 13 250 62 241 Cooke Township 95 95 0 0 0 0 0 Dickinson Township 3 ,865 3,847 0 0 9 9 23 East Pennsboro Township 15 ,185 114 ,759 37 50 302 37 80 Hampden Township 20 ,384 119 ,660 64 27 551 82 85 Hopewell Township 1,910 1 ,893 10 2 3 2 4 Lemoyne Borough 3,959 3,849 13 0 90 7 28 Lower Allen Township 15,254 114 ,150 852 34 157 61 227 Lower Frankford Township 1 ,491 1,490 1 0 0 0 0 Lower Mifflin Township 1 ,700 1,683 14 0 3 0 0 Mechanicsburg Borough 9 ,452 9,317 23 18 94 0 42 Middlesex Township 5,853 5,723 97 0 19 14 89 Monroe Township 5,468 5,418 19 6 18 7 39 Mt. Holly Springs Borough 1,925 1 ,899 11 2 11 2 3 Newburg Borough 315 315 0 0 0 0 0 New Cumberland Borough 7,665 7,439 5 6 12 6 89 119 Newville Borough 1,349 1,339 0 0 0 2 8 North Middleton Township 9 ,760 9,364 34 7 0 45 4 64 North Newton Township 1 ,779 1,760 8 2 9 0 6 Penn Township 2,425 2,402 0 2 4 17 21 Shippensburg Borough 4,328 4 ,160 56 12 100 0 6 Shippensburg Township 4 ,606 4,362 136 25 77 6 31 Shiremanstown Borough 1 ,567 1,552 2 0 11 2 15 Silver Spring Township 8,369 8,141 25 37 166 0 34 Southampton Township 3,552 3 ,534 0 18 0 0 19 South Middleton Township 10 ,340 10,207 59 0 48 26 137 South Newton Township 1,153 1 ,153 0 0 0 0 0 Upper Allen Township 13 ,347 13 ,044 71 9 194 29 51 Upper Frankford Township 1 ,703 1 ,690 6 2 5 0 0 Upper Mifflin Township 1,013 1,013 0 0 0 0 2 West Fairview Township 1,403 1,398 0 0 5 0 7 West Pennsboro Township 4,945 4 ,934 6 0 5 0 0 Womleysburg Borough 2,847 2,761 12 12 62 0 5 COUNTY TOTALS 195,257 189 ,229 2,875 277 2,418 458 1,397

4-16 I

TABLE 4-5 1 PRIVATE AND PUBLIC SCHOOL ENROLLMENT - PERSONS OVER 3 YEARS OLD I Cumberland County During 1980 and 1990 1980 1990 1 Pre-Primary School 4 ,064 3 , 588 Elementary or High School 32 ,887 28 ,456 I College 11,289 17,144

TABLE 4-6 I EDUCATION BACKGROUND - PERSONS OVER 25 YEARS OLD

% of I Cumberland Persons 25+ Dauphin % Perry %

0-8 years of 9,106 7.1 . 12,035 7.5 2,596 9.9 I Elementary 1-3 years of 15,122 11.9. 23,917 14.9 4,707 17.9 I High School 4 years of 48 ,490 38.0 63,346 39.5 13,023 49.4 I High School 1-3 years of 17,841 14.0 21,787 13-8 2,469 9.4 I College 4 years or 29,176 22.9 29,791 18.6 2,815 10.7 I more of College Total % High 81 .O 77.6 72.3 School Graduates I Source: U.S. Census, 1990 I Income 1 Table 4-7 includes poverty level data for the Tri-County Region and Pennsylvania. All of the Counties experienced a decrease in the percent of persons and families below poverty level. Cumberland appears much healthier than the other two I Counties in this category. The municipalities with the highest percentages of persons and families below poverty level are concentrated in the western portion of the County. Shippensburg I Borough is an anomaly with 33.3 percent of all persons below I 4-1 7 I I poverty level and only 8.7 percent of all families below poverty level (Table 4-8). A possible explanation. for this is that the I presence of Shippensburg University students in such a small town has skewed the individual income data while not- affecting the family income data much at all. I

TAE3LE 4-7 PERCENT OF TOTAL BELOW POVERTY LEVEL I FOR HARRISBURG BMSA COUNTIES AND PA

31980* 1990* Persons Fami 1i e s Persons Families I

Perry County 8.2 6.3 7.4 6.3 I Cumberland County 5.5 3.5 5.0 2.8 Dauphin County 9.9 7.4 9.95 7.2 Pennsylvania 10.5 7.8 10.8 8.2 I *Income data is for previous tax year. SOURCE: U.S. Census, 1980 and 1990 I

Income levels and poverty status for Cumberland County I residents by municipality are illustrated in Table 4-8. There is an apparent geographic trend evident in family and household median income statistics. Within the I’ri-CountyRegion, Cumberland County realized the largest increase in family median income between 1980 I and 1990. The increases were 80.7%, 80.8%, and 271% percent for Perry, Dauphin, and Cumberland Counties, respectively. I Table 4-9 updates the per capita income data by municipality (to 1989) and further analyzes; the information by region of the County. The percentage increase in per capita income varied from I 6.1 percent in Shippensburg Borough to 57.6 percent in North Newton Township during the 1985 - 1989 period. In general, the Cumberland East region municipalities have the highest per capita income levels and the Cumberland West municipalities the lowest levels. I POPULATION TRENDS I Population Growth Factors Population growth in Cumberland County can be broken down into I two general categories: net immigration and natural growth. Net immigration is created when immigrants outnumber outmigrants, resulting in a net population increase. Natural growth is attributed to the number of births in an area being greater than I the number of deaths. I 4-18 I I 1 Between 1975 and 1980, the amount of persons migrating into the County (37,967) outnumbered the amount of persons migrating out of the County (32,166) by 5,801 persons. Assuming that there was I a similar rate of net immigration during the first five years of the decade, it can be said that immigration accounted for approximately 55 percent of the County's population growth during that decade. Therefore, natural growth explained approximately 45 I percent of the remaining population increase. TABLE 4-8 I SOCIO-ECONOMIC CHARACTERISTICS CUMBERLAND COUNTY I 1990 Income Poverty

* Per Per Family Household Persons Families I Capita Capita (Median) (Median) Below Below Municipality 1990 1980 (1990) (1990) (%) (%I I I I I I I I I I I I I

I 4-19 I

TAHLE 4-9 PER CAPITA INCOME - CUMBERLAND COUNTY I

% Change 1985 (Est) 1989 (Updated) 85-89, I CUMBERLAND COUNTY 11 ,ti18 15, 796 36.0 I Cumberland East 13,1.36 17,680 34.6 Camp Hill Boro 16,686 20,698 24.0 East Pennsboro Twp 11,301 14; 996 32.7 Hampden Twp 14, 014 20,380 45.4 I Lemoyne Boro 13 ,4:09 17, 889 33.4 Lower Allen Twp 13 ,053 18, 304 40.2 Mechanicsburg Boro 12,2176 15, 312 24.7 I New Cumberland Boro 12, 9146 17, 590 35.9 Shiremanstown Boro 12, 9151 16, 601 28.2 Upper Allen Twp 12 ,5115 17,698 41.4 I West Fairview Boro 8 ,806 11,459 30.1 Wormleysburg Boro 16, 5136 23 ,449 42.4 Cumberland Central 10,786 -14,861 27.4 I Carlisle Boro 11 ,0136 13,797 25.0 Dickinson Twp 9,505 14;239 49.8 Middlesex Twp 10,858 14, 358 32.2 1 Monroe Twp 12,292 16, 554 34.7 Mt Holly Springs Boro 9,219 12, 377 34.3 North Middleton Twp 10, 762 15, 062 40.0 Silver Spring Twp 12, 078 17, 614 45.8 I South Middleton Twp 10,535 14, 888 41.3

Cumberland West 8,236 11,238 36.4 ,_ I Cooke Twp 10,465 13,797 31.8 Hopewell-Twp 8,406 11;876 41.3 Lower Frankford Twp 8,390 12,242 31.5 I Lower Mifflin Twp 7,659 10, 760 40.5 Newburg Boro 9,293 11,705 26.0 Newville Boro 8,578 10,718 24.9 North Newton Twp 7 ,541 11 ,883 57.6 I Penn Twp 8,349 12, 105 45.0 Shippensburg Boro 9,469 110 ,081 6.1 Shippensburg Twp 5,265 5,888 11.8 I Southampton Twp 7 ,466 11 ,148 49.3 South Newton Twp 8,827 11,017 24.8 Upper Frankford Twp 7,470 11,635 55.8 I Upper Mifflin Twp 7 ,414 10, 464 41.1 West Pennsboro Twp 8 ,952 13, 246 48.0 SOURCE: Pa. State Data Center, 1986 Population and 1985 Per I Capita Income Estimates: Pennsylvania, 1987. Census, 1990 STF3A I 4-20 I I I From 1986 to 1990, births outnumbered deaths by an average of 1.38 to one in Cumberland County. If this ratio is interpolated over a ten year period, it will yield a net natural population growth of about 6,200 persons between 1990 and 2000. That amount I would account for about 40 percent of the expected overall growth. This fact reflects the national trend of steadily declining natural I population expansion. Population Trends and Projections I Between 1980 and 1990, the population of Cumberland County increased 8.7 percent, from 179,625 to 195,257. This was the 13th highest growth rate of the State's 67 counties. Cumberland County's increase was much higher than Pennsylvania's growth rate I of 0.1 percent. The general trend of population change within Cumberland I County has been that the Boroughs either lost or made slight gains in population, while all the townships gained population. (See Table 4-10 for population growth statistics from 1930-1990, by municipality.) This seems to reflect the overall trend within the I State: urban areas, including boroughs, are losing population to adjacent or outlying suburban or rural areas. This results in an eroded tax base, an older population, and stagnant land use I patterns for the boroughs. This trend is expected to continue. Seven municipalities, all townships, experienced moderate to I substantial growth between 1980 and 1990: East Pennsboro, Hampden, Lower Allen, Middlesex, Silver Spring, South Middleton, and Upper Allen Townships. Portions of four of these are in the urbanized area (East Pennsboro, Hampden, Lower Allen, and Upper Allen I Townships) while the remaining three are adjacent to the urbanizing areas of Mechanicsburg and Carlisle Boroughs. These municipalities will continue to experience consistent population growth into the I future. This population growth trend is expected to spread westward into the less densely populated townships of the County. I Three municipalities, all boroughs, experienced a moderate loss of population between 1970-1990: Camp Hill, New Cumberland, and Shiremanstown Boroughs. In all cases, the townships surrounding these boroughs recorded moderate to substantial I population gains, providing evidence of the continuing suburbanization trend. I Cumberland County's growth rate was quite substantial between 1940 and 1970: between 1940 and 1950, the County population increased by 19,651 or 26.3 percent; between 1950 and 1960, the I population increased by 30,359 or 32.1 percent; and between 1960 and 1970, the population increased by 32,361 or 25.9 percent. The County's population increase began to slow between 1970 and 1980 I and is expected to remain at such levels into the next century. I 4-21 TABLE 4-10 CUMBERLAND COUNTY POPULATION GROWTH BY MUNICIPALITY 1940-90

% CHG. 0 CHG. 0 CHG. % CHG. % CHG. % CHG. 1930 1940 1930-40 1950 1940-50 1960 1950-60 1970 1960-70 1980 1970-80 1990 1980-90

Camp Hill Borough 3111 3630 16.68% 5934 63.47% 8559 44.24% 9931 16.03% 8422 -15.19% 7,831 -7 * 0% Carlisle Borough 12596 13984 11 -02% 16812 20.22% 16623 -1.12% 18079 8.76% 1831 4 1.30% 18,419 0.6% Cooke Township 33 50 51.52% 36 -28.00% 16 -55.56% 71 343.75% 197 177.46% 95 -51 -8% Dickinson Township 1667 1816 8.94% 1936 6.61% 2025 4.60% 241 6 19.31% 3037 25.70% 3,865 27.3% East Pennsboro Twp. 4424 4738 7.10% 5582 17.81% 8977 60.82% 12440 38.58% 13931 11 -99% 15,185 9.0% Hampden Township 1149 1405 22.28% 2095 49.11% 6558 213.03% 11847 80.65% 17732 49.68% 20,384 15.0% Hopewell Township 679 569 -1 6.20% 761 33.74% 849 11.56% 1026 20.85% 1411 37.52% 1,910 35.4% Lemoyne Borough 41 71 4358 4.48% 4605 5.67% 4662 1.24% 4625 -0.79% 41 78 -9.66% 3,959 -5.2% Lower Allen TWP. 1209 1426 17.95% 5115 258.70% 11614 127.06% 13690 17.87% 14077 2.83% 15,254 8.4% Lower Frankford Twp. 424 4 65 9.67% 485 4.30% 620 27.84% 81 3 31 -13% 1261 55.10% 1,491 18.3% Lower Mifflin TWP. 505 552 9.31% 534 -3.26% 61 3 14.79% 746 21 -70% 1122 50.40% 1,700 51.5% Mechanicsburg Boro 5647 5709 1.10% 6786 18.86% 81 23 19.70% 9385 15.54% 9487 1.09% 2,452 0.0% Middlesex Township 1207 1365 13.09% 1632 19.56% 2333 42.95% 2857 22.46% 4506 57.72% 5,853 30.0% Monroe Township 1498 1567 4.61% 1875 19.66% 2298 22.56% 3326 44.73% 4836 45.40% 5,468 13.1% Mt. Holly Sprs Boro 1140 1260 10.53% 1701 35.00% 1840 8.17% 2009 9.18% 2068 --3.94% 1 i925 -5.9% Newburg Borough 222 278 25.23% 289 3.96% 283 -2.08% 320 13.07% 303 -5.31% 31 5 4.0% New Cumberland Boro 4283 4525 5.65% 6204 37.10% 9257 49.21% 9803 5.90% 8051 -1 7.87% 7,665 -4.8% Newville Borough 1482 1758 18.62% 1788 1.71% 1656 -7.38% 1631 -1 .51% 1370 -1 6.00% 1 ,349 . -1.5% North Middleton Twp 1698 221 3 N/A 3208 44.96% 5079 58.32% 6572 29.40% 9785 48.89% 9,760 0 .O% North Newton Twp 785 781 -0.51% 930 19.08% 1088 16.99% 1365 25.46% 1697 24.32% 1,779 4.3% Penn Township 1124 1188 5.69% 1183 -0.42% 1374 16.15% 1441 4.88% 1944 34.91% 2,425 24.7% Shippensburg Boro 4345 4661 7.27% 5004 7.36% 5071 1.34% 51 72 1.99% 4376 -1 5.39% 4 I 328 -1 .I% Shippensburg Twp. 796 847 6.41% 1442 70.25% 1321 -8.39% 31 98 142.09% 41 36 29.33% 4,606 11 -4% Shiremanstown Boro 731 777 6.29% 887 14.16% 1212 36.64% 1773 46.29% 1719 -3.05% 1,567 -8.8% 9nn-o Sil.;er Spring ywp. ’ ;849 I730 n; A 2509 28.i4% 4044 61 ,i 8% 6324 56.38% 71 48 13.03% 8,369 17.1% Southampton Twp. 1442 1529 6.03% 1731 13.12% 2282 31.83% 2451 7.41% 3004 22.56% 3,552 18.2% South Middleton Twp 2813 3240 15.18% 4204 29.75% 5424 29.02% 7521 38.66% 8941 18.88% 10,340 15.6% South Newton Twp. 51 2 547 6.84% 71 5 30.71% 847 18.46% 874 3.19% 972 11.21% 1,153 18.6% Upper Allen Twp. 1142 1217 6.57% 1594 30.98% 2631 65.06%. 7325 178.41% 10533 43.80% 13,347 26.7% Upper Frankford Twp 635 748 17.80% 770 2.94% 893 15.97% 991 10.97% 1552 56.61% 1,703 9.7% Upper Mifflin Twp. 492 534 8.54% 533 -0.19% 520 -2.44% 638 22.69% 964 51.10% 1,103 5.1% West Fairview Boro 1794 1820 1.45% 1896 4.18% 1718 -9.39% 1388 -19.21% 1426 2.74% 1,403 -6.1% West Pennsboro Twp. 1658 1837 10.80% 21 61 17.64% 261 2 20.87% 2937 12.44% 4329 47.40% 4,945 14.2% Wormleysburg Boro 1404 1454 3.56% 1511 3.92% 1794 18.73% 31 92 77.93% 2796 -12.41% 2,847 1.8%

COUNTY TOTALS 68667 74806 8.94% 94448 26.26% 12481 6 32.15% 158177 26.73% 179625 13.56% 195,257 8.7% SOURCE: U.S. Bureau of Census. -

4-22 I

I The 1990 population of Cumberland County is determined by the U.S. Census Bureau to be 195,257; reflecting an 8.7 percent increase since 1980. Table 4-11 presents population projections I prepared by the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Resources. TABLE 4-11 I POPULATION PROJECTIONS FOR REGION Projections I 1990 Data 2000 3 Change 2010 % Change Cumberland County 195,259 209,992 7.5 221,325 5.4 Dauphin County 237 ,813 242 ,901 2.1 244,620 0.1 I Perry County 41 ,172 46,327 12.5 50,614 9.3

I Table 4-11 reveals that Cumberland County is expected to experience a consistently modest population growth into the next century; at a higher rate than Dauphin County, but lower than Perry County in the Tri-County Region. However, since there are many I factors 'which influence population growth, actual growth rates I could deviate significantly from the predicted levels. I I I I I I I I I 4-23 I I

I CHAPTER 5 ECONOMY AND EMPLOYMENT I The purpose of this Chapter is to describe the County’s economic base and draw conclusions based upon trends shown in the data. Selected information on industries, employment, I unemployment, personal income, agricultural economy, wholesale/retail trade and economic development is provided as a summary indication of the economic status of the County. I The economic future of Cumberland County is based on a capacity to produce goods and services. In order to serve a growing population and provide employment for a growing labor I force, the economic base will also have to grow. The economic health of the County will influence its future housing, I transportation and land use decisions. Historical Trends Colonial expansion westward resulted in the formation of I Cumberland County as the sixth County of the State in 1750. Although basically an agrarian economy at that time, the County became known for its military posts. The influence of military I installations on the County’s and Region’s economy is still strongly felt today; with the U.S. Naval Supply Depot and the New Cumberland Army Depot the second and fifth largest employers in the I Region, respectively. Historically, Cumberland County’s economy may be characterized as dominated by agriculture interspersed with manufacturing which geared up to meet demand during times of war. After World War 11, agricultural acreage was reduced to accommodate new housing, and the economy shifted from mostly rural agricultural to urbadsuburban commerce, industry, and services. Today, a diversified economic base, employment opportunities, and location within the growing Harrisburg Urbanized Area have contributed to the strength of the County’s economy. Recrional Influences Cumberland County, as part of the Tri-County Region, is affected by economic trends of Dauphin and Perry Counties to the west and north. The Tri-County Region also includes the Harrisburg I Metropolitan Area. Certain features of past and present development are important to the economic growth of this Region. These features are unique to the area, yet are not isolated from I national economic and business cycles. Historically, the strategic crossroads location, at a point . where the Susquehanna River emerges from the Appalachian Mountain I ridges into the junction of five valleys, is important. This location made the Harrisburg Metropolitan Area the hub of Central I Pennsylvania’s colonial trading activity. I 5-1 1

This strategic location spurred rapid development as a transportation center. Four interstates and six other U.S. 1 highways traverse the Region, making it very accessible to the major metropolitan areas of the Northeast Atlantic Region. Historically, the railroad industry has been a vital part of the local economy, with Conrail and AMTRAK still serving the area. Two airports are located in the area: the Harrisburg International Airport (Dauphin County) and the Capital City Airport in York County adjacent to the Cumberland County line. A number of large trucking companies have also recognized the advantages of locating in the area and have built la.rge terminals and warehouses in Cumberland County. Natural resources are abundant. Large axeas of prime farmland exist in Cumberland County, creating very productive farms where land is still available in large tracts. This same land is also excellent for most types of residential and commercial development. Some of the larger portions of woodland provide valuable timber resources. Mineral resources of the Region include coal, iron, iron-ore, limestone, sandstone , and shale. There is limited coal mining activity in northeastern Dauphin County and limestone mining in the valleys both Cumberland and Dauphin Counties. Mining of ore was mostly done during the colonial and industrial periods. In 1812 Harrisburg was selected as the State Capital, and more recently federal military installations were added, establishing the Region, in particular Cumberland County, as a major employer of government workers. The State Government is the largest employer in the Region, drawing empl.oyees from all corners of the Commonwealth. Commercial activity and industrial development increased following the growth of the City as a government and transportation center. The eastern portion of Cumberland County, across the Susquehanna River from Harrisburg, also experienced commercial and industrial development. In the heart of Cumberland County is Carlisle Borough, another large employment center in the Region. Employment opportunities outside the County are available and within reasonable commuting distance. The development of the Harrisburg Metropolitan Area and the east-west corridor (Carlisle to the City of Harrisburg) has been vital to the expansion of Cumberland County’s economic base. EmPlovment by Industry Table 5-1 breaks down employment by type of industry for Cumberland County residents as reported in the 1980 and 1990 Censuses, as well as the sa.me informati.on for the Harrisburg Primary Metropolitan Statistical Area (PMSA) and the State. Starting with the total number of County residents employed in each industry group in 1990, we find that the largest proportion of the County work force was employedin Professional and Related Services (22.7 percent) , followed closely by Wholesale and Retail Trade

5-2 1

(21.9 percent) and Manufacturing (14.1 percent). The combined I employment would include 30.2 percent of the County’s work force. Public administration accounted for 10.2 percent of the County I work force,in 1990. Local and County governments provided some of this employment, however, several federal military installations inside and outside the County, along with the state government I offices in Harrisburg generate most of these employment positions. Transportation/communications/publis utilities jobs were filled by 7.8 percent of the County‘s work force in 1990. Agriculture, forestry etc. employed only 1.9 percent of Cumberland County I residents in 1990. This area of employment is important in influencing the usage patterns of large quantities of land in the County, and is discussed further in the Agricultural Economy 1 section.

Between 1980 and 1990 (see Table 5-1 ) the Business and Repair I Service sector increased in the numbers of County residents they employed by over 56 percent. Other industries that had significant employment numbers all realized increases during this period: Construction (up 52.9 percent over the time period), Finance & I Insurance (50.1%), Personal Entertainment and Recreation Services (49.0%), and Professional and Related Services (up 39.3%). The number of Cumberland County residents employed in these selected I industries increased by 20.6 percent, which was greater than the 8.7 percent increase in population observed during the same time period. This is a healthy sign that there is demand for the I employable residents of Cumberland County. Comparing Cumberland County to the SMSA and State, we find that one of the most significant differences is a 23.5 percent I decrease in manufacturing employment of State residents and 13.3 percent decrease of County residents over the 1980 - 1990 time period. This is compared to a gain of 19.8 percent for the PMSA. I The greater diversity of industry and lesser reliance on heavy industry in the County, plus the inclusion of large urban areas whose residents experienced heavy manufacturing job losses over I this time period throughout the State, account for much of this difference. t Figures on annual average employment by industry in Cumberland I County for 1990 are shown in Table 5-2. This data is useful in analyzing the relative diversification of industries in the County’s economic base. It should be noted that the figures in I Table 5-2 are not directly comparable to those of Table 5-1, since they are establishment-based (i.e./ total employment of businesses located in the County) , rather than residence-based (i.e., where County residents actually work) as the Census figures for Table 5-1 I reflect. I I 5-3 I

TABLE 5-1 EMPLOYMENT BY INDUSTRY I BY PLACE OF RESIDENCE ( 16 Years and Older) 1 Pennsylvania Harrisburg PMSA Cumberland County

% % % Industry Group 1980 1990 Change 1980 1990 Change 1980 1990 Change I Agriculture, 136,117 129,207 -5.1 3,888 6,490 67.1 1,850 1,961 6.0 Forestry, and Fisheries & Mining I Construction 240,162 331 ,161 37.9 9,293 17,245 85.6 3,656 5,589 52.9 Manufacturing 1,420,837 1,087,220 -23.5 41,235 49,406 19.8 16,598 14,395 -13.3 Transportation, 347,197 376,741 8.5 18,316 23,062 25.9 7,061 7,964 12.8 I Communications, and Public Utilities Wholesale and 942,676 1,166,867 23.8 39,115 60,67€; 55.1 17,014 22,295 31 .O Retail Trade I Finance, 256,275 351,519 36.9 12,914 21 ,859 69.3 5,555 8,339 50.1 Insurance, and Real Estate I Business and i86,sag 236,525 21.2 6,627 12,27:2 85.2 2, a53 4,472 56.7 Repair Services Personal 161,446 194,955 20.8 6,181 11,069 79.1 2,132 3,176 49.0 Entertainment and 1 Recreation Services

Professional and 1,011,813 1,341,431 32.6 3%,402 65,577 70.8 16,584 23,099 ' 39.3 Related Services 1 Public 227,939 21 8,606 -4.1 18,448 31 ,065 68.4 11,023 10,400 -5.7 Administration TOTAL 4,931,501 5,434,532 10.2 194,419 298,729 53.6 04,326 101,690 20.6 I

SOURCE: U.S. Census - 1980, 1990, Census of Population and Housing 1 :I) Examples of employment by Industry: (See next page) :2) Harrisburg PMSA - Cumberland, Dauphin, Lebanon, and Perry Counties I Agriculture, Forestry, Fisheries, and Mining: farms, greenhouses, orchards, hatcheries, logging, quarries, etic. I Construction: buil,ding,highway, plumbing, electrical, excavation, utility contractors. I Manufacturing: meat packing, metal fabric:ating, flour and grain mills, textiles, apparel, millwork, furniture, paper mills, publishing/printing, chemicals, refining, footwear, etc. I Transportation, Communications, and Public: Utilities: passenger and freight transportation, motor freight, air transportation, pipeline transmission, railroads, radio, electric, gas and sewage I utilities, etc. I 5-4 8 Wholesale Trade: businesses primarily engaged in selling merchandise to retailers; to industrial, commercial, institutional, farm, or professional business users; and bringing buyer and seller together. Retail Trade: businesses primarily engaged in retail sale of merchandise to the general public for personal or household consumption; the buying of goods for resale to the consumer. Finance, Insurance, Real Estate: banks, credit unions, security brokers, insurance carriers, realtors, etc. Business and Repair Services: advertising, employment agencies, photography, equipment leasing, automotive repair, locksmiths, appliance repair, etc. Personal Entertainment and Recreation Services: theaters, dance studios, golf courses, fitness centers, etc. Professional and Related Services: doctors, nursing, attorneys, engineers, accountants, consultants, etc. Public Administration: police, municipal managers/secretaries, penitentiaries, veteran’s affairs, planning commissions, elected officials, etc. TABLE 5-2 1990 ANNUAL AVERAGE EMPLOYMENT BY INDUSTRY CUMBERLAND COUNTY 1990 Annual Industry Group Average Employment % of Total

Agriculture, Forestry and Fishing 1,867 1.8 Mining 94 - 01 Manufacturing 14,395 14.2 Construction 5 , 589 5.5 Transportation/Public Utilities 7 ,964 7.8 Finance/Insurance/Real Estate 8,339 8.2 Wholesale/Retail Trade 22 ,295 21 -9 Services (All Types) 30,747 30.2 Public Administration: 18,171 17.8 Local Government 4,590 (4.5) State Government 6 ,673 (6.6) Federal Government 6 ,908 (6.8)

COUNTY TOTAL 101 , 690

t SOURCE: STF-3A 1-990 Census Bureau, Labor Force

5-5 According to Table 5-2, Services was the County industry with the highest annual average employment in 1990 (30,747 workers, or I 30.2 percent of total County employment), surpassing the Wholesale/Retail Industry total of 22,295 employees (21.9 percent of total). The 1990 figures also reveal that there are more public I administration jobs (18,171) than manufacturing jobs (14,395) in the County. il The transportation/public utilities sector employed 7,964 workers or 7.8 percent of the County total in 1990. This figure is significantly influenced by the large trucking industry in Cumberland County which takes advantage of the access available in the area. This sector is expected to grow even more in the future, due to the anticipated expansion of these trucking activities. Personal Income by Industry Related to the breakdown of employment by industry is personal income by industry, Table 5-3 profiles this characteristic for the County, Tri-County Region, and State. The Services category contributed the highest proportion of total personal income for the County (27.8%) and the Region (30.1%) in 19512. Wholesale/retail trade contributed the second largest proportion of total personal income for Cumberland County (22.5 percent). Manufacturing contributed the third largest share of total personal income in Cumberland County while it accounted for the second largest in the Region and the State. In general, manufacturing has been known for its re1at:ively higher salaries - The greater number of people employed in these categories contributes to the higher personal income figures.

TABLE 5-3 PERSONAL INCOME BY TYPE OF INDUSTRY - 1992 (in $1,000)

% of % of Cumberland % of Type of Industry PA Total Tri-County Total County Total

Farm/ Agricultural 399,629 0.3 15,199 0.3 6,043 0.3 Service Mining 863,312 0.8 5,907 0.1 1,163 0.05 Construction 5,799,021 5.3 291 ,140 5.6 ii3,6ia 5.2 Manufacturing za,977,177 26.6 1,124,357 21 .6 375,408 17.2 Transportation a, 175,257 7.5 828,630 15.9 304,432 13.9 Public Utilities Wholesale/ Retail 19,661,796 18.1 aoi,777 - 15.5 491,469 22.5 Trade Fin Ins. Real 9,2a9,aga 8.5 a21,702 15.8 286,206 13.1 Estafe Services 35,570.9a9 32.7 i ,564,158 30.1 600,455 27.8 TOTAL 108,801,892 5,192,373 2,187,191

*Totals may not equal 100.0 due to rounding SOURCE : Pennsylvania County Business Patterns, 1992; U.S. Department of Commerce Economic and St:atistics Admin:istration

5-6 I - I Employment by Occupation The employment by occupation data from the 1990 Census profiles statistics dealing with individual worker characteristics. 1 These numbers reflect the educational level, vocational training and work experience of the work force. Table 5-4 lists employment 1 by occupation for both Cumberland County and the Harrisburg SMSA. The Table shows that the largest proportion of County workers were, employed in the administrative support/clerical worker category in 1990 (19.4 percent), followed closely by the operators I and laborers group (16.0 percent). Professional occupations ranked third with 14.7 percent, managerial positions fourth with 12.6 percent , service jobs fifth with 11.2 percent , and sales sixth with I 1 0.8 percent TABLE 5-4 I EMPLOYMENT BY OCCUPATION PERSONS 16 YEARS i? OLDER: 1990

I Cumberland County I SMSA Industry No. % No. %

I Executive, Administrative, 12,765 12.6 34,683 11.6 Managerial I Professional Specialty 14,933 14.7 39,414 13.2 Technicians & Related Support 4,460 4.4 11,803 3.9 Sales IO, 936 10.8 29,523 9.9 I Administrative Support & 19,768 19.4 57 ,073 19.1 Clerical Service 11,422 11.2 36 , 787 12.3 I Farming & Forestry 1,703 1.7 5,264 1.8 Precision Production, Craft & 9,373 9.2 32,209 10.8 Repair I Operators, Fabricators, & 16,330 16.0 51,793 17.4 Laborers I TOTAL 101,690 100.0 298,729 100.0 I SOURCE: U.S. Census, Census of Population and Housing, 1990 However, if the managerial and professional categories are taken together as a measure of the "white collar" employees, this group would compose the greatest proportion of the County I work force at 27.3 percent. This concentration of white collar workers reflects the high level of education and training of the County work force (see Table 4-6 for highlights of Cumberland 1 County's educational profile).

I 5-7 I I

Comparing the occupational profile for Cumberland County with that of the Harrisburg SMSA in Table 5-4, we find that the I breakdown of occupational categories is nearly the same for the County and the SMSA. If the SMSP, data were further broken down by County, we would find that the Cumberland and Dauphin County I occupational profiles are similar, but that the Perry County profile differs greatly from the other two counties. The greatest differences are a larger proportion of workers in the unskilled and semi-skilled labor categories in Perry County, and a smaller 1 proportion of “white collar”-type workers. Employment by Place of Work I A useful indicator to include in an analysis of the County’s employment base is a breakdown of where County residents work. I Table 5-5 illustrates the employment locations of the Cumberland County work force in 1990. Of the 101,250 persons that reported their place of work, 69.9 percent worked in the County and 29.0 percent worked outside of the County (but st:ill within the State). I At the municipal level, a large majority of those reporting were employed outside of the municipality in which they lived. A total of 93,824 County residents were employed In the Central Cities I (Harrisburg, Carlisle, Lebanon) as defined by the 1990 Census. These numbers seem to ref :Lett that employment opportunities are abundant within the County and that the job market in the I County has expanded along with the population. Expansion of the economic base, with its increased job opportunities, is expected to continue in the County and Region. I Table 5-6 breaks down the place of work; data by municipality, showing the number of people who work in the municipality in which I they live, and the number who work outsidLe the municipality in which they live. Carlisle Borough has the highest proportion of residents working in the Borough (65.9 percent) , followed by Shippensburg Borough (40.7 percent), Newville Borough (26.1 I percent) , and Hampden Township (25.2 perlzent 1 . These figures reflect a greater amount of employment opportunities within these municipalities for local residents. Cooke Township, which lies I largely within a State Forest, and the rural Township of Lower Frankford has the lowest proportion of residents working within their municipalities (0.0 and 1.9 percent, respectively) - 1 I I I

5-8 I I I I TABLE 5-5 WORK LOCATIONS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY RESIDENTS I Persons 16 Years & Older: 1990

I NUMBER

I MUNICIPAL LEVEL Work in Municipality of Residence 19,449 I Work Outside Municipality of Residence 81 ,801 TOTAL 101,250 I COUNTY/STATE LEVEL Work in Cumberland County 70 ,837 I Work Outside County 29 ,462 Work Outside Pennsylvania 951

I TOTAL 101 I 250 PMSA (Cumberland,Dauphin,Perry, Lebanon) LEVEL I Work in PMSA [Four County Region] (Central City*) 93 I 824 (Remainder PMSA: Outside Central City) 117,271 I Residents Working Outside PMSA 25,153 1 TOTAL 236 ,248 SOURCE: U.S. Census, 1990 (Pa State Data Center, Census of I Population and Housing, 1990 Summary Tape File 3A, 1990) *Central City: Includes Harrisburg, Carlisle, and Lebanon as I defined by 1990 Census. 1 I I

I 5-9 1 I

TABLE 5-6 WORKERS 16 YEARS i? OVER BY I PLACE OF WORK CUMBERLAND COUNTY 1990 I Worked in Municipality Worked Outside Municipality of Residence Municipality # % of Residence

Camp Hill Boro 627 17.3 2997 I Carlisle Boro 6093 65.9 31 49 Cooke Twp 0 0.0 54 Dickinson Twp 163 8.5 1917 I East Pennsboro Twp 1691 21 -4 6224 Hampden Twp 2778 25.2 263 Hopewell Twp 67 6.7 934 Lemoyne Boro 31 3 17.4 1803 I Lower Allen Twp 1106 15.8 5898 Lower Frankford Twp 15 1.9 790 Lower Mifflin Twp 39 4.3 86 1 I Mechanicsburg Boro 1101 21 -5 4023 Middlesex Twp 101 3.4 291 3 Monroe Twp 114 3.7 2988 Mt. Holly Springs 208 21 .I 777 I ' Newburg Twp 13 7.9 150 New Cumberland Boro 628 15.8 3348 Newville Boro 186 26.1 526 I North Middleton Twp 140 2.6 5233 North Newton Twp 61 6.3 91 0 Penn Twp 108 8.4 1172 I Shippensburg Boro 839 40.7 1220 Shippensburg Twp 326 19.6 1340 Shiremanstown Boro 52 6.0 81 7 Silver Spring Twp 384 8.0 4422 I Southampton Twp 102 5.9 1629 South Middleton Twp 351 6.4 51 30 South Newton Twp 31 5.7 51 6 1 Upper Allen Twp 1476 20.2 5830 Upper Frankford Twp 42 4.7 855 Upper Mifflin Twp 23 4.6 480 1 West Fairview Boro 33 4.8 660 West Pennsboro Twp 156 6.3 2336 Wormleysburg Boro 80 4.7 1638 County Total 19449 81 801 I SOURCE: U.S. Bureau of Census, Summary Tape File 3A, 1990. I 1 5-1 0 1 I I Unemployment A problem that almost every county faces and must solve to remain economically healthy is unemployment. Unemployment rates 1 are often used as economic indicators, since they reflect the demand for labor which is driven by a particular economy. However, there are too many other factors that affect unemployment to I qualify it as a sole indicator of economic strength. Unemployment rates can be affected by seasonal jobs, State and national trends and personnel decisions by large employers. I Table 5-7 reveals that Cumberland County’s unemployment rate is normally lower than the State’s and the SMSA’S rates, as well as being the lowest of the three counties (Cumberland, Dauphin and Perry) individually. The higher unemployment rate of the State reflects the large urban areas which usually exhibit relatively high rates. Cumberland and Dauphin counties usually exhibit low rates because of the large employment centers in and surrounding the Harrisburg Metropolitan Area. Perry County, which lacks large employment centers and has a slightly lower educational level of its work force, usually ranks highest of the three counties in unemployment rate. In 1993, though, the unemployment rate for Perry County fell below the rate for Dauphin County. Unemployment rate trends in the County follow the regional, state and national trends. Table 5-7 shows that employment was strong at all levels during the 1970 Census, was faltering during the 1980 Census and was rebounding in 1993. The high unemployment 1 rates in 1980 reflect a major recession which was gripping the nation at that time. 1970 was near a peak in the national economic cycle, while 1993 was a time when the nation and region were I emerging from another recession. National economic trends probably have the most influence on Cumberland County’s unemployment rate of I any of the factors affecting it. TABLE 5-7 UNEMPLOYMENT TRENDS: 1970, 1980, 1993 (Unadj us ted) I 1970 1980 1993 Pennsylvania 3.7% 7.4% 6.9% Harrisburg PMSA 2.6% 4.6% 4.6% I Cumberland County 2.1% 3.7% 3.7% Dauphin County 2.2% 5.1% 4.7% Perry County 2.9% 6.4% 4.2% I SOURCES: U.S. Census - 1970, 1990 PA Bureau of Employment Security I 1 5-1 1 1 I 1 As described in Chapter 3, Cumberland County is blessed with an abundance of productive farmland, located mostly in the more level valley areas underlain by the best agricultural soils. These 1 same characteristics often intensify competition between agriculture and development forces, however, because flat, level I land is also more easily developed. I These favorable physical conditions have produced a substantial agricultural economy in the County. Table 5-8 indicates farming trends for the County for the period 1978-1992, I using U.S. Census of Agriculture figures. Although there may be disagreement over what should be considered "farmland, it is still helpful to compare Census figures to get a general idea of the I state of the agricultural economy. While the major farm industry indicators remained fairly constant over this thirteen year period, a significant decrease in I both the total number of farms (-16.8 percent) and total land in farms (-10.3 percent) occurred over the most recent five year Census period, II 987-1 992. Among other factors, the strong economy I of the recent post-recession years has impacted farmland loss. The table also reveals that average farm size has remained fairly constant over the entire period, implying no significant 1 trend toward larger "corporate"-type farms. While some farms have increased in size, the tendency of some farmers to have smaller farms and subdivide their farms has counterbalanced this effect I County-wide. Smaller farm size is also often associated with the use of more traditional-type farm.ing methods. I The average value of farmland and buildings generally increased over the time period, but decreased by $140/acre from 1982 to 1987. The following five years though, revealed a large increase in both the average value of farmland and farms. Between I 1987 and 1992, the average value of farmland increased by $807/acre. Land values tend to fluctuate due to a number of factors, including the weather. Severe drought conditions in some 1 areas for certain years between 1982-1 988 have impacted farmland value. 1 Rapidly rising farmland values are sometimes associated with increased development pressure. This is true to a greater extent in certain areas of the County more than others (eg. the municipalities in the eastern section of the County, closer to the I urbanized area). Less tangible factors are also involved in pressure to develop farmland, such as younger family members finding farming less attractive and farmers looking at farmland as I an investment, to be sold off as needed at. retirement. I 5-1 2 I I TABLE 5-8 AGRICULTURAL ECONOMY: 1978, 1982, 1987, 1992 CUMBERLAND COUNTY

1978 1982 1987 1992

Total #' Farms 1,138 1,174 1,130 940 I Total Farm Acreage 163 ,826 163,186 1 58 ,300 141,919 Average Farm Size (Acres) 144 139 140 151 Value of Land/Buildings: Average per Farm $21 2,103 282 ,070 279,562 405 ,742 I Average per Acre $1,533 2,085 1,945 2,752 No. of Farms with Total Sales over $10,000 640 651 603 588 I Market Value of Products Sold: Total Sales $43,879,000 63,007,000 66,124,000 57,701,000 I Average per Farm $ 38,558 96,786 110,206 61,384 I SOURCE: U.S. Bureau of Census, Census of Agriculture - 1974,1978,1982,1987 The importance of Cumberland County agriculture to the State as a whole is revealed in the County's ranking on agricultural indicators as compared to other counties in Pennsylvania. The I County ranked 16th out of 67 counties in the total acres of farmland in 1987, and 15th out of 67 in the total number of farms. Thus, Cumberland County makes a significant contribution to the I State's overall agricultural economy. Exhibit 5A shows graphically the distribution of total farms by county for the State. I Manuf acturinq The historic trend in manufacturing for the State has been a fairly steady decline in the number of establishments. The Tri- I County Region has remained stable since 1972 in the number of establishments, while the State has experienced a 26% decline in the number of establishments since 1972. The most recent years I seem to indicate that the number of manufacturing establishments is stabilizing at these levels. Census figures suggest a different trend for CumberlandCounty I manufacturing in the recent past, however. Table 5-9 indicates that the total number of manufacturing establishments in the County increased from 187 in 1977 to 217 in 1987, for an increase of 16.0 I percent over this 10 year period. The total number of employees working in County manufacturing establishments also increased over the same time period by a significant amount (25.3 percent). Value I added by manufacture (sales receipts minus cost of materials and manufacture) also increased significantly from 1977 - 1987, another I healthy sign for the County's manufacturing base.

1 5-1 3 1 I

EXHIBIT 5-A I 1 TOTAL FARMS BY COUNTY, 1987 PENNSYLVANIA TOTAL = 57,549

I- I to 455 -0 456 to 800

801 to 1200 1201 to 4775

kTA CENTER GRAPHICS 0

5-14 I

I TABLE 5-9 MANUFACTURING STATISTICS - CUMBERLAND COUNTY

I 1977 1982 1987 1 Total # Establishments 187 196 21 7 # Establishments w/20 82 89 97 or More Employees I Total # Employees 14,600 15,500 18,300 Payroll $1 66,900,000 $261 ,300 , 000 $41 2 , 100,000 1 New Capital $23,800,000 $84,900,000 $72,600,000 Expenditures Value Added by $454,8OO,OOO $695,100,000 $1 , 187,6OO,000 I Manufacture I SOURCE: U.S. Census, Census of Manufactures: 1977, 1982, 1987

I The top five industries in the County in 1987 in terms of the total number of manufacturing establishments were: printing and . publishing - 47 establishments, machinery (except electrical) - 27 I establishments, food and kindred products - 20 establishments, apparel and other textiles - 17 establishments, electronic and other electric equipment - 16 establishments. I Wholesale and Retail Trade Healthy wholesale and retail trade is a vital element of an I area's economy as it generates the movement of money, employment base, and disposable income for the purchase of goods and services. If a diversity of goods and services is readily available within an I area, there is less tendency for the local residents to spend their earnings elsewhere, and therefore, it can become to some degree self-sufficient. I As Table 5-10 shows, both the number of wholesale trade establishments only slightly increased (1.2%) while the number of employees actually decreased (-3.7%) between 1987 and 1992. Also I within the same time period, sales decreased significantly, by almost 10 percent.

~'I I 5-1 5 I Table 5-10 reveals a different pattern for retail trade, that is, both the number of sales and the number of employees increased I significantly over the time period. By comparison, the Tri-County Region and the State showed I moderate to substantial gains in both wholesale and retail establishments and employment between 1987 and 1992, with significant gains in payroll and sales (see Tables 5-11 and 5-12). Cumberland County, the region, and the State display similar trends I in the percentage of new retail and wholesale establishments over the time period from 1987 to 1992. I Of all the retail establishments in the County with payrolls in 1992, 26.6 percent were eating and drinking places, 20.2 percent were miscellaneous retail stores and 10.3 plercent were apparel and I accessory stores. Following these in order were: food stores (9.8 percent of total establishments) , gasoline service stations (8.2%) , furniture/home furnishings stores (7.9%:1, automotive dealers (6.3%), building materials/hardware/ mobile home dealers (4.7%), 1 drug and proprietary stores (3.6%), and general merchandise group stores (1 -9%). I The above figures suggest that the wholesale and retail trade in Cumberland County provides hasic goods to the local market, but also contributes to the wide range of retail and wholesale items I which serve population centers of the Harrisburg Area. Also, the County’s stable employment base contributes to continued demand for wholesale and retail goods. TAZ3LE 5-1 0 I WHOLESALE, RETAIL, SELECTED SERVICES: 1987, 1992 Cumberland County I %Ca 1987 1992 1 9 8 3’- 1Se2 Wholesale Trade I Establishments 304 31 0 1.2 Payroll ($1 ,000) 114,037 135,751 -19.0 Sales ($1 ,000) 1 ,865,245 1,680,988 -9.9 I Employment 4 ,897 4,715 -3.7 Retail Trade (1) Establishments 1,231 1,263 2.6 I Payroll ($1 ,000) 173,353 229,736 32.5 Sales ($1 ,000) 1 ,662 ,228 2,040,186 22.7 Employment 18,728 20,063 7.1 I Selected Services (1 1 Establishments 1,168 1,387 18.7 I Payroll ($1,000) 21 9,219 381,207 73.9 Receipts ($1 ,000) 540 ,893 901 ,837 66.7 Employment 12,420 16,682 34.3 I SOURCE : U.S. Census, Censuses of Wholesale Trade, Retail Trade, and Service Industries, 1987, 1992 (1) Represents only those establishments with payroll.. I I 5-1 6 1 TABLE 5-1 1 1 WHOLESALE, RETAIL, SELECTED SERVICES: 1987, 1992 I Tri-County Region (Cumberland, Dauphin, and Perry Counties) % Cha 1987 1992 1 987-1Be2 Wholesale Trade I Establishments 71a 743 3.5 Payroll ($1,000) 281 ,520 376,153 33.6 Sales ($1 ,000) 4,475,026 6,192,241 38.4 ‘I Employment 12,161 12,916 6.2 Retail Trade (1) I Establishments 2,739 2,787 1.7 Payroll ($1,000) 364 ,049 459,815 26.3 Sales ($1,000) 3,374,222 4,031,019 19.5 I Employment 38, I 52 39,890 4.5 Selected Services 111 Establishments 2,746 3,133 14.1 I Payroll ($1,000) 522,243 a21 ,236 57.2 Receipts ($1 ,000) I ,417,438 2,127,739 50.1 Employment 32, a55 37,269 13.4 I SOURCE : U.S. Census, Censuses of Wholesale Trade, Retail Trade, and Service Industries, 1987, 1992 (1) Represents only those establishments with payroll. I TABLE 5-12 WHOLESALE, RETAIL, SELECTED SERVICES: 1987, 1992 I PENNSYLVANIA %Ca e 1987 1992 198?-%2 I Wholesale Trade Establishments 19,793 20 ,230 2.2 Payroll ($1 ,000) 5,832,479 7 ,485,376 28.3 Sales ($1,000) 104,454,301 126,369,922 20.9 Employment 247,599 254,410 2.7 Retail Trade (1 L Establishments 70, a23 71,652 1.2 Payroll ($1,000) a, 096,7a9 I 0,042, aaa 24.0 Sales ($1,000) 71,216,605 a7,787,a42 23.3 Employment 847,907 861,565 1.6 Selected Services (1 ) Establishments 70,071 77, a39 11 .I Payroll ($1 ,000) 12,407,825 ia,740,764 51 .O Receipts ($1,000) 33,232,174 49,382,550 48.6 Employment 693,760 797,051 14.9 SOURCE : U.S. Census, Censuses of Wholesale Trade, Retail Trade, and Service Industries, 1987, 1992 (1) Represents only those establishments with payroll.

5-1 7 I Selected Services I The number of selected service industry establishments has been increasing significantly in Cumberland County, as well as the SMSA and State. This increase reflects an overall nationwide trend I towards the "tertiary sector" or service-type industry. Portions of the regional increase can be attributed to the growth of technology development and service industries (as well as the growth of state government and related services. I Between 1987 and 1992, the number of service sector establishments in Cumberland County increased by 18.7 percent, and I the receipts increased by 66.7 percent (see Table 5-10). Paid employees in these industries increased by 34.3 percent during the same period of time. In 1992 the largest service-type group was I the health services (except hospitals) with 25.8 percent of all service establishments. The business services (advertising,- mailing-reproduction, computer programming, data processing, etc.) group was second with 17.0 percent of all service establishments. I The remaining top five service groups were: personal services (14.3%) , engineering, accounting, research, ma:nagement,and related services (12.1 %) , and automotive repair , services, and parking I (9.9%).

Cumberland County's service sector growth trends are expected to continue into the future similar to the national and regional I trends. The County's population growth will also affect growth in this sector, due to the strong correlation between population size' and the demand for all types of services. I Economic Development I This section provides information on some of the factors which are important to economic development. The data would be valuable as input for a more detailed economic base study to be conducted in the future. I Table 5-13 lists the major employers in Cumberland County for 1993. The table shows a diversity of employers, from public I hospitals and school systems, to trucking, communications, printing, and computer-related firms, drug stores, and various manufacturing establishments. The employezs with the highest 1 levels of employment tend to be public entities/government agencies, large industrial plants, and large retail firms. Exhibits 5-B and 5-C inventory existing industrial/ commercial I parks and major shopping centers and malls, locating them on a map of Cumberland County. Future siting of industrial/commercial parks and shopping centers will be affected by many factors, including I the availability of properly zoned land, utilities, and employees. Planning for commercial and industrial development is discussed further in the Land Use Chapter. I I 5-1 8 I I

TABLE 5-13 I MAJOR EMPLOYERS IN CUMBERLAND COUNTY: 1993 I Employer Name Employees Product/Service Blue Shield 6,585 Medical Svc. Plans Navy Ships Parts Control Center 4 , 900 Supply Agencies - Govt. I Kinney Shoes/Service Corp. 2,600 Shoe Stores Giant Foods 2,316 Grocery Stores I Holy Spirit Hospital 1 ,652 Hospital Rite Aid Corp. 1,650 Drugs, Proprietaries, Sundries IBM Corp. 1,485 Commercial Machines & Equip. I U.S. Army War College 1,440 Military Installation C.H. Masland & Sons 1 ,300 Woven Carpets & Rugs Roadway Express 1,240 Trucking I Carlisle Hospital 1,100 Hospi t a1 United Telephone 1,093 Telephone Communications I Cumberland County 1,000 County Seat Carolina Freight Corp. 995 Trucking PNC Bank 991 Banking I West Shore School District 961 Elementary & Secondary Schools Fry Communications 896 Commercial Printing Gannett-Fleming, Inc. 885 Engineering/Consulting I ABF Freight System, Inc. 800 Trucking Shippensburg University 789 State College I Book of the Month Club 762 Mail Orders Cumberland Valley School District 679 Elementary & Secondary Schools Capital Area Intermediate Unit 650 School Programs & Services I Dickinson College 61 9 Private College Appleton Papers, Inc. 600 Paper Products Carlisle School District 597 Elementary & Secondary Schools I Phico Insurance 560 Insurance Company Carlisle Tire and Rubber Co. 550 Tires, Tubes, and Hose I Carlisle Syntec 54 6 Rubber Sheeting/Commercial Roofing Beistle Co. 540 Seasonal Decor & Party Goods P.P.G. Industries 530 Flat Glass I Messiah College 500 Private College Quaker Oats Co. 500 Cereal Breakfast Foods Hoffman Mills, Inc. 500 Fabrics I Hempt Brothers 425 Mining/Construction Supplies AMP, Inc. 400 Electronic Components I PP&L 400 Electric Company SOURCES: Capital Region United Way; Patriot News Research Dept., Carlisle Chamber of I Commerce I 5-1 9 Knowledge of occupied and vacant properties is important in making economic development decisions. TabILe 5-1 4 lists the number I of occupied commercial/industrial properties for the County and by plan development sections of the County. Miscellaneous commercial buildings top the list for aIL1 sections as well as the County. I Office buildings and stores have the next highest number of occupied properties.

I I Other data which would be useful in economic development I planning are included for informational purposes: County Economic Development Organizations (Table 5-1 5) , Local Research and Development Facilities (Table 5-1 6) , and Major Lending Institutions I (Table 5-1 7). TABLE 5-14 I OCCUPIED COMMERCIAL/INDUSTRIAL PROPERTIES ( 1 992 ) Number of Properties Land Use Cumberland, Cumberland Cumberland Cumberland I Category East* Central* West* Total I Office Buildings 420 126 23 569 Stores 208 154 52 41 4 Auto Garages 69 54 31 154 I Shopping Centers 18 5 1 24 Gas Station 59 38 11 108 Fast Food Restaurants 35 26 8 69 Misc. Commercial 503 397 151 1051 1 Financial Institutions 30 8 4 42 Restaurants/Taverns 58 25 10 93 Warehouses 94 72 17 183 I Light Industrial 27 36 7 70 Heavy Industrial 2 6 0 8 VFW/Leqion Posts 8 10 6 24 I TOTAL 1531 957 321 2809 I SOURCE: Cumb. Co. Tax Assessment Office *Plan Development Sections I - Cumberland East: Camp Hill Boro, East Pennsboro Twp, Hampden Twp, Lemoyne Boro , Lower Allen Twp, Mechanicsburg Boro, New Cumberland Boro, Shiremanstown Boro, Upper Allen Twp, West Fairview Boro, Wormleysburg I Boro - Cumberland Central: Carlisle Boro, Dickinson Twp, Middlesex Twp, Monroe Twp, Mt. Holly Springs Boro, North I Middleton Twp, Silver Spring Twp, South Middleton Twp - Cumberland West: Cooke Twp, Hopewell Twp, Lower Frankford Twp, Lower Mifflin Twp, Ncewburg Boro, Newville Boro, I North Newton Twp, Penn Twp, Shippensburg Boro, Shippensburg Twp, Southampton Twp, South Newton Twp, Upper Frankford Twp, Upper Mifflin Twp, West Pennshoro Twp I I 5-20 I CUMBERLAND COUNTY MAJOR SHOPPING CENTERS EXlBlT 5-C

LOWER MIFFIJN N. MU"

UPPER MIF"

W. PENNSBORO UPPER ALLEN

S. YIDDLEIDN

1. SUMMERDALE SHOPPING CENTER 2. PLAZA 21 3. WEST SHORE PLAZA 4. CEDAR cuff MALL 5. LOWER ALLEN SHOPPING CENTER 6. HARTZDALE PLAZA 7. CAPKAJ. ClTy PLAZA 8. CAPITAL CllY MALL 9. CAMP HIU W 10. HILLS SHOPPING CENTER 11. WINDSOR PARK SHOPPING CENTER 18. SfLMR SPRING COMMONS 12. EAsrcATE PLAZA 19. CARUSLE PLAZA MALL 13. HECHANICSBURG PLAZA 20. M J MALL 14. HAMPDEN CENlER 21. PENROSE PLAZA IS. GATEWAY SQUARE SHOPPING CENTER !TONEHEDGE PLAZA 22. 16. K MART PLAZA W.KMARTPLAZA 17. UPPER Aup( SHOPPING CENTER CUMBERLAND COUNT( INDUSTRIAL/COMMERCIAL PARKS EXlBlT 5-B

N. MIDDLETON SILVER SPRING

UPPER MIU

W. PENNSEORO

A. ROSSMOYNE INDUSTfSIAL PARK E. HERITAGE OFFlCg/COMMERCIAL PARK c. sunuM omcE PARK D. MECWCSEURG INDUSTRIAL PARK L WPDEN INDUSTRW PARK F. NEW KINGSON INDUSRlAL PARK c. PENNSEORO omcE COMPLEX H. ROADWAY COMMERCE CENTER L WATTS BUSINESS CENlER SOWPTON J. S.A.D.CO INDUSTRIAL PARK

- APPROXIUNE LOCATION TABLE 5-15 1 CUMBERLAND COUNTY ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ORGANIZATIONS Shippensburg Area Development Corp. I 75 W. King Street Shippensburg, PA 17257 532-5509 I Contact: Allan Williams Shippensburg Area Chamber of Commerce 75 W. King Street Shippensburg, PA 17257 532-5509 Contact: Meg Hutchinson Carlisle Area Chamber of Commerce 212 N. Hanover Street Carlisle, PA 17013 Contact: Karen Hurwitz Carlisle Area Industrial Development Corp. 212 N. Hanover Street Carlisle, PA 17013 Contact: Larry Foote Greater West Shore Area Chamber of Commerce 4211 Trindle Road Camp Hill, PA 17011 Contact: Edward Messner Capital Region Economic Development Corp. Suite 604, 214 Senate Avenue Camp Hill, PA 17011 Contact: Charles Wurster Cumberland County Industrial Enterprises (Consortium of County Chambers of Commerce) Cumberland County Industrial Development Authority (Contact: Karen Hurwitz, See Carlisle Chamber of Commerce Above) Hampden Township Industrial Development Authority 230 Sporting Hill Road Mechanicsburg, PA 17055 Contact: Sharon Browne Shippensburg Area Industrial Development Authority 60 W. Burd Street, P.0- Box 129 Shippensburg, PA 17257 Contact: Kevin DeFebbo East Pennsboro Township Industrial Development Authority 98 South Enola Drive, Enola, PA 17025 Contact: Robert Gill, Township Manager

SOURCE: Cumberland County Redevelopment Authority, 1993

5-23 TABLE 5-16 LOCAL RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT FACILITIES Cumberland County Dupont Bert Electronics Electronic Connectors Engineering Murata Erie North America, Inc. Carlisle Operations Oscillators Filters Quart z Piezo Crystal Co. Frequency Crystals Oscillators The Vertebrate Museum Shippensburg University Small Mammals Ecology Zoogeography Biology Department Shippensburg University Cell Biology Plant Pathology Tissue culture^ Product Engineering ITT Domestic Pump Vacuum Pumps Vacuum Systems Condensate Systems Research Department Pennsylvania Blue Shield Statistical Analysis Physicians' Services Economic Studies Product Engineering SGL Abrasive Bonded Abrasive Products Product Efficiency Frehn Center for Management Shippensburg University Applied Business Human Resource Development Business Management SOURCE: PA County Data Book-'1987, Cumberland County.

5-24 TABLE 5-17 MAJOR LENDING INSTITUTIONS CUMBERLAND COUNTY 1993

Office Location Phone

Bank/Savings and Loan PNC Bank NA MJ Mall 243-6021 Carlis le 3 East 1st Street 258-321 6 Boiling Springs 1 2 West Pine Street 486-341 6 Mt. Holly Springs 9 West Big Spring Ave. 776-31 46 1 Newi1 le Capitol City Mall 761 -0847 3549 Hartzdale Drive I Camp Hill 'Cedar Cliff Mall 761 -31 80 1104 Carlisle Road Camp Hill 1 2101 Market Street 761 -2022 Camp Hill 29 Hunter Lane 763-7776 I Camp Hill South 32 & Trindle Rds. 761 -2079 Camp Hill I 235 Enola Road 732-5388 Harrisburg 300 Hummel Avenue 763-7707 Lemoyne 331 Bridge Street 774-7000 New Cumberland Windsor Park 697-1 641 5288 Simpson Ferry Road Mechanicsburg New Cumberland Army Depot 774-4526 Harrisburg Mechanicsburg Naval Depot 766-0561 :I Harrisburg Central Pennsylvania Savings 4622 Carlisle Park 975-6988 Association Mechanicsburg Commerce Bank 100 Senate Avenue 975-5630 I Camp Hill Commonwealth National Bank 1510 Cedar Cliff Drive 731 -4858 I Camp Hill 4101 Carlisle Pike 731 -4848 Camp Kill Main and Market Streets 766-4743 I Mechanicsburg Main and Filbert Streets 795-7775 I Mechanicsburg I 5-25 TABLE 5-1 7 (continued) 1

Office Location Phone

872 Poplar Church Road 731 -4845 1~ Camp Hill 2 West Main Street 731 -4853 Shiremanstown I~ 130 Gettysburg Pike 6 97-3 790 Mechan i csbur g Credit Alliance Corp. 5230 Deerfield Road 761 -8889 I Mechanicsburg Dauphin Deposit Bank 2 West High Street 240-6700 Car 1is le I 812 1/2 West High Street 240-671 6 Carlisle Carlisle Plaza Mall 240-6721 I Car 1i 5, le 35 East King Street 532-41 31 Shippensburg I 3 04 5 Market Street 737-8848 Camp Hill 5528 Carlisle Pike 766-1 731 I Mechanic sburg 344 South 10th Street. 737-3300 Lemoy ne I 301 Market Street 761 -1 800 Lemoyne 5219 Simpson Ferry Road 697-1 500 Mechanicsburg I Summerdale Plaza 732-0764 Routes 11 and 15 Enola I West Shore Plaza 761 -5800 Lemoyne Farmer’s National Bank Big Spring Avenue 776-531 2 I Newj. 11e or 776-5452 Farmer’s Trust Company 1 West High Street 243-321 2 8 Car 1is le Carlisle Plaza Mall 240-4523 East High Street Car 1is le 1 Noble Boulevard and 240-4520 Southwest Streets Car lisle I 1958 Spring Road 240-4521 Carl is le 19 East Main Street 766-4765 I New Kingstown 18th Street and Kent Drive 737-6782 Camp Hill I 5303 East Simpson Ferry Road 766-1 847 Mechanicsburg 1 5-26 1 TABLE 5-17 (continued)

Office Location Phone

631 Holly Pike 240-4522 Mt. Holly Springs Stonehedge Plaza 240-4524 960 Walnut Bottom Road Carlisle 3805 Trindle Road 737-2308 Camp Hill Financial Trust Corp. 31 0 Allen Road 243-8003 Carlisle First Bank and Trust Co. Main and Market Streets 691 -401 1 Mechanicsburg 5150 Simpson Ferry Road 691 -401 3 Mechanicsburg Lisburn Road at U. S. 15 691 -401 4 Mechanicsburg 6480 Carlisle Pike 691 -4092 Mechanicsburg I Messiah Village 691 -4091 First Federal of Harrisburg 31st and Market Streets 737-0457 Camp Hill Camp Hill Shopping Mall 737-2323 I Camp Hill Fulton Bank Routes 11 and 15 255-7674 Lemoyne I 4707 Carlisle Pike 255-7693 Mechanicsburg 132 Old York Road 255-7690 I New Cumberland Hamilton Bank A Corestates 351 6 Market Street 234-2871 Bank Camp Hill I Mechanicsburg 795-741 7

Harris Savings Association 635 North 12th Street 731 -1 440 I Lemoyne 19th and Market Streets 761 -4460 Camp Hill Capital City Mall 761 -721 8 I Camp Hill Summerdale Plaza 732-3637 Enola I West Shore Plaza Lemoyne 17 West High Street 243-291 5 Carlisle 921 Cavalry Road 243-8868 Car lis le 600 East Simpson Street 697-4603 Mechanicsburg

5-27 TABLE 5-1 7 (continued) I

Off ice Location Phone

Loyola Consumer Services 219 East Main Street 691 -3400 I Mechanicsburg Mechanicsburg Main Street 44 West Main Street 691 -1 844 Trust Mechanicsburg I Mellon Bank Commonwealth 1 North Hanover Street 249-241 4 Region Car 1is 1.e 665 North East Street 243-531 1 II Car 1i s Le 1 West King Street 532-21 51 Shippeiisburg I Meridian Bank 1200 Camp Hill Shopping 737-8697 Center Camp Hill I 16 West High Street 249-81 82 Car lisle 436 Bridge Street 774-5800 New Cumberland I Orrstown Bank Lurgan Avenue 530-2641 Shippensburg I 77 East King Street 530-261 1 Shippensburg Parent Federal Savings Bank 2101 Market Street 763-81 06 Camp Hill I Pennsylvania State Bank 21 48 Market Street 731 -7272 Camp Hill I Pennsylvania Independent Bank 3975 Trindle Road 737-9335 Camp Hill Pennsylvania National Bank 4231 'Trindle Road 737-2882 Camp Hill I United Federal Bank 49 West King Street 532-21 74 Shippensburg Valley Bank and Trust Co. 871 West King Street 532-31 71 I Shippensburg York Federal Savings and Loan 180 Noble Boulevard 249-791 1 Assoc. Carlisle I Allendale and Simpson Ferry 697-8279 Road Mechanicsburg I 75 Zjmmerman Drive 763-7723 Camp Hill I Credit Unions ACCO Lemoyne Federal Credit 221 South 10th Street 763-9508 Union Lemo:yne I Chrysler Credit Corp. 4718 Old Gettysburg 731 -1 552 Mechanicsburg Defense Activities Federal MJ Mall 249-4666 I Credit Union Car lisle 5275 East Trindle Road 697-3944 Mechanicsburg I 5-28 I TABLE 5-1 7 (continued)

Office Location Phone

423 North 21st Street 737-1 041 Camp Hill Mechanicsburg 766-41 53

New Cumberland Federal Credit 619 Bridge Street 774-7706 Union New Cumberland New Cumberland Army Depot 774-4633 New Cumberland Quaker Oats Shiremanstown Railroad Avenue 737-4760 Federal Credit Union Shiremanstown Teamsters Credit Union 25 West Main Street 761 -5555 Shiremanstown United Telephone Employees 5 Eastgate Drive 249-1 661 Federal Credit Union Carlis le West Shore Teacher’s Federal 1213 State Hill Road 737-41 52 Credit Union Camp Hill Central Pennsylvania Lutheran 960 Century Drive 697-2640 Credit Union Mechanicsburg Harrisburg Belco Federal Camp Hill 232-3526 Credit Union IBM PA Employee Federal 61-08 Carlisle Pike 697-3474 Credit Union Mechanicsburg

SOURCE: Tri-County Developer Resource Guide, 1993

5-29 I 1 I The following description of existing land use in Cumberland County is fundamental to understanding the character of the County I and its development related issues. Economic factors, development trends, cultural attitudes, and physical features result in a land use pattern that expresses what a community is, and has been. 1 Future development will, for the most part, take place within the framework established by these elements and will be guided by them. Information gathered through the existing land use inventory serves I as part of the County's multi-faceted inventory of resources and, together with other factors, provides the basis for recommendations 1 regarding future land use. Methodolasy

I For planning purposes, Cumberland County is divided into three Plan Development Sections: Cumberland East; Cumberland Central; and Cumberland West. Each Section contains eleven, eight, and I fifteen municipalities, respectively. Existing land use data is compiled and illustrated at municipal, Plan Development Section, I and County levels. A combination of windshield inspections, correlation of available maps and aerial photographs, tax maps, development I records, tax assessment file data, and meetings with municipal officials was employed to determine the types of existing land uses throughout the County. The survey results are graphically depicted I on the Existing Land Use Map. Tables 6-1 through 6-5 and Exhibits 6-A through 6-E illustrate the statistical results of the survey in terms of land use categories, total parcels in each use, and total I acreage in each use. Also, the percentage each use comprises of the total land use inventory and land use changes which have occurred between 1975 and 1987 are presented by municipality and I Plan Development Section.

For purposes of analysis, major categories of land uses were I established for statistical and graphical illustrations, as follows:

I Text StzLLkLkS GraRhics Residential Residential Commercial Retail Commercial I Industrial Commercial Services Agriculture Industrial Public/Semi-Public Public/Semi-Public I Vacant (undeveloped) Vacant (undeveloped)

1 6-1 I~ I As illustrated on the Existing Land Use Map, the County's land use is characterized by high density, mixed urban development in I the eastern section adjacent to the Susquehanna River. This area is primarily an extension of the Harrisburg City Urbanized Area. High density mixed use development is also evident in the older I urban centers of Mechanicsburg, Carlisle, and Shippensburg Boroughs. I The large concentrations of medium density residential development occur adjacent to the more intensely developed urban areas. These are newer developments which have located on the more I developable land, particularly where pubylic sewer and water services are available. The concentration of this type of density gradually lessons moving west towards CarlisILe, where it increases I again in connection with the higher density development associated with the Borough. There is limited medium residential density development west of Carlisle. That which does exist, occurs in the I Boroughs of Newville, Newburg, and Shippensburg. Some medium density development also occurs to the south of Carlisle in Mt. Holly Springs Borough and the Village of Bo.iling Springs. I Low density residential development (occurs throughout the County in random strip development fashion along existing road I corridors. This type of residential development is predominant in the Cumberland Central and Cumberland West Plan Development Sections. I I solated nodes of non-residential devel'opment occur throughout the County in a scattered fashion and adjacent to existing I roadways. The greatest concentration of non-residential strip development occurs in the area between Camp Hill and Carlisle Boroughs, adjacent to U.S. Routes 11 and 15. Other concentrations I occur along U.S. Route 11 arid Pennsylvania Route 641 west of , Carlisle. Concentrations of non-residential,development also occur at the limited access intersections of Interstates 81 and 83, and I the Pennsylvania Turnpike.

The central and western parts of the County, lying in the I heart of the Cumberland Valley, contain a vast amount of agricultural activity. Much of the southern tier of the County is mountainous and forested. The majority of the forested and steep I sloped areas in the County are located along the northern and southern county boundaries, with very limited development activity. I I

6-2 I I TTse

In 1997, approximately 80 percent of all land parcels in the I County contain residences; the single family dwelling being predominant. About 51 percent of these residential parcels are located in the Cumberland East Plan Development Section followed by I Cumberland Central containing about 34 percent, and Cumberland West with only 15 percent.

1 Those municipalities containing the greatest number of parcels in residential use are listed below:

I Hampden East Pennsboro Carl i sle I South Middleton Lower Allen Township

I Between 1975 and 1987, the total number of residential parcels increased by 41 percent (Table 6-2).

1 From 1987 to 1997, the number of residential parcels increased again by 20.1% (Table 6-3). The number of residential building permits issued in the County increased from 902 in 1995 to 1,113 in m 1996. The leading growth municipalities for residential development in 1996 were Hampden, South Middleton, Upper Allen, I East Pennsboro, and Silver Spring Townships. The amount of acreage in residential use has increased more than any other land use between 1975 and 1997. During this period, m approximately 11,125 acres were developed for residential use (Table 6-5). 1 use

In 1997, approximately 3.6 percent of all land parcels in the I County contain some type of commercial use. About 55 percent are located in the Cumberland East Plan Development Section, followed by Cumberland Central containing about 35 percent, and Cumberland I West with 10 percent(Tab1e 6-4).

Those municipalities containing the greatest number of parcels I in commercial use are listed below.

Carl isle I Hampden Lower Allen Lemoyne I South Middleton I 6-3 Between 1975 and 1987, it is estimated that the number of I commercially developed land parcels increased by about 37 percent (Table 6-2). From 1987 to 1997, the number of commercial parcels continued to increase by more than 19%(Table 6-3). The leading I growth municipalities for commercial development in 1996 were Upper Allen, Hampden, Lower Allen and Silver Spring Townships. I The acreage developed for commercia.1 use has steadily increased between 1975 and 1997. In 1975, coinmercial uses occupied approximately 3,425 acres in th.e County. By 1997, the number of I commercially developed acres had grown to 4,545; an increase of 1,120 acres (Table 6-5). I The Existing Land Use map divides the commercial land uses into two categories - retail and service. This provides a more detailed description of the County’s commercial development and I reflects the significant increase in service industries being established. (See Chapter 5, B-onomy and FJ@aymenL Page 5-18). Commercial Service uses include health, business, and personal 1 services such as advertising, data processing, insurance, consulting, accounting, research, management, and automotive repair. I

ITse I

About 87 individual land parcels in the County are classified by the Cumberland County Tax Assessment Office as being industrial I in use. Thi’s amounts to about .1 percent of all the land parcels in the County. Approximately 57 percent of these parcels are -located in the Cumberland C!entral Plan Development Section, I followed by Cumberland East with 35 percent, and Cumberland West with only 8 percent. I Those municipalities containing the greatest number of industrially developed parcels are: I Silver Spring Hampden South Middleton 1 Borough of Carlisle

Between 1975 and 1987, it is estimated that the total number 1 of industrially developed 1Zmd parcels decreased by about 45 percent(Tab1e 6-2). The trend reversed between 1987 and 1997; with the number of industrial parcels increasing by 16% (Table 6-3). I During 1996, the leading growth municipalities for industrial development were Hampden and Lower Allen Townships. I

6-4 I 1

I The total acreage in industrial land uses has significantly increased during the period from 1975 to 1997. During that 22 year period, industrial acreage increased from approximately 1,878 to I 6,273 acres (Table 6-5). The industrial land use category had the greatest percentage increase (234%) in acreage during this period.

I cultural T,i~ndUse

In 1987, about 3.5 percent of all land parcels in the County 1 were used for agricultural activities. By 1997, that percentage had decreased to 2.8% (Table 6-3). Approximately 54 percent of these parcels are located in the Cumberland West Plan Development I Section, followed by Cumberland Central containing 41 percent, and Cumberland East with about 5 percent.

1 The 1992 Census of Agriculture data indicates that there were 940 farms in Cumberland County, having a total farm acreage of 141,919 acres or about 40 percent of the County's total area (See I Chapter 5, Economy and Employment, page 5-12). By comparing 1987 with 1992 Census of Agriculture data, the number of farms decreased by about 17 percent and the total farm acreage decreased by about I 10 percent. Those municipalities having the greatest number of agriculturally used parcels in 1997 are the Townships of Dickinson, 1 Southampton, West Pennsboro, South Middleton and Silver Spring.

I Examples of Public/semi-public land uses include utilities, municipal administration and maintenance, state forest and game lands, state park lands, hospitals, public schools and parks, 1 public libraries, firehouses, police stations, cemeteries, and churches. Approximately 2 percent of all land parcels in the County 1 contain either public or semi-public land uses. About 43 percent of these parcels are located in the Cumberland Central Plan Development Section, followed by Cumberland 1 East containing 38 percent, and Cumberland West with 19 percent(Tab1e 6-4). It is estimated that between 1975 and 1987 the number of public/semi-public land parcels increased by about 105 1 percent (Table 6-2). Between 1987 and 1997 the number of public/semi-public parcels continued to increase by more than 30% (Table 6-3). The largest single areas in this land use category are I contained in the State owned forest lands, game lands, parks, and Fish Commission Lands.

I The number of acres in public and semi-public uses has greatly increased between 1975 and 1997. This land use category increased in area by approximately 9,537 acres during this period (Table 6- I 5). I 6-5 Vacant or unused land parcels comprise about 11 percent of all the land parcels in the County. Approximately 43 percent of the parcels in this land use category are located in the Cumberland Central Plan Development Section, followed by Cumberland West with about 31 percent, and Cumberland East with about 28 percent.

Those municipalities containing the greatest number of vacant parcels in 1997 are the Townships of South Middleton, Silver . Spring, Hampden, East Pennsboro, and Dickinson. Because these are leading growth municipalities, it is expected that a sizeable number of their respective vacant parcels have been created through recent subdivision activity and are not yet developed.

For the purpose of determining the amount of total acreage in vacant or undeveloped land, agricultural uses were included in this category. Table 6-5 illustrates the ,significant loss of vacant/agricultural land in Cumberland County between 1975 and 1997. During that time, approximately 26,000 acres of open space as developed.

I I I

6-6 I I

I TABLE 6-1 1997 EXISTING LAND USE: BY PARCEL CUMBERLAND COUNTY PUBLIC/ I SEMI - COMMERCIAL, AG-PUBLTr VmTO=

EAST REGION I CAMP HILL BOROUGH 2,891 162 1 0 44 76 3,174 EAST PENNSBORO TOWNSHIP 5,249 172 0 8 119 603 6,152 HAMPDEN TOWNSHIP 7,777 369 10 41 81 706 8,984 LEMOYNE BOROUGH 1,461 195 5 0 42 116 1,819 I LOWER ALLEN TOWNSHIP 4,783 240 6 26 103 297 5,458 MECHANICSBURG BOROUGH 3,109 162 6 2 74 89 3,442 NEW CUMBERLAND BOROUGH 2,860 129 0 0 39 108 3,136 SHIREMANSTOWN BOROUGH 569 22 0 0 14 9 615 I UPPER ALLEN TOWNSHIP 4,290 122 2 49 79 526 5,046 WEST FAIRVIEW BOROUGH 465 19 0- 0 24 44 552 840 960 I TOTAL EAST 34,294 1,644 30 126 - 636 2,625 39,338 CENTRAL REGION CARLISLE BOROUGH 5,071 403 13 2 222 311 6,027 I DICKINSON TOWNSHIP 1,531 20 0 193 48 584 2,381 MIDDLESEX TOWNSHIP 2,080 128 6 149 80 332 2,777 MONROE TOWNSHIP 1,954 33 1 151 60 335 2,532 MT. HOLLY SPRINGS BOROUGH 713 52 5 2 30 107 898 I NORTH MIDDLETON TOWNSHIP 3,296 63 1 108 57 407 3,932 SILVER SPRING TOWNSHIP 3,688 174 16 175 77 722 4,854 TOM"I2- 4,437 178 R 175 13 9 1017 5 9s I TOTAL CENTRAL 22,770 1,051 50 955 713 3,815 29,355 WEST REGION COOKE TOWNSHIP 38 1 0 1 3 383 433 HOPEWELL TOWNSHIP 608 6 0 155 13 290 1,073 I LOWER FRANKFORD TOWNSHIP 585 2 0 100 6 169 862 LOWER MIFFLIN TOWNSHIP 517 2 0 101 12 154 786 NEWBURG BOROUGH 13 0 1 0 1 11 12 155 NEWVILLE BOROUGH 464 44 3 0 20 32 563 I NORTH NEWTON TOWNSHIP 601 11 1 122 19 158 912 PENN TOWNSHIP 813 10 0 139 24 255 1,281 SHIPPENSBURG BOROUGH 1,074 139 2 0 70 161 1,446 SHIPPENSBURG TOWNSHIP 599 26 1 11 13 50 712 I SOUTHAMPTON TOWNSHIP 1,353 21 0 185 52 432 2,043 SOUTH NEWTON TOWNSHP 382 13 0 46 8 95 554 UPPER FRANKFORD TOWNSHIP 539 3 0 122 14 178 856 UPPER MIFFLIN TOWNSHIP 399 0 0 94 11 176 681 I 1,692 75 0 190 19 127 2,233 TOTAL WEST 9,794 314 7 1,267 315 2,872 14,640 I TOTALS BY REGIONS CUMBERLAND COUNTY EAST 34,294 1,644 30 126 636 2,625 39,338 CUMBERLAND COUNTY CENTRAL 22,770 1,051 50 955 713 3,815 29,355 9.794 314 7 1,267 315 2,877 I CUMBERLAND COUNTY TOTAL 66,858 3,009 87 2,348 1,664 9,312 83,333 u SOURCE: CUMBERLAND COUNTY REAL ESTATE ASSESSMENT LISTING - 1997 I I 6-7 I

TABLE 6-2 EXISTING LAND USE: 1975-1987 I CUMBERLAND COUNTY

1975 1987 1975-87 GT,B % TOTAT, NO. EABCFlA % TOT-. I RESIDENTIAL 39,486 75.0% 55,669 77.2% 41.0% COMMERCIAL 1,842 3.5% 2,524 3.5% 37.0% INDUSTRIAL 136 0.3% 75 0.1% -44.0% AGRICULTURAL 2,525 4.8% 2,534 3.5% 0.4% 1 PmLrc/smr-PmLIc 620 1.1% 1,272 1.8% 105.2% R1057 15.7% 25 -2% TOTAL PARCELS 52,661 100.0% -72,153 100.0% 37.0% I SOURCE : TRI-COUNTY REGIONAL PLANNING COMMISSION LAND USE INVENTORY-1975 CUMBERLAND COUNTY REAL ESTATE ASSESSMENT LISTING - 1987 I TAElLE 6-3 EXISTING LAND USE CHANGE: 1987 - 1997 CUMBERIJWD COUNTY I 1987 1997 1987-97 NO. _I?AE?.YTS % TOTAL ?iCUTmGE RESIDENTIAL 55,669 77.2% 66,858 80.2% 20.1% I COMMERCIAL 2,524 3.5% 3,009 3.6% 19.2% INDUSTRIAL 75 0.1% 87 0.1% 16.0% AGRICULTURAL 2,534 3.5% 2,348 2.8% -7.3% PUBLIC/SEMI-PUBLIC 1,272 1.8% 1,664 2.0% 30.8% I YnrnNT in n79 -9.717 11 7% - 9: TOTAL PARCELS 12,153 100.0% 83,333 100% 15.5% I SOURCE : CUMBERLAND COUNTY REAL ESTATE ASSESSMENT LISTING - 1987, 1997 I I I I I I I I

6-8 I I TABLE 6-4 EXISTING LAND USE: 1997 PERCENTAGE OF COUNTY TOTAL/PLAN DEVELOPMENT SECTION CUMBERLAND COUNTY

PUBLIC RESIDEN- COMMER- INDUST- AGRICULT- SEMI- VACANT TOTAL PURTaTr JT' I JT' CUMBERLAND EAST 51% 55% 35% 6% 38% 28% 48% CUMBERLAND CENTRAL 34% 35% 57% 41% 43% 41% 34% CUMBERLAND WEST 15% 10% 8% 54% 19% 31% 18%

CUMBERLAND TOTAL 77.2% 3.5% .l% 3.5% 1.8% 13.9% 100.0%

SOURCE : CUMBERLAND COUNTY REAL ESTATE ASSESSMENT LISTING - 1997

LAND USE CATEGORY ACRES 1975 ACRES 1997 TOTAL CHANGE % CHANGE

Residential 29,676 40,801 11,125 37.4

Commercial 3,425 4,545 1,120 32.7

Industrial 9,878 6,273 4,397 234.0 I Public-Semi-public 43,441 52,978 9,537 21.9 Vacant/Agriculture 280,364 254,187 -26,177 -9.3 I

I I I I I II

I 6-9 Exhibit 6-A I I Cumberland County Existing L,and Use By I Parcel - 1997 I

Pub/Semi-Pub Agriculture I 2% 3 yo I

Ind I

COInmerc I 4% I I I I I I I

Source:. 1997 Cumberland County Real Estate Assessment Listing I I 1 6-10 I Exhibit 6-B

Land Use Comparisons By Plan Development Section Cumberland County - 1997 40000

35000

30000

ru 0 20000 aL P E 3 15000

10000

5000

0 Residential Vacant

Source 1997 Cumberland County Real Land Use Estate Assessment Listing

6-1 1 Exhibit 6-C

Land Use Comparisons By Plan Development Section Cumberland County - 1997 1800

1600

1400

1200 rA 4 3 2 1000 pc cu 0 5 a 800 E

600

400

200

0 Commercial Industrial Agriculture Pub/ SeA-Pub Plan Section Source: 1997 Cumberland County Real Estate Assessment Listing

6-12 Exhibit 6-D

Percent of Land Use Change by Parcel 1987- 1997 35% T...... ___...... 30%

25%

20%

15%

10%

5 Yo

0%

-5%

Source. Cumberland County Real Estate Land Use ’ Assessment Listing 1987. 1997

6-13 Exhibit 6-E I I Cumberland County Existing L,and Use By 1 Acreage - 1997 I

Residential

Pub/Semi-Pub 14.8% I

1 I A ic;ulturl e/ 70.8'0'/

Source: 1997 Cumberland County Real Estate Assessment Listing

6-1 4

I

I CHAPTER 7 HOUSING I Attractive housing and well maintained residential neighborhoods are one of the most important assets of any community. Good housing not only assures a sound residential tax I base that will continue to appreciate in value, but also assures that residents are living in an environment that is conducive to healthful and satisfactory day-to-day life. I The future quality and condition of housing is extremely important to the growth and prosperity of Cumberland County and its municipalities. Where substandard or deteriorated housing I conditions exist, positive public and private action is required to prevent the spread of these conditions and to restore these areas to sound condition. By analyzing existing housing characteristics and evaluating housing conditions, those areas of the County which I require such attention can be identified and recommendations for appropriate actions can be made. I The purpose of this housing overview is to provide an assessment of the existing quantity of housing within the County, its quality, and future housing needs. The general characteristics I of housing in Cumberland County appear to be more than satisfactory. There are, however, inhabited dwellings with inadequate plumbing, bathroom, and kitchen facilities; and those that can be considered overcrowded. The increasing pressures of I urbanization and a growing population are becoming more evident as residential subdivisions and apartment complexes occupy more-land area throughout the County. New and innovative housing programs I further broaden the range of considerations which must be included in a program of planning for housing. In view of this, it is important to take a close look at the character of housing in order to get a better idea of the varied living conditions which exist in I Cumberland County, and to plan toward adequate housing for all residents. It should be noted that more detailed housing characteristics are on file at the Cumberland County and Tri-County I planning offices which are available for review, and act to supplement the data contained in this text. I Housincr Inventory Census data indicates that the County’s year-round housing stock has increased by some 12,012 dwelling units between 1980 and 1990, or by about 18.5 percent. As indicated in Table 7-1, the total housing supply in the County has increased during this period by a greater percentage than both Perry and Dauphin Counties. I Since 1970, Cumberland County’s housing supply has increased by about 27,500 dwellings , or 55 percent. This surpasses the population increase of 23 percent experienced over the same period. I It is noted that year-round housing units consist of all occupied 7-1 units plus vacant units available or intended for year-round use. Units intended for seasonal occupancy and migratory labor are not included in the totals. TABLE 7-1 I YEAR ROUND DWELLING UNITS 1980-1 990 I Change 1980 1990 Number Percent I Tri-County Region 174,319 196,855 22 , 536 12.9 Cumberland County 65 ,096 77,108 12,012 18.5 I Dauphin County 95 , 728 102 ,684 6,956 7.3 Perry County 14,784 17,063 2,279 15.4 I SOURCE : U.S. Bureau of Census, 1980 and 1990 I The tenure and occupancy characteristics for occupied dwell ings in 1990, as compared to that which existed in 1980, are reflected in Table 7-2. The total number of occupied dwellings I increased by some 10,649 unitz,, or about 17 percent- over that decade; with renter-occupied units increasing by 3,378 (19.4 percent) and owner-occupied units by 7,27"1 (16 percent). The number of vacant units increased by 1,363 (59.4 percent) , thus I increasing the gross vacancy rate from 3.5 percent in 1980 to 4.7 percent in 1990. TABLE 7-2 I HOUSING INVENTORY: 1980-11990 CUMBERLAND COUNTY I Chanae 1980 1990 Number Percent I

Total Dwelling 65,096 77,108 12,012 18.. 5 Units(1) I Occupied Dwellings 62 , 803 73 ,452 10,649 16.9 Owner Occupied 45 ,438 52 ,709 7,271 16.0 I Renter Occupied 17 , 365 20,743 3 ,378 19.4 Vacant 2 ,29:3 3,656 1,363 59.4 Gross Vacancy Rate 3 5% 4.7% I I 7-2 I 1

Table 7-3 compares the 1990 vacancy rate and tenure status of I dwelling units in the County with the Tri-County Region, Dauphin County, and Perry County. The Cumberland County housing vacancy rate was lower than that of the Tri-County Region and its 1 neighboring counties of Dauphin and Perry. The County had a smaller percentage of renter-occupied units than the Region and Dauphin County, and a comparatively greater percentage of owner- occupied units than the Region and Dauphin County. As might be 1 expected, the Boroughs contained a higher percentage of renter- occupied dwelling units as part of their total housing than did the Townships. The Townships of East Pennsboro, Lower Allen, North I Middleton, and Shippensburg, however, had between 25 percent and 40 percent of their housing stock comprised of rental units. Conversely, the Townships had a greater percentage of their housing I stock comprised of owner-occupied. The Townships of Dickinson, Lower Frankford, Lower Mifflin, Middlesex, Monroe, North Newton, Silver Spring, Southampton, South Middleton, South Newton, and West Pennsboro had between 80 percent and 85 percent of their housing I supply comprised of owner-occupied units. TABLE 7-3 1 YEAR-ROUND DWELLING UNITS BY OCCUPANCY: 1990 (Percentage)

I Renter Owner Occupied Occupied Vacant (%)

I Tri-County Region 31 .2 68.8 6.7 Cumberland County 28.2 71 .8 4.7 I Dauphin County 36.3 63.7 , 7.2 I Perry County 20.5 79.5 12.4 Housinq Characteristics: Residential Unit Desiqn I The predominant residential unit design in the County is the single family detached dwelling, comprising about 61 percent of all occupied housing in 1990. As illustrated in Table 7-4, apartment I units comprised 15.4 percent, townhouses 1 1 -1 percent, mobile homes 7.5 percent, and two-family units 4.1 percent. The additional category of "other" was added to the 1990 Census and includes less I than 1% of the occupied housing units. I I I 7-3 I I

TABLE 7-4 OCCUPIED HOUSING INVENTORY: RESIDENTIAL DESIGN - 1980-1 990 I

1980 1980 1990 1990 Type of Dwelling Number Percent Number Percent I

Single Family Detached 40 , 968 65.2 47 ,042 61 .O I Two-Family 3,1!54 5.0 3,151 4.1 Townhouses 5,767 9.2 8 , 570 11.1 I Apartment Units 9,368 15.0 11,892 15.4 Mobile Home 3,546 5.6 5,753 7.5 I Other* 700 0.9 Total 62,803 100.0 77,108 100.0 I *Other - This category is for any living quarters occupied as a housing unit that does not fit the previous categories. Examples that fit this category are houseboats, railroad cars, campers, and I vans. SOURCE: U. S Bureau of Census, 1990 I

The distribution of persons among all occupied housing units I is an important index of general household sizes and the type of housing that might be needed. In 1990 Cumberland County had a smaller household size than the typical Perry County household, and as generally experienced throughout the 'I'ri-County Region as a I whole, and a slightly larger one than Dauphin County. The typical Cumberland County household size has decreased from 3.3 in 1960, to 3.1 in 1970, to 2.7 in 1980, and to 2.5 in 1990. A decline in the I number of persons per household has been commonly experienced throughout the Tri-County Region. Several factors account for this change, including the desire to have fewer children, fewer children I continuing to reside in their parent's home, and rising personal income, which allows more single persons to maintain a household alone. I It is interesting to note that the number of one-person households has increased from 12,950 in 1980 to 17,824 in 1990, or by about 38 percent. Married couples comprised the largest I percentage of households in 1990, at 61 percent. Census data further indicates that two-pe-son households comprised 33 percent of the total, followed by three-person households at 17.3 percent, I four-person households at 14.6 percent, fi.ve-person households at 5.4 percent, and those containing six cx more persons at 'I .8 percent. I 7-4 I I 1

TABLE 7-5 I HOUSEHOLD SIZE: 1990 (Persons per Household)

I 1980 1990 Change

I Tri-County Region 2.7 2.7 0 Cumberland County 2.7 2.5 -.2 I Dauphin County 2.6 2.45 -1.5 Perry County 2.8 2.7 -.I I SOURCE: U.S. Bureau of Census, 1980 and 1990 Housins Characteristics: Size of Dwellins Units I The predominant type of dwelling is the standard six room house. Over 57 percent of all dwellings in the County contained six or more rooms in 1990; followed by 5 rooms (19.2 percent), and I two or fewer rooms (2.2 percent). The median number of rooms per dwelling in Cumberland County is 6.0 rooms. This data is illustrated in Table 7-6. I TABLE 7-6 ROOMS PER DWELLING UNIT: 1990 I Cumberland County Number Number of I of Rooms Dwelling Units Percent

1 240 -03 I 2 1,463 1.9 3 5,169 6.7 I 4 11,399 14.8 5 14,828 19.2 I 6 or More 44 ,009 57.1 1 Median Number of Rooms per Dwelling Unit: 6.0 SOURCE: U.S. Bureau of Census, 1990 I I 1 7-5 I Housinq Characteristics: Aae of Dwellina Structures The age of a structure can be useful in the evaluation of structural conditions. Although the age of (a structure does not necessarily imply its condition, it does point to areas where repairs, heating costs, and inadequate plumbing and electrical systems could be a problem. The age ranges of dwelling units in I Cumberland County are shown on Table 7-7. Upon examination of this Table, it is clear that the bulk of I the County’s residential construction took place since 1950; with about 70 percent having been constructed between 1950 and 1990. The larger increases were initially experienced along the eastern portion of the County as the suburban movement traveled west from I Harrisburg City, and in the areas surrounding Carlisle and Mechanicsburg Boroughs. Residential units increased by 16,201 between 1970 and 1980. During the 1980’s the County experienced an I increase of 15,039 dwellings. During this period the leading residential growth municipalities were: Hampden Township - 1,988 dwellings I Lower Allen Township - 1,247 dwellings Upper Allen Township - 1,202 dwellings South Middleton Township - 770 dwellings I Silver Spring Township - 726 dwellings East Pennsboro Township - 714 dwellings North Middleton Township - 526 dwellings I Carlisle Borough - 404 dwellings Middlesex Township - 395 dwellings Concentrations of older dwelling units, constructed prior to I 1940, are primarily located in the Boroughs. This is illustrated in Table 7-8. I TABLIE 7-7 AGE OF DWElLLING UNITS Cumberland County I Year Structure Built Numbe r Percent I 1989 to March 1990 2,215 2.9 1985 to 1988 6 , 972 9.0 I 1980 to 1984 5,852 7.6 1970 to 1979 16,201 21 .o 1960 to 1969 12,039 15.6 I 1950 to 1959 10 , 844 14.1 1940 to 1949 5,656 7.3 Before 1940 -17,329 22.5 MEDIAN YEAR BUILT: 1964 SOURCE: U.S. Bureau of Census,.1990 I ’7-6 I I I TABLE 7-8 CONCENTRATIONS OF OLDER DWELLINGS I Units: Constructed Prior to 1940 Number of I Municipality Dwellings I Carlisle Borough 3 ,349 Mechanicsburg Borough 1,749 I Shippensburg Borough 1,210 New Cumberland Borough 1,170 Camp Hill Borough 1,075 I East Pennsboro Township 938 Lemoyne Borough 888 I Newville Borough 478 West Fairview Borough 382 I North Middleton Township 328 Wormleysburg Borough 328 I Mt. Holly Springs Borough 31 7 Shiremanstown Borough 230

I SOURCE: U.S. Bureau of Census, 1990 I Housinq Characteristics: Housins Conditions/Infrastructure Several reliable indicators of substandard housing are the lack of complete plumbing facilities for exclusive use. These data are illustrated in Tables 7-9. The percentage of total dwellings I in the County reported in the 1990 Census as lacking complete plumbing facilities for exclusive use, was 9 percent, or about 661 dwelling units. The total number of dwellings in the County I lacking complete plumbing has decreased from 1,247 in 1980 to 661 in 1990. Of the occupied units in the County reported as lacking complete plumbing in 1990, 199 were owner occupied units and 90 I were renter-occupied units. 1 I I I

I 7-7 I TABLiE 7-9 YEAR-ROUND DWELLING UNITS BY PLUMBING FAC!ILITIES(l): 1990 I Cumberland County I Number Percent

Total Year-Round Units 77,108 100.0 I Units with Complete Plumbing 76 ,447 99.1 Units without Complete Plumbing 661 0.9 I Total Occupied Units 73,452 100.0 Units with Complete Plumbing 73,163 I Owner Occupied 52,510 Renter Occupied 20,563 Units without Complete Plumbing 289 0.4 I Owner Occupied 199 Renter Occupied 90 I (1) Plumbing Facilities - The category "Complete plumbing for exclusive use" consists of units which have hot and cold piped water, a flush toilet, and a bathtub or shower inside the housing unit for the exclusive use of the occupants of the unit. "Lacking complete plumbing for exclusive use" I includes those conditions when (1 ) all three specified plumbing facilities are present inside the unit, but are also used by another household; (2) some but not all the facilities are present; or (3) none of the three specified plumbing facilities are present. I SOURCE: U.S. Bureau of Census, 1990 Another indicator of deficient housing is the number of I dwellings having more than one person per room. Based on this standard, in 1990 the County contained 716 dwellings with an occupancy ratio of more than one person per room. This amount consisted of 368 owner-occupied dwellings an13 348 renter-occupied I dwellings. On a percentage basis, only about 1.0 percent of the 73,452 occupied dwellings in the County could be considered overcrowded. I

TABL:E 7-10 OCCUPIED DWELLING UNITS BY PERSON PER ROOM: 1990 I Cumberland County

Number Percent I

One Person or Less Per Room Owner Occupied I Renter Occupied More Than One Person Per Room(1) 71 6 99.1 Owner Occupied 368 Renter Occupied 348 I Total Occupied Units 73,452 (1) Considered an Overcrowded Condition I SOURCE: U.S. Bureau of Census, 1980 I 7-8 I I Housinq Characteristics: Utilities A variety of house heating fuels are used in the County. About 40 percent use fuel oil or kerosene, 31- percent use I electricity, and 20 percent use utility gas. Approximately 74 percent of the dwellings receive public I sewerage service and about 74 percent receive public water service. Housina Characteristics: Value of Housinq I Previous discussion in this Chapter has identified such housing characteristics as dwelling unit design, age, condition, occupancy, size, and infrastructure. Of major importance, however, I is the value of housing in the County. Because of the rapid rate of escalating housing costs, constant shifts in housing supply and demand, and the innate difficulties of estimating the actual I "worth1'of a dwelling unit, the value of housing is one of the most difficult areas in which to establish a true current value figure. The 1990 Census tabulated the value of owner-occupied housing I units, as estimated by the owner, and contract rent paid for renter occupied units. The results are illustrated on Tables 7-11 and 7- 12. Slightly less than 80 percent of the owner-occupied dwelling 1 units in the County fell within the $50,000 to $100,000 range, with the median dwelling value being $85,000. Approximately 60 percent of the monthly contract rents fell within the $300 to $500 range, with the median monthly contract rent being $378. Between 1980 and I 1990, the median housing value in the County increased by more than 56 percent , and the median monthly contract rent increased by about 55 percent. There are nine municipalities whose median housing I values exceed that of the County (85,000),as follows:

Hampden Township $113,400 I Monroe Township $ 96,700 Upper Allen Township $ 95,900 Camp Hill Borough $ 94,100 Cooke Township $ 93,800 I Silver Spring Township $ 92,000 Middlesex Township $ 91,600 Wormleysburg Borough $ 85,500 I Lower Allen Township $ 85,400 Those municipalities whose median housing value is greater I than 25 percent less than that of the County are: Shippensburg Township $62,900 Mt. Holly Springs $60 ,900 I Newburg Borough $58 , 500 Shippensburg Borough $57,900 Newville Borough $50 ,000 I West Fairview Borough $48 ,300 7-9 Comparatively, the 1990 Cumberland County housing value and monthly contract rent exceeded those of the Tri-County Region, Dauphin County, and Perry County. TABLE 7-1 1 VALUE OF OWNER-OCCUPIED DWELLINGS: 1990 Cumber1a.nd County

Dwelling Units Value Ranae Number Percent

Less than 15,000 237 0.6 $15,000 to 24,999 295 0.7 $25,000 to 34,999 1,009 2.3 $35,000 to 49,999 3 , 043 7.1 $50,000 to 74,999 11,690 27.3 $75,000 to 99,999 13,234 30.9 $100,000 to 149,999 9,119 21 -3 $150,000 to 199,999 2,751 6.5 $200,000 to 299,999 997 2.3 $300,000 or More 41 3 0.9 Total Units 42,788 100.0 SOURCE: U.S. Bureau of Census, 1990 TABLE 7-1 2 MEDIAN HOUSING VALUES AND CONTRACT RENTS

Owner Occupied Renter Occupied Dwelling Value Contract Rent 1980 1990 1980 1990

Tri-County Region $41 , 830 $72 , 925 $1 82 $323 Cumberland County $48,200 $85 ,000 $208 $378 Dauphin County $40 ,300 $71 , 300 $1 89 $357 Perry County $37 , 000 $64 ,400 $1 49 $262 SOURCE: U.S. Bureau of Census, 1990

7.-1 0 CHAPTER 8

.- .-

Introduction

The primary purpose of this chapter is to present information about the transportation 1 system in Cumberland County. Emphasis will be placed on the responsibilities of the County government with respect to transportation facility and service planning, programming, improvement and maintenance. This inventory chapter and the transportation plan chapter will I be fully consistent with the Hamsburg Area Transportation Study (HATS) transportation planning and programming activities.

I The County's role in planning, improving and operating the transportation system encompasses the following: I e developing and maintaining a County Comprehensive Plan; I e operating the Cumberland County Transportation Department and its paratransit services;

1 e maintaining/improving County bridges; e partial funding of Capitol Area Transit's (CAT) operating and capital budget; e planning/programming work for federally-aided transportation improvements through I involvement with the Harrisburg Area Transportation Study (HATS); e County Planning Commission reviews/approvals of subdivision and land development plans and comments on new and revised municipal zoning and subdivision ordinances, I and comprehensive plans; e membership in the Susquehanna Area Regional Airport Authority; and, 8 0 establishing and continued support of the Cumberland County Transportation Authority. A major emphasis of the transportation element of the Comprehensive Plan is on the highway (including bridges) system. Within the highway system only roadways with a I functional classification of collector or arterial and County bridges are discussed and evaluated. The minor street system is primarily a municipal responsibility and therefore it is only discussed where there are federal or state funded projects on it. The functional classification system that is I presented in this Plan is based on the HATS functional classification system. Other transportation modes including bus, rail, air and non-motorized are also discussed and evaluated I in this Plan. Cumberland County, because of its geography and the importance of the Harrisburg Area as a business center and the State Capital, has an extensive transportation system. The County is I served by major highways like Interstates 81 and 83, U.S. 11 and 15, PA 581 and the Pennsylvania Turnpike. The Interstate highways and Turnpike link the County with other areas in the Tri-County Region, as well as other regions within and outside of Pennsylvania. A I subsystem of minor arterial highways, many of which are Pennsylvania traffic routes, serve intra- I region and intra-County travel. I 8- 1 I

Cumberland County highways serve a variety of travel types including long-distance I "through" travel, work commutation, goods movement and recreational travel. "Through" travel is significant and mainly occurs on the Turnpike, Interstates and 1J.S. Traffic Routes. Commuting trips occur on all classifications of' roadways and are a principal cause of congestion I problems during peak commuting periods (7 to9 a.m. and 3 to 6 1i.m.) These peak hour congestion problems are the worst in certain areas of the Harrisburg Urbanized Area (West Shore area), but are also significant in the Carlisle and Shippensburg Urban Areas. Congestion during I peak commuting periods will get worse, perhaps considerably worse, as the County and the Tri- County Region develop with expanded and new businesses and new residents. Goods movement is considerable on the County's arterial highways and will continue to increase as growth occurs. 1 Goods movement often involves large trucks that do not always mix well with other types of vehicles. Recreational travel is also significant in Cumberland County and the Region throughout the year because of the many recreational and entertainment attractions within the I County and South Central and Central Pennsylvania.

1990 Census data indicate that of the approximately 100,299 workers, 16 years of age and I over, who live in the County, 71 percent work within the County. Another 21 percent of the workers are employed in Dauphin County. Ninety-two percent of the workers use a car for their work travel and 87 percent of these persons drive alone. Eighty percent of Cumberland County's 1 98,577 workers spent less than one-half hour commuting to work in 1990 while another 12 percent spent between 30 and 40 minutes commuting. Vehicle registrations in 1997 were at 202,137 and increased by 14 percent since 1990 and 121 percent since 1970. I "WAYS 1 Functional Classification

PennDOT and the Harrisburg Area Transportation Study (HATS) have been classifying I area highways for planning and hnding purposes since 1965. In planning for highway improvements for Cumberland County it is important that planners be cognizant of a functional classification scheme to guide this effort. 1 Map 8-1 shows the functional classification of highways in Cumberland County. The I hierarchy of classifications (from highest to lowest) includes principal arterials, minor arterials, collectors, and locally-classified roadways (not shown). Table 8- 1 shows Highway mileage by functional classification for each of the Capitol Region's three counties for comparative purposes I Table 8-1 1996 Highway Functional Classification Mileage I Functional Classification Cumberland Dauphin Perry I Arterial 136 135 43 Minor Arterial 112 176 79 Co 1lector 31 1 277 167 I Local 1280 242 794 Total 1838 829 084 I Source: PennDOT I I I The functional classification system shown in these maps should be used by state, regional, county and municipal planners and officials in planning highway improvements and in 1 land use planning. Exhibit 8-1 identifies characteristics of Arterial, Collector and Local highways. Many of the roadways shown on the maps with classifications of collector or higher are state highways, however, there are some locally-owned roads with collector or higher I classifications. Again, this plan is focusing on roadways with a collector or higher classification. I Traffic Volumes Map 8-2 contains 1996 estimated Annual Average Daily Traffic (AADT) volumes for state highways in the Harrisburg Region. Map 8-2 indicates that in 1996 there were I approximately 2 12 thousand vehicles crossing the four Susquehanna River bridges (I 8 1, I 83, Market Street and George Wade) each day. Over two-thirds of these were on the two Interstate I highway bridges and almost half were on the 1-83 (South Bridge) alone. Aside from the very hgh volume four and six lane limited access facilities, some of the two, three and four lane unlimited access roadways carry significant traffic volumes. A number I of two-lane roadways cany volumes of over 15,000 AADT and include: Main and Simpson Streets in Mechanicsburg; Bridge Street in New Cumberland; Market Street in Camp Hill; and Hanover Street and Walnut Bottom Road in Carlisle. The Carlisle Pike, Camp Hill Bypass and I U.S. 11/15 in East Pennsboro Township are the highest volume three and four-lane roadways I without access control in the County. I I I I I I I I I 8-3 Exhibit 8-1 Functional Classification Information

Arterial Collector Local

Sub-Classifications rn Limited Accesshnterstate rn Major rn Other Principal Arterials rn Minor rn Minor Arterials

Mobility vs. Access Mobility of utmost importance Mobility and land access of Land access of utmost equal importance importance

Trip Distance Typically used for longer trips Short to medium distance Typically used for short trips (inter and intra-state, inter- intra-regional trips & for and for accessing hgher order region & longer intra-region & accessing arterial and local systems intra-county trips) systems

Traffic Volumes Highest volume roadways; Moderate volumes in general Low volume roadways a1ode:a:e IS high vc!umes 3R most arterials

Design Features Limited, partial and unlimited No access controls; moderate No access controls; Minimum access controls; widest right-of- to minimum right-of-way, cartway right-of-way, cartway and ways, carhvays and shoulders; often and shoulder widths; often 2 shoulder widths; often 2 lane 3 or 4 lane facilities lane facilities facilities

Speeds -iypicaiiy 45-65 mph

ThrougMocal Travel Minimal interference to through Balanced through and local Through travel discouraged; travel; local travel discouraged travel local travel encouraged especially on limited access roads

Relation to Other Most important connections with Connects with Arterials and Primarily connects with other Systems other arterials and collectors Locals: locals and collectors usually via grade separated rn Collector/Arterial intersections rn Most intersections of locals interchanges or signalized often signalized with other roadways are stop intersections rn CollectorLocal intersections controlled often stop controlled

Source: TCRPC

8-4 I Highway Mileage and Travel Table 8-2 identifies highway mileage by owner in each of the Capitol Region’s three counties I for comparison purposes. Daily vehicle miles of travel (DVMT) are also shown in the table and are a good indicator of the overall level of travel on the highway system.

I Table 8-2 1996 Highway Mileage and DVMT by Ownership

I Mileage by Ownershm Cumberland mw pr=lqr State 564 558 419 I Other 69 16 65 Turnpike 38 13 0 Municipal 1.167 L241 4M I Total 1,838 1,829 1,084 I DVMT 6,53 1,000 7,492,000 1,394,000 Source: PennDOT

I Major Traffic Generators 1 In a County such as Cumberland that is partially urbanized, traffic generators are numerous and of various types. The most significant generators are within the Harrisburg Urbanized Area and the Carlisle and Shippensburg Urban Areas. The vehicle trips generated by these facilities I vary in the kinds of vehicles (autos/trucks) and trip types (commuting, business, shopping, etc.). Some of the generators are individual businesses or facilities, while others are areas of numerous activities such as office parks or retail areas (shopping districts, malls and highway commercial I strips). Some of the larger traffic generators include the Navy Inventory Control Point in Hampden I Township (which generates over 20 thousand vehicle trips a day), Defense Distribution Region East facility (York County), East Pennsboro Office Area, Shippensburg University, and various shopping malls. Trucking distribution and warehousing facilities on U.S. 11 near Carlisle 1 generate significant volumes of truck traffic on the area’s limited access system as well as on U.S. 11 east of Carlisle. The largest generator of out-of-County trips is Harrisburg‘s Capital I Complex and central business district. Special Highway Networks

I The ISTEA legislation of 1991 required Congress to approve a National Highway System (NHS) that is critical to the nations mobility, economy and defense. The concept was a proposal for the future federal-aid highway program. The network then is a major focus of federal I resources. Criteria for selecting routes for the NHS included:

I e:* provisions for interstate and international commerce 8-5 I

*:* *:* national defense needs *:* *:* enhanced economic vitality and inteinational competitiveness I *:* the provision of transportation services to all parts of the nation, and *:* *:* response to changing population and travel patterns. I The NHS is shown on map 8-3. Congress approved the NHS in December of 1995. A significant proportion of ISTEA’s highway improvement funding is set aside for the NHS. Key I roadways that connect the NHS arterials with major defense and inter-modal facilities (Lucknow, Rutherford Yards, Harrisburg Transportation Center, etc.) were also made part of the NHS. I In addition to the National Highway System, PennDOT also designates Truck Access Routes for oversize trucks as required by the Federal Surface Transportation Assistance Act of 1982. Approval of Truck Access Routes is a continuing process and PeImDOT maintains up-to-date I listings of approved routes. Deficiencies/Areas of Emphasis I For the most part, this section will deal with deficiencies/projects that have already been identified by HATS and PennDOT. Discussions of the processes used by PennDOT to identify I deficiencies and program improvement projects will also be presented. Finally, a listing of planned and programmed projects on the 1999 Twelve Year Progam and HATS Transportation Improvement Program (TIP). Deficiencies/ projects are discusseid in four categories: congestion, I safety, maintenance, bridge and miscellaneous (Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS), enhancements, bicycle/pedestrian, etc.). 1

Capacity deficiencies/projects normally relate to the need for a new facility or relocation of 1 an existing facility, the need to widen existing facilities or the neled to install or update traffic control devices such as traffic signals. With the completion of th.e Interstate System and rising improvement costs and limited resources, the number of new facility projects that are I programmed for improvement in Cumberland County and throughout the state are limited. The 1999 Program is included later in this chapter as Exhibit 8-2. I Major widening and interchange projects on the current Twelve Year Program include Gettysburg Road from Carlisie Road to U.S. 15, the U.S. 15 interchange at Lisbum Road, and I interchange improvements at 1-81 and PA 465 (exit 12), U.S. 15 bridges project (PA 581 to Simpson Ferry Road), and 1-83 widening and interchange improvements (PA 58 1 to 1-8 1). I Many of the capacity deficiencies/projects on the current Twelve Year Program are Safety and Mobility Initiative (SAMI) projects. The SAMI Program wits initiated by PennDOT in the early 1990’s to address safety and traffic flow deficiencies. Most of the SAMI projects in I Cumberland County involve traffic signal or intersection improvements. SAMI projects are typically 80 or 90 percent federally funded with the remaining funding from the state. I I 8-6 I I

I S.afdy

Safety of our transportation system is a principal concern of HATS and PennDOT. A i number of safety projects (SAMI) are on the current 1999 Program. PennDOT District 8-0's Traffic Unit has a safety engineer and staff. This group is responsible for monitoring crash data and making remedial recommendations, as well as, reviewing other roadway improvement I project designs to assure that safety issues are addressed. Safety projects can include but are not limited to geometric, signing, pavement marking, guide rail, pavementhhoulder widening, skid 1 resistance and traffic control improvements. PennDOT has a very structured approach to identifying and addressing safety problems. The I process is an annual one that begins with a review of computerized accident data that identifies safety priority locations utilizing various data. The worst locations are studied each year and if a cost beneficial solution is available, a project report is prepared and a project is recommended for I programming. The safety unit also reviews student walking routes, fatal accidents and the location of utility poles and guiderail. I Maintenance of our transportation system is also a principal concern of HATS' and I PennDOT. A goal of the Commonwealth and HATS is that 80 percent of roadway and bridge improvement funds should be spent on maintaining the system. Maintenance deficiencieshmprovements include resurfacing and restoration-type projects. Many of the I improvements are made under PennDOT's Betterment Program. A number of maintenance projects can be found in the 1999 Program.

I PennDOT, as with the Safety Improvement process, has a well-defined and structured annual process of identifying and programming Betterment projects. The identification of Betterment projects begins with recommendations fi-om citizens, planning commissions, legislators and I Metropolitan Planning Organizations like HATS. A computerized pavement analysis system (STAMPP) is also used to identify Betterment candidates. If a project suggestion has merit, as determined by PennDOT County Maintenance Office personnel, it goes into a future project file. I An annual Betterment candidate list is compiled by the District Office using the future project candidate file and suggestions by the District's Bridge, Traffic and Safety Units. The District field views the list of candidate projects and develops a shorter list of projects that will undergo I detailed scoping.

A "Scoping Team" then field views the shortened list of candidates and begins to detail the I scope and cost of each project. A project selection team then reviews available funds and project needs to develop the final annual listing of Betterment projects.

I Funding of the Betterment Program is about $15 million annually and is one-third federally funded with the remainder coming from state funds. The legislature allocates Betterment funds I by County and the PennDOT County Maintenance Office budget comes off the top of this allocation. The remaining money is then used to complete resurfacinglrestoration-type projects.

8-7 I

Biidges I Bridge rehabilitations or replacements are expensive and often utilize federal, state and municipal funding in their improvement. One of the principal critleria for federal funding 1 eligibility is that the bridge’s span must be at least 20 feet. Recognizing that bridge reconstruction and replacement is one of our m,ost important transportation needs, the state legislature approved seven Bridge Bills since the early 1980’s. The Bills list the bridges to be I improved and provide authorization for PennDOT to work on them, but in order for them to be funded, they must be placed on the Twelve Year Program. The bridges that HATS and PennDOT deal with are both on and off the federal-aid system and include niunicipal as well as state-owned I structures.

One of the County government’s more important transportaticm responsibilities is the I ownership and maintenance of 27 bridges. In 1997, the county received $275 thousand in liquid fuels payments from the Commonwealth to assist with the maintmance of its bridges. These bridges are listed in Table 8-3. I

Table 8-3 County Bridges I

Road Feature bI.umhxw EiP NuInkI !3cE&cl I C-1 BridgeRd. PIS Concrete Bridge Rd. Condoguinet E. Pennsboro c-2 On’s PIS Concrete Orrs Bridge Rd. Condoguinet Hampden C-6 Sample PIS Concrete Samples Bridge Rd. Condoguinet Silver Spring C-9 Bernheisel PIS Concrete T574 Condoguinet Middlesex B c-11 Wolf Truss T508 Condoguinet Middlesex C-15 Hays PIS Concrete T484 Condoguinet N. Middleton C-16 Hertzler Truss T427 Condoguinet L. Frankford 1 C-17 Burgner PIS Concrete T457 Condoguine t L. Frankford C-19 Stanton PIS Concrete T448 Condoguinet L. Frankford C-21 Graham PIS Concrete T409 Condoguinet U. Frankford C-26 Ramp Covered T374 Condoguinet Hopewell I F-1** T-311 Concrete T-Beam T311 Middle Spring Southampton F-2** T-364 PIS Concrete T364 Laughlin Run Hopewell Y-2* Etters Truss Cireen Lane Dr. Yellow Breeches Lower Allen I Y-4* Miller Stone Arch Limekiln Rd. Yellow Breeches Lower Allen Y-6* Old Forge Truss Sheepsford Rd. Yellow Breeches Lower Allen Y-7* McCormick Concrete Arch 1’918 Yellow Breeches Upper Allen Y-9* Bishop Truss ELishop Rd. Yellow Breeches Upper Allen I Y-10* Gilbert Truss Elishop Rd. Yellow Breeches Upper Allen Y-l1* Grantham PIS Concrete 1’912 Yellow Breeches Upper Allen Y-14 Leidigh PIS Concrete 1’545 Yellow Breeches Monroe I Y- 15 Boiling Springs Stone Arch 1’538 Yellow Breeches S. Middleton Y-17 Kunkle Plate Girder 1’518 Yellow Breeches S. Middleton Y- 18 Craighead Truss 1’520 Yellow Breeches S. Middleton 1 Y-20 RoiJSh PIS Concrete ’1’470 Rail Road Dickinson Y-22 Enck Concrete Slab 1’462 Yellow Breeches D ickinson R-1 Messiah College Steel Plate Road Railroad Tracks Upper Allen access Road 1

Notes: 18 fully owned county bridges; 9 jointly ownd *=Joint ownership with York County **=Joint ownership with Franklin County .I

8-8 I I

I Closed and weight limit posted bridges in Cumberland County are listed in Table 8-4.

Table 8-4 I Cumberland County Posted and Closed Bridges by Municipality - 1997 Weight Limit I (tons) Municipality RoadlBridge Name Feature Crossed Owner Single Comb. Length

L. Mifflin Campground Rd , Doubling Gap Run DEP Parks 6304 28 39 24 Cooke Woodrow Rd Mountain Creek DEP Forestry-01 7 14 24 I Dickinson Encks Mill Rd (T-462) Yellow Breeches Creek Cumberland County 8 40 Dickinson SR 3021 Yellow Breeches Creek PennDOT 15 25 114 E. Pennsboro River Road Conrail Conrail Custodian Closed 310 I Hampden Orr’s Bridge Rd Conodoguinet Creek Cumberland County 31 5 Hopewell Ramp Bridge (T-374) Conodoguinet Creek Cumberland County 3 115 1. Allen Greenlane Dr Yellow Breeches Creek Curnberland County 8 133 L. Frankford Creek Rd (T427) Conodoguinet Creek Cumberland County 10 218 I L. Mifflin Creekview Rd (T-399) Doubling Gap Creek Lower Mifflin Twp 26 34 35 L. Mifflin Harvey Rd Doubling Gap Greek Lower Mifflin Twp 18 33 29 L. Mifflin Pipeline Rd Doubling Gap Creek Lower Mifflin Twp 10 22 I Middlesex Mill Rd (T-501) Letort Spring Run Middlesex Twp 5 27 Middlesex Shady Lane (T-510) Letort Spring Run Middlesex Twp 12 20 28 Middlesex Wolf Bridge Rd Conodoguinet Creek Cumberland County 10 192 Monroe SR 201 1 Dogwood Run PennDOT 32 40 20 I S. Middleton Craighead Bridge (T-520) Yellow Breeches Creek Cumberland County 10 134 S. Middleton Kunkle Bridge Yellow Breeches Creek Cumberland County 14 25 103 S. Middleton Ladnor Rd Mountain Creek South Middleton Twp 4 50 I Shippensburg B. W Garfield St Middle Spring Creek Shippensburg Boro Closed 27 Silver Spring Beechcliff Drive Brenizer Run Silver Spring Twp 33 40 26 Silver Spring Sample’s Bridge Rd Conodoguinet Creek Cumberland County 252 Silver Spring Village Rd (T-582) Hogestown Run Silver Spring Twp 30 36 I U. Allen Bishop Rd (T-612) Yellow Breeches Creek York-Cumberland Co. 10 134 U. Allen McCorrnack Rd Yellow Breeches Creek York-Cumberland Co. 10 131 U. Mifflin Bridge Water Rd Three Square Hollow Run Upper Mifflin Twp 7 36 I U. Mifflin Lesher Rd Three Square Hollow Run Upper Mifflin Twp 10 24 U. Mifflin SR 4007 Three Square Hollow Creek PennDOT 34 40 47 I Source: PennDOT - 1997

I The Harrisburg area, in 1998/99, is in the midst of implementation of its first Intelligent Transportation System (ITS) project as well as a comprehensive, regional study of ITS. The ITS project involves deployment and operation of 18 variable message signs and two highway I advisory radios on and around the Capital Beltway. The variable message displays are intended to provide motorists with information about incidents so that they may make appropriate decisions. The ITS study will take a broad look at a full range of ITS strategies for the Harrisburg I area. It is expected that ITS will eventually become institutionalized and an integral part of our plans and programs from a project-specific and regional perspective.

I Transportation enhancements are a group of projects born out of the 1991 federal transportation legislation - ISTEA (Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act). Enhancements continue to be a funding category of projects in ISTEA’s successor, TEA-2 1. I Some examples of previously programmed enhancement projects include planninghmprovements of the Cumberland Valley Rails to Trails Council’s Newville to

I 8-9 I

Shippensburg trail, improvements to the Capitill Area Greenbelt, Wildwood pathway 1 improvements at Wildwood Lake, and development of a path plan in West Hanover Township. Planned and Programmed Highway Improvements I In the mid 1970's HATS produced and adopted a Long-Range Highway Plan. This plan which included some extensive improvements and new facilities, represented the end of an era in I transportation planning in the Region. The era began in the early 1960's with the formation of HATS and an extensive transportation system computer modelinl; effort that culminated in the adoption of the mid-70's plan. Because of rising improvement costs and a lack of resources for I new facilities, relocations and major widenings, the emphasis on major facility improvements has shifted. The Twelve Year Program and the process of identifying its projects became the essence of the highway planning process from the mid ~O'S,through the 1980's. In recent years a I new era in transportation planning seems to be emerging with more stability in PennDOT's financing, new tools like the microcomputer arid transportation planning software to perform site-specific, corridor and regional planning related to both short and long range needs, and the I 1997 programming process re-engineering effort.

The re-engineered, biennial Program development process looks to the regional I transportation plan as its source of major projects. The process continues to be tied to the local (municipal) level with HATS soliciting municipalities and interest groups for Program update suggestions. Under the new process PennDOT is more of an equal partner than in the past when I it was often dominant. Local Program update suggestions are reviewed by the county and regional planning commissions before going to HATS as recommendations. Ultimately the State Transportation Commission adopts the 12 Year Program with HATS adopting the Transportation I Improvement Program which is supposed to coincide with the first four year period of the 12 Year Program. Most recently, the State Transportation Commission adopted the 1999 Program in early 1999 and its Cumberland County contents are listed in Exhbit 8-x. I In addition to HATS TIP and the Commonwealth's 12 Year Program, HATS' I Transportation Plan was updated in 1998 and contains major project suggestions for the years 201 0 through 2020. These are listed in the Transportation Plan se:ction of this document. I Highway Design Standards The best guide for developing and evaluating design standards for local roads and streets I is PennDOT's Publication 70: "Guidelines for Design of Local Roads and Streets". I I I I

8-10 I I PI TRT ,TRANSPORTATION I Capitol Area Transit (CAT) The Cumberland-Dauphin-Harrisburg Transit Authority (CAT) was formed in 1973 to provide local bus service to the residents of the Harrisburg area. CAT currently has a fleet of 65 I buses and two trolleys which serve the Harrisburg area and parts of the surrounding 28 municipalities. Twenty-one local routes and four express routes are currently operated. In Fiscal I Year 1997, CAT carried over 2.4 million passengers, down from four million in FY 1987. The CAT system has downtown Harrisburg as its hub and serves eastern Cumberland I County with routes extending as far west as Carlisle and Mechanicsburg. Within CAT’S service area in Cumberland County, there is an approximate population of 67 I thousand persons, which represents about one-third of the County’s population. One of Cumberland County’s most important transportation responsibilities is the hnding of I a share of CAT’s operations. In 1998 the County budgeted $137,417.00 in support of CAT’s operations. Dauphin County and the City of Harrisburg are the other local supporters of CAT. I CAT serves seven park and ride facilities in the County. These free parking areas primarily serve commuters who work in downtown Harrisburg and attract those who have to pay I substantially for downtown parking. Current one-way fares range between $1.35 and $2.05. Ten and 40-ride tickets are available as well as monthly passes. Special fimding, service and promotional programs include I Transitchek, senior citizen program, Special Efforts Transportation and guaranteed ride home program.

1 Transit surveys in the past have indicated that Cumberland County bus riders would like the system to better serve some trips from one community to another within the County, along with longer hours of service. With the advent of “Access to Work” efforts, CAT is reviewing areas of I need and opportunity to provide the “TO” of the transportation in “Access TO Work.”

Following the first two phases of CAT’s Transit Alternatives Study in 1998, CAT began a I $600,000 Major Investment Study (MIS) of Comdor One, the 54-mile corridor linking Harrisburg with Carlisle and Lancaster. The MIS will provide the most detailed look yet at the prospect of commuter rail or light rail. The study - to be completed by June 1999 - will address I all the transportation options including ridership, equipment, station placements, startup costs, financing, route configurations, and management. A big step toward the reality of rail in the Hamsburg area came with the passage of TEA-21 on June 9, 1998. The six-year federal I transportation legislation recognized the Corridor One transportation project as a “new start” and I authorized $20 million for a long-term demonstration project. I Paratransit and Taxi Cumberland County Transportation Department (CCTD) provides shared-ride paratransit I service to the residents of Cumberland County. The service is supplied Monday through Friday, 8-1 1 I service to the residents of Cumberland County, The service is supplied Monday through Friday, from 8:00 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., providing that 24 hour notification is given for the ride. CCTD I operates twenty-six vehicles (vans), and most are equipped to acclommodate wheelchairs. Twenty-five percent of the system's riders are non-disabled elderly, 20% are disabled elderly, I and 50% are disabled non-elderly. Transportation is provided to and from all points within the County and to certain I destinations outside of the €ounty. The Department serves some 550 different persons each month. I Regular taxi service is also available to Cumberland County iresidents and is provided by a number of taxi companies. I Intercity Bus and Rail Services Greyhound and Trailways Bus Lines also serve the Harrisburg area. Both companies have I main terminals in downtown Harrisburg. However, Trailways also has a terminal at the Capital City Airport, just outside of New Cumberland in York County. I Amtrak serves the Harrisburg Area with its terminal in Harriljburg's central business district. Service is provided to points east and west of the Harrisburg Area in Pennsylvania and to many other points outside of the state. Service on the once heavily traveled Harrisburg to Philadelphia I corridor has diminished as Amtrak has reduced service in recent years. However, the Commonwealth has been increasing its subsidies for the Keystone Service, and service and ridership appear to be going in a positive direction. I

Conrail (to be sold to Norfolk SouthedCSX in 1998/99) provides freight rail service in the Area with three lines in Cumberland County. Double stack container and internodal service is 1 available in the Harrisburg area. The Carlisle line extends from Harrisburg to Carlisle while another line extends from Harrisburg to Shippensburg and southward to Hagerstown, Maryland. Finally, there is a Conrail line that extends along the Susquehanna River and connects with York I to the south and various points to the north and west. The Enola Yard in East Pennsboro Township is located adjacent to this line. The Gettysburg Railroad provides freight and tourist service between Mount Holly Springs and Gettysburg. Additional rail freight lines, other than I sidings or major increases to the rail freight business, are not anti'cipated in the future.

Aviation I The Tri-County Region is served by two rnajor airports, Capital City in Fairview Township, I York County, and Harrisburg International Airport (HIA) in Lower Swatara Township, Dauphin County. HIA is the Region's passenger and air freight facility while Capital City provides general aviation services. Since January 1, 1998, HIA has been owned and operated by the I Susquehanna Area Regional Airport Authority (SARAA). Hamsburg International Airport is currently the State's third largest commercial airport in terms of enplanements (departures). It is located within a 700 acre aviation/ industrial park I complex along the Susquehanna River in Dauphin County and is served by ten passenger airlines

8-12 I I I and eight cargo airlines. The airport has a single, concrete runway, 9501 feet long and 200 feet wide. Air traffic is controlled by an FAA air traffic control tower, which is attended 24 hours a day. HIA also has a U.S. Customs facility to handle international activity. In.the mid-l990's, I improvements to HIA included a rehabilitation of the runway, the installation of a de-icing facility, and expansion of the terminal.

I Although not in Cumberland County, Capital City Airport provides general aviation services and fhctions as a limited capacity reliever airport for Harrisburg International. The primary runway is 5001 feet long and 150 feet wide. A crosswind runway is 3894 feet long and 100 feet I wide. While HIA has received extensive master planning attention, Capital City's Master Plan is limited to a single page Airport Layout Plan.

I Finally, Carlisle Airport is a small facility that has become of focus of interest of the Cumberland County Transportation Authority. The Authority's interest relates to the corporate I and business benefits the airport brings, or could bring, to the Carlisle area. I PT .- HATS performed some intermodal system planning in the mid 1990's. It's focus was on identifying major intermodal facilities and their connector roadways to the National Highway I System. Beyond this concern, HATS has a continuing concern and focus on the roadway and pedestrian accessibility of these facilities. The eleven facilities identified and their counties are as I follows: e CAT Transfer Center - Dauphin e Harrisburg Transportation Center - Dauphin I e Defense Distribution Region East (DDRE) - York e Naval Inventory Control Point (NAVICP) - Cumberland e Conrail Lucknow Yard - Dauphin I e Conrail Rutherford YardTriple Crown Roadrailer Facility Dauphin e Carlisle Airport - Cumberland Harrisburg International Airport - Dauphin I e Capital City Airport - York e U.S. 11 Truck Terminals - Cumberland I Millersburg Ferry - Dauphifleny COUNTY J

I The Authority was formed in 1990 by the County to conduct studies, develop plans, and implement projects that will meet the present and fiture transportation needs of the citizens and businesses of the County. Since its incorporation, it has been involved in various aspects of the I transportation system and at times has focused on issues like development of a Strategic Plan I and the hture of the Carlisle Airport. I 8-13 I I Although not as significant as other modes of travel, bicycle ;and pedestrian modes make up an important part of the county’s transportation system. I Table 8-X Workers Who Walk or Bike to Work I by place of residenoe I

Cumberland 308 1 98,577 I I DauDhin 267 116,181 I Source: US.Census (1990) I As part of its continuing transportation planning work, TCRE’C/HATS in 1997 developed a BicyclePedestrian Transportation Plan as an amendment to the 1995-2015 Transportation Plan. The Plan identifies a short list of specific, “achievable” projects that are visible in nature, I command regional visibility and carry high impacts.

One of these is the completion of the Capital Area Greenbelt, the Region’s largest I bicycle/pedestrian facility.

The Plan also proposed the adoption of an 830-mile “BicycldPedestrian Network,” (44% of 1 which is in Dauphin County) consisting of existing roadway-based routes (78% of the Network) and trails as well as some that existed only on paper. The Plan selves as a policy tool for PennDOT and Harrisburg area municipalities as they continue with routine improvement and I maintenance programs. Improvements geared toward improving bicycle and pedestrian forms of travel can include shoulder widenings, removal of obstructions/grates, grade separations, and I implementation of traffic calming to name a few. -~ 1 Cumberland County and the Region have an extensive transportation system in support of its role as state capital and as a major business center in Central Pennsylvania as well as the east I coast. The County government’s role in improving and operating the transportation system will probably not change substantially in the near future. Again these roles and responsibilities include: I 1) developing and maintaining a County Comprehensive Plan; 2) operating the Cumberland County Transportation Department and its paratransit services; 3) maintaininghmproving County bridges; I 4) partial funding of Capitol Area Transit’s (C14T) operating and capital budget;

8-14 I I 1

I 5) planning/programming work for federally-aided transportation improvements through involvement with the Harrisburg Area Transportation Study (HATS); 6) County Planning Commission reviews/approvals of subdivision and land development plans I and comments on new and revised municipal zoning and subdivision ordinances and comprehensive plans; 7) membership with the Susquehanna Area Regional Airport Authority; and, I 8) establishing and continued support of the Cumberland County Transportation Authority. I PENNDOT STUllIES HATS Transportation Plan 1994,1998 (Bikepedestrian Element - 1997) HATS Congestion Management System - 1995 I Harrisburg Intelligent Transportation System Early Deployment Study - 1998-99 CAT Shod Range Transit Plan - Annual Updates Third/Market Street Lemoyne Congestion Management System Study - 1996 I Harrisburg Intermodal Management System Phase 1 - 1995 I Carlisle Area Transportation Study - 1989 I I I I I I I I I I 8-15 I A wide variety of community facilities and services are provided to Cumberland County residents, including educational, health, recreational, emergency, public water, public sewerage, solid waste management, and utility facilities and services. Factors influencing the need for and the provision of these services is dependent on the types and density of development, the composition and distribution of the residential population, and the ‘financial resources and ability of County municipalities to support the range of facilities and services that are needed.

The purpose of this chapter is to describe existing community facilities and services provided within the County. The discussion is primarily concerned with the existing characteristics and functional adequacy of these facilities. The adequacy and availability of these facilities are a reflection on the quality, convenience, and general character of the County as a place to live.

Cumberland County is served by public and private primary and secondary educational facilities, and state and private higher education facilities. In addition to identifying the location of these facilities, the following discussion will provide characteristics of the public school districts; their service area, current and future enrollments, and projected needs.

]Public Primary and Secondary Education

Local government, including County government, has very little impact on private educational facilities, in contrast to the very important role local government plays with public facilities. The public is dependent on the municipalities and the educational systems ability to work together to continually assess the effect of growth patterns on the adequacy of the educational system. The effects of declining or increasing school age populations may have a dramatic impact on the provision of services and capacity of existing facilities.

Nine (9) school districts serve Cumberland County. In July 1997, a survey of the Cumberland County School Districts, conducted by Tri-County Regional Planning Commission, provided descriptive information regarding the existing status of these districts. Table 9-1 has been developed from this information. Sixty-two (62) facilities are located in the County, including forty-one (41) elementary schools (kindergarten to fifth or sixth grades), ten (10)

I I 9- I I iAaLE 9-1 CHARACTERISTICS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICTS

:amp Hill

:adisle Area

:umberland Valley

(+19%) (-27%) - I (8.8%) (9.2%)1 (8.1%) (7.9%)1 (8.1%) (8.4%) (7.5%) (7.0%) (7.5%)[ (7.3%) (6.9%)( (7.0%) (6.3%) IEast Pennsboro Middle School 798

I I I I I I West Creek Hills Elementary ~~ 498 I I I I East Pennsboro Elementary School 607

9-2 TABLE 9-1 CHARACTERISTICS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICTS

Shippensburg Area

South Middleton

West Shore

I I I I I I I I I I I Rossmoyne Elementary School I 257 1 I (Washington Hleghts ElementarJ Schl.1 177 * Included with grade levels

SOURCE: Tri-County Regional Planning Commission, Educational Facilities Survey, 1997

9-3 I middle schools (sixth to eighth grades), one (1) junior high schocd (seventh to ninth grade), two (2) junior/senior high schools (seventh to twelfth grade). Total enrollment for the 1996197 I school year for the nine school districts equaled 3 1,777 students. The three largest school districts are Cumberland Valley (7,416 students in ten facilities), Carlisle Area (4,978 students in I ten facilities), and the West Shore School District (4,061 students in ten facilities). The smallest school district is Camp Hill with 1,038 studems in four facilities. I In contrast to the period 1977 to 1987, over the past ten y~sars, 1987 to 1997, all of the school districts, except one, have gained in enrollments (past enrollment data not having been available for the West Shore School District). 'The greatest increases have occurred in South I Middleton (+26%), East Pennsboro Area (+19%), Cumberland Valley (+14%), and Shippensburg Area (+12%) School Districts. Five of the nine school districts have experienced a ten (10) percent or greater increase in enrollments over the ten year period. The only school district to I experience a decreased enrollment for the period is the Carlisle Area School District (-3%). The smallest increases have occurred in the Big Spring (+1%) and the Mechanicsburg Area (+1 %)School Districts. I

The growth or decline of enrollment has an impact on the physical and financial status of the districts. The distribution of enrollment as shown on Table 9-1 reveals the breakdown of the I student population by grade level. This breakdown is an indication of what may be expected (given no new developments which would add. considerable student populations) over the next decade; particularly to the middle and high school levels. An even distribution indicates, under I present conditions, the districts should not expect many changes in enrollment figures or distribution in the middle and high schools over the next five years. The greater the enrollment variation between grade levels, the greater impact on hture enrollments at the middle (junior) I and high school level.

Several districts have advised that they have initiated planning efforts in an attempt to I resolve existing problems and/or address future needs. The following is a summary of these efforts: I Big Spring - The Board of School Directors has initiated a feasibility study and the results of the study will assist the Board in making decisions relative to classroom space, renovations, the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), and asbestos concerns. 1

East Pennsboro Area - The District is looking to enlarge and renovate the West Creek Hills Elementary School, the Middle School, and the High School due to increasing enrollments. I Rehabilitation is also necessary to assure compliance with ADA :Requirements. I Shippensburg Area - The District is currently applying for a reimburseable building project for the Junior and Senior High Schools. The District hopes to move the sixth grade out of the elementary school to a middle school (the Junior High School will be converted to a middle I school for grades 6-8). Ninth graders will be moved from the Junior High School to the Senior High where an addition is planned. Both buildings will also be brought up to current educational standards (including technology) as well as compliance with Labor and Industry and ADA I standards. 9-4 I I

I

I South Middleton - The District is planning for potential renovations, additions, or a new facility due to increasing enrollments.

I West Shore - The District is planning to replace both the Washington Heights and Highland Elementary building with new buildings in the next 5 years. Discussions have occurred about renovating New Cumberland Middle School. Plans are on the drawing boards to add 8 I classrooms to Cedar Cliff High School and renovate several areas of the building.

In addition to providing public educational facilities, these schools provide the I communities in which they are located additional recreational facilities. Table 9-2 lists these recreational facilities by district and by school. These recreational facilities include athletic fields, playgrounds, and passive recreation areas. In many cases, special arrangements must be I made with school officials for the general public to utilize school district recreation facilities, in particular, indoor facilities.

1 Source: Tri-County Regional Planning Commission, “Educational Facility Questionnaire, 1997” I I I I I I 1 I I I

I 9-5 I I

Talble 9-2 I PUBLIC SCHOOL RECREATION FACILITIES 1 I I I

BIG SPRING SCHOOL DISTRICT a Big Spring High School I Big Spring Middle School - Frankford Elementary School X Mifflin Elementary School -X X Oak Flat Elementary School X ~~ - Plainfield Elementary School X I CAMP HILL SCHOOL DISTRICT I Eisenhower Elementary School

~~ Sc hae ffer Elementary Sc hoo 1

~ I Hoover Elementary School -1 X I Junior/Senior High School I X CARlLISLE AREA SCHOOL DISTRICT I Bellaire Elementary School I -X X X I Crestview Elementary School I X -X X X Hamilton Elementary School X xx X Letort Elementary School X xx X I ~ - I Mooreland Elementary School -X xx X

9-6 I

I Table 9-2 I PUBLIC SCHOOL RECREATION FACILITIES I 1 1 CARLISLE AREA SCHOOL DISTRICT I (CONT.) Mt. Holly Springs Elementary I School North Dickinson Elementary I School Wilson Middle School

~~ ~~ ~ I Lamberton Middle School I Swartz Senior High West Senior High X CUMBERLAND VALLEY I SCHOOL DISTRICT Cumberland Valley High I School Eagle View Middle School I Good Hope Middle School Green Ridge Elementary I School I Hampden Elementary School I Monroe Elementary School Shaull Elementary School 1

I 9-7 I

Table 9-2 I PUBLIC SCHOOL RECREATION FACILITIES 1 I

F4 I I CUMBERLAND VALLEY SCHOOL DISTRICT (CONT.) I Silver Spring Elementary School - I Sporting Hill Elementary X School m EAST PENNSBORO AREA SCHOOL DISTRICT - I West Creek Hills Elementary X School - I East Pennsboro Elementary X School East Pennsboro Area Middle I School MECHANICSBURG AREA I SCHOOL DISTRICT Mechanicsburg Intermediate I School ~ ~ ~~~ ~~ ~ - - - Mechanicsburg Senior High X X I School Broad Street Elementary School m Filbert Street Elementary School m Northside Elementary School- -X Shephardstown Elementary m School

9-8 I I

I Table 9-2 I PUBLIC SCHOOL RECREATION FACILITIES I I I MECHANICSBURG AREA SCHOOL DISTRICT 1 (CONT.) Shiremanstown Elementary I School Upper Allen Elementary I School 1 ~~~ SHIPPENSBURG AREA I SCHOOL DISTRICT James Bud Elementary I School Nancy ,Grayson Elementary I School Rowland School for Young Children I Shippensburg Area Junior High School

~ ~~ I Shippensburg Area Senior High School I SOUTH MIDDLETON SCHOOL DISTRICT I Boiling Springs ML/SR H.S. Iron Forge Educational Center I W.G. Rice Elementary School I

I 9-9 I

Table 9-2 I PUBLIC SCHOOL RECREATION FACILITIES I 1 I I WEST SHORE SCHOOL DISTRICT ll - I Herman Avenue Elementary X School Ix I - I Highland Elementary School I X I X _. - Hillside Elementary School xx -X -X I Lower Allen Elementary X X X School - Rossmoyne Elementary X X X I School

~~ Washington Heights I Elementary School II Allen Middle School X I- Lemoyne Middle School New Cumberland Middle I School Cedar Cliff High School lx Ix X 1

Source: Tri-County Regional Planning Commission, Educational Facilities Survey, 1997 I I I 1

9-1 0 I I Vocational Technical Schools

I The public school districts in Cumberland County support three vocational technical schools which provide additional educational opportunities to high school students. The Cumberland-Perry Vocational Technical School serves the Camp Hill, Big Spring, Cumberland Valley, East Pennsboro, I Mechanicsburg Area, South Middleton, and West Shore School Districts in Cumberland County as well as school districts in northern York County, and all of Perry County. Enrollment at the facility for the 1 1996/97 school year was 847 students. Students receive a diploma upon graduation. The Cumberland-Perry Vocational Technical School curriculum includes programs in Mathematics, Allied Health, HVAC, Auto Body Repair, Automotive Technology, Carpentry, Child 1 Care, Commercial Art, Computer Information System, Cosmetology, Diesel Mechanics, Electrical ConstructiodMaintenance, Electronics Technology, Food Service, Graphic Arts, Dental Assistant, Health Assistant, Medical Assistant, Horticulture, Law Enforcement, Precision Machine Technology, I Masonry, Material Handling, Microcomputer Repair, Office Technologies, and Welding.

The Carlisle Area School District has its own vocational technical education program and offers I the following curriculums: Auto Technology, Carpentry, Masonry, Cabinet Making, Manufacturing Maintenance, Child Care, Accounting, General Office, Executive Secretary, Cosmetology, Electrical Occupations, Graphics, Drafting, Legal Secretary, and Engineering. 220 students were enrolled in these I programs for the 1996/97 school year.

The Shippensburg Area School District utilizes the Franklin County Vocational Technical 1 School to satisfy its technical school needs.

Source: Tri-County Regional Planning Commission “Vocational Technical School I Questionnaire - 1997” I Non-Public Education In addition to public elementary and secondary education, there are many non-public educational 1 facilities. The Pennsylvania Department of Education separates these facilities into licensed private academic schools, and non-public elementary and secondary schools. According to the Pennsylvania Department of Education’s, Directay of Ticensed Prjvate 1997, there are twenty- I four (24) licensed facilities located in Cumberland County.- These schools provide a variety of educational services which include: nursery and kindergarten education; summer sessions; educational testing and remedial centers; special education for the brain-damaged, socially and emotionally I disturbed, speech and language impaired, and mentally retarded individuals. Table 9-3 lists the licensed private schools, addresses and type of services offered.

I Forty eight (48) non-public elementary and secondary schools, as identified by the Pennsylvania Department of Education, Division of Nonpublic and Private School Services, also serve county residents. The majority of these schools are affiliated with a religious group. Table 9-4 lists these I schools and addresses. I

I 9-1 1 LICENSED PRIVATE SCHOOLS - 1997

Camp Hill, Pa 17033 Carefree Learning Center 1871 Center St. X X Camp Hill, Pa 17033 Carlisle Comm. Nursery School I528 Garland Dr. Carlisle. Pa. 17013 Carlisle Early Education Center 100 East Ponfret X Carlisle, Pa. 17013 Carlisle YMCA 31 1 S. West St. X r

Childrens School of New Cumberland 16th & Brandt Ave. X X New Cumberland. Pa. 17070 Discovery Schools 3710 Trindle Rd. X I_ I I Lamp Hill, ?a I7033 I I I I I Huntington Learning Center 3507 Market St X W I Camp Hill, Pa 17033 A hl Kinder Care Learning Center 3515 Kohler Hill X Camp Hill, Pa 17033

Camp Hill, Pa 17033 Magic Years 457 N 21st St X X Camp Hill, Pa 17033 Mechanicsburg Learning Center 119 West Keller X X Mechanicsburg, Pa 17055 Mechanicsburg Learning Center 30 W Carlisle Pike X X New Kingston, Pa 17072 Messiah College Early Learning Grantham X Sylven Learning Center 304 Hartzdale Or X

Caiiiij %hi;, Pa 7 7033 Tender Years 203 Horse Ave X X Camp Hill, Pa 17033 United Cerebal Palsy 925 Linda Lane X X X X X Camp Hill, Pa 17033 Wonder Years 5005 Carlisle Pike X Mechanrcsburg. Pa 17055 TABLE 9-4 PRIVATE AND NONPUBLIC SCHOOLS

I Bethel Christian Academy, 1412 Holly Pike, Carlisle, Pa 17013-0000 123 Bible Baptist School, 201 W. Main St., Shiremanstown, Pa 17011-0000 319

I .Chestnut Grove Parachial School, 212 Hammond Rd., Shippensburg, Pa 17257-0000 22

Christian School Grace Baptist, 777 W. North St., Carlisle, Pa 17013-0000 127

Emmanuel Baptist Christ Academy,4681 E. Trindle Rd.,Mechanicsburg, Pa 17055-0000 48

~ Fair Oaks,l5 Oak Park Avenue, Carlisle, Pa 17013-0000 6

,Faith Tabernacle School, 1410 Good Hope Road, Mechanicsburg, Pa 17055-0000 68

Good Shepherd School, 34th & Market Sts., Camp Hill, Pa 17011-0000 303

Great Hope Baptist School, 110 Fern Avenue, Carlisle, Pa 17013-0000 16

Harrisburg Academy, 10 Erford Road, Wormleysburg, Pa 17043-0000 21 1

Hidden Valley School, 244 Farm Road, Newville, Pa 17241-0000 23

Independent Baptist Church Acad., 308 S. Queen St., Shippensburg, Pa 17257-0000 8

Living Faith School, 297 Goodhart Road, Shippensburg, Pa 17257-0000 22 Meadow Run Parochial School, Newburg, Pa 17240-0000 29

Middle Run Parochial School. 7490 Olde Scotland Road. Shinoensbura. Pa 17257-fI000 31

Mt. Rock Parochial School, Shippensburg, Pa 17257-0000 I 21 I Oak Grove Parochial School, Shippensburg, Pa 17257-0000 I 24

St., New Cumberland Pa 17070-0000

I SOURCE: Pennsylvania Department of Education, Private and Nonpublic Schools, Elementary Enrollments 1996-97 Pennsylvania Department of Education, Private and Nonpublic Schools, Secondary Enrollments 1996-97

I 9-1 3 I

Higher Education I Higher Education is provided at five Cumberland. County institutions. Table 9-5 provides descriptive information regarding these facilities. 1

Shippensburg University offers both undergraduate and graduate degrees. At the graduate level, Dickinson School of Law is a nationally recognized law school that has recently become I associated with Pennsylvania State University. Dickinson College and Messiah College are privately owned and operated undergraduate facilities. I In addition to these facilities, the Central Pennsylvania Business School offers a variety of associate degrees in business related fields. An estimated 442 students were enrolled in th.e Spring of 1997 session. I

Institutions of higher education located in close proximity to Cumberland County include the Harrisburg Area Community College (HACC), the Harrisburg Capital College and Hershey Medical I Center (both affiliated with Penn State University), the Harrisburg campus of Widener University, and Wilson College (a privately owned undergraduate college). 1 TABLE 9-5 HIGHER EDUCATION FACILITIES I .. QfFXlllty T ,ocatL-

Dickinson College Carlisle Borough 1943 I Dickinson School of Law Carlisle Borough 557 1 Central PA Business School East Pennsboro Township 725 (S ummerdale) 1 Messiah College Upper Allen Township 1915 (Grantham) I Shippensburg University Shippensburg Borough 6358 1 Source: Pennsylvania Department of Education, Total Ehrollments in Institutions of Higher Education in Pennsylvania, Fall 1996 I Central Penn Business Journal, August 1, 1997, Central Pennsylvania’s higher education institutions I I 9-14 1 - I I A wide variety of both private and public libraries are available to Cumberland County 1 residents. The Cumberland County Library System (CCLS) includes an administrative office, seven local libraries and one branch. (Table 9-6) The system’s mission is to plan, develop, coordinate, and provide fiee, comprehensive public library services for Cumberland County residents through a I cooperative network of federated public libraries. I TABLE 9-6 1 CUMBERLAND COUNTY LLBRARY SYSTEM Amelia Given Library John Graham Public Library 114 North Baltimore Avenue 9 Parsonage Street 1 Mt. Holly Springs 17065 Newville 17241

Bosler Free Library Shippensburg Public Library I 158 West High Street 73 W. King Street Carlisle 17013 Shippensburg 17257

I Mechanicsburg Area Public Library West Shore Public Library 16 N Walnut Street 30 North 31st Street I Mechanicsburg 17055 Camp Hill 17011 New Cumberland Public Libary East Pennsboro Branch of the I 1 Benjamin Plaza West Shore Library j New Cumberland 17070 98 S. Enola Drive Township Building I Administrative Office Enola 17025 158 West High Street I Carlisle 170 13

1 CCLS does not have a single headquarters library. Two libraries, Bosler and West Shore, act as Reference Resource Centers. These libraries provide supplementary reference services for system members. CCLS anticipates that the West Shore Public Library will move from its present location to a I larger facility within the next 5 years. Its new location has not yet been determined. The CCLS administrative office is a department within Cumberland County government. I In addition to its administrative and information technology functions, the office offers a homebound delivery and nursing home service that provides large print books, audiocassettes and programming I materials. I 9-15 1 I

System Library Services 1 Cumberland County residents may register and use library services at no charge at any CCLS facility. i

TABLE 9-7 1 CUMBERLAND COUNTY LIBRARY SYSTEM PROFILE (1 996)

Registered I Library Name Borrowers Collection Circulation I I 1I I Amelia S. Given 4,205 I 21,724 82,185 I I I I Bosler Free Library 29,300 I 63,524 348,313 I I JohnGraham 2,215 I 22,887 40,430 I I I I Mechanicsburg 24,323 I 55,186 292.144 I I New Cumberland 15.147 I 52,757 205,79 1 'I IShippensburg 10,249 I 47,713 1 18,677 West Shore 37,732 67,664

E. Pennsboro 3,787 10,085 I Branch +- I AdmOffce N/A I 5,160 I I TOTAL 126,!)58 I 346,700 I I I I 1 I I 9-16 I I I

I According to a 1994 countywide survey, two out of three residents use their public library. Nearly three quarters use either the West Shore (29%), Bosler (25%), or Mechanicsburg Area I libraries (1 8%). Demand For Library Services

1 Demand for library services has increased greatly since CCLS’s founding in 1960. This growth includes the size, and number of facilities, library card registrations, collection size, circulation, and program offerings. Further, with the advent of a county library tax in 1986, a stable 1.5 mil tax base I stimulated growth at an accelerated pace. Longer operating hours, additional material purchases, improved facilities, more programming, new homebound services and expanded countywide summer I reading programs all contributed to usage statistics that reflect a high level of demand. System Information Technology

1 CCLS utilizes Ameritech Library Services as its library automation services vendor. Amentech’s Dynix software is a fully integrated, multi-fhctional, multi-user automated library sytem.

I Systemwide, the network is configured with 104 Personal Computers (PC). All seven member libraries provide at least one PC available for public Internet use.

I In conjunction with CCLS’s information technology plan development, CCLS actively works with county government on key information technology issues. Since public access to information is seen as integral to the success of county government, CCLS plans to become the public’s I electronic access point for information about county government. Toward that goal, the county has recently installed a fiber network ring for its “campus” of buildings in Carlisle (including CCLS). As currently planned, CCLS’s connection to this fiber ring will eventually help accomplish two objectives. I It will: (1) Serve as the public’s primary access point for county government information; and (2) I Provide the county and CCLS with a means for shared Internet access. Future Technology Plans

I 1) Provide electronic access to county government information for the public. 2) Provide shared text and graphical-based Internet access with public libraries and the county courthouse. I 3) Provide web-based access to CCLS’s bibliographic database as well as those of other libraries. I Other libraries in the County include academic libraries, law libraries, special libraries, and libraries associated with state supported institutions. The following is a list of libraries within the I County in addition to those associated with the CCLS: I I 9-17 I ~ I

Academic Libraries 1 Central Pennsylvania Business School College Hill Road 1 Summerdale, PA 17093

Dickinson College 1 Boyd Lee Spahr Library Carlisle, PA 17013 I Messiah College Murray Learning Resource Center Grantham, PA 17027 I

Shippensburg University of Penna. Ezra Lehman Memorial Library 1 1871 Old Main Drive Shippensburg, PA 17257 I Law Libraries

Cumberland County Law Library I Court House Carlisle, PA 17013 I Dickinson School of Law Sheely-Lee Law Library 150 South College Street I Carlisle, PA 17013 I Special Libraries Carlisle Hospital I Medical Library 246 Parker Street Carlisle, PA 17013 I Cumberland County Historical Society and Hamilton Library Association I PO Box 626 Carlisle, PA 17013 1 Holy Spirit Hospital Medical Library 503 North 2lStStreet I Camp Hill, PA 170 1 1 9-1 8 I I I

I Shaffer-Orecchia Associates M. Corutney Library 650 North 12'h Street I Lemoyne, PA 17043

U.S. Army Military History Institute I Building 22 - Upton Hall Carlisle Barracks I Carlisle, PA 17013 US. Army War College Attn: Library I Building 122 Carlisle Barracks 1 Carlisle, PA 17013 Sources: Jonelle Prether Dan-, Director Cumberland County Library System, Correspondence I dated August 1 1, 1997 Pennsylvania Department of Education, Office'of Commonwealth Libraries, 1997 1 Directory of Pennsylvania Libraries I A1,TH mTESAND SERVICES Three (3) hospitals are located in Cumberland County; Carlisle Hospital, Holy Spirit Hospital, and Healthsouth Mechanicsburg Rehabilitation System. Table 9-8 provides descriptive I information regarding the type of ownership, services provided, and the number of licensed beds for each facility. County residents have access to a number of excellent hospitals located in neighboring I counties. These facilities are also listed in Table 9-8. In addition to hospitals, Cumberland County has seventeen (1 7) licensed nursing homes. I Table 9-9 lists these facilities as well as information regarding the type of ownership, the type of facility, the number of licensed beds, and the number of medicaidmedicare certified beds. In addition, those facilities provided a dedicated Alzheimer unit and continuing life care options are identified. Eight (8) of I the nursing homes are non-profit facilities, six (6) are for profit, two (2) are Church related, and one (1) is owned and operated by the County. The 17 facilities provide a total of 2200 licensed beds. I I I

I 9-19 I -_ I

TABLE 9-8 EXISTING HOSPITALS 1 1997 I Wd

Carlisle Hospital 246 Parker St: Generalisurgery, obstetrics, gynecological, 23 1 Carlisle pediatric, psychiatric hospice, neurophysiology, 1 special care. Holy Spirit N. 2 1st Street Generalisurgery, neonatal, obstetrics 335 I Camp Hill gynecological, pediatric, psychatric, special care, orthopedics, opthomology advanced life support I Healthsouth 175 Lancaster Head injury, chronic pain, orthopedics, 103 Rehab Hospital Boulevard neurologic, psychiatric, physical therapy, in Mechanicsburg Mechanicsburg occupational therapy and vocational I rehabilitation I Community General Londondeny Rd. Medical, surgical, CCU, oncology, orthopedic, 157 Osteopathic Harrisburg telemetry, 24-hour emergency, laboratory, Hospital physical therapy, respiratory therapy, free- I standing diagnostic center, out-patient surgery center, cancer-treatment center

Edgewater 1829 N. Front St. I Psychiatric Center Harrisburg Psychiatric 26

Harrisburg South Front St. GeneraVsurgery, neonatal, surgical pediatric, 422 I Hospital Harrisburg obstetrics, psychiatric, special care, short (Subsidiary of procedure center, trauma center Capital Health System) I Harrisburg State Cameron and Psychiatric 392 Hospital McClay St. Harrisburg I

M.S. Hershey 500 University Perm State’s College of Medicine and Univer- 504 Medical Center Drive sity Hospital. General surgery, family and Hershey cormunity medicine, cardiology, obstetrics, I gynecology, pediatric, psychiatry and psychiatric research, aeromedical emergency sewices, trauma center, Elizabethville I Hospital and Rehabilitation Center, South- Central Lithotripter Alliance, Capital Area Poison Control Center I Polyclinic 2601 N. Third St. GeneraVsurgery, neonatal, obstetrics, 423 Medical Center Hamsburg gynecological, pediatric, cardiac, intensive care, psychiatric care, diabetes center, I geriatrichursing home, adult day health center, 1 9-20 I I I 1 Industrial medical program, Harrisburg Pain Treatment Center (Upper Allen Township), I Willow Mill Health Center (Silver Spring Township) I County Chambersburg 112 N. 7th St. Generallsurgery, emergency, mental health, 224 Hospital Chambersburg radiology, therapy, social services, risk I management, dialysis, critical care, personal emergency response

Source: Pennsylvania Department of Health, State Center for Health Statistics and Research “Directory of Pennsylvania I Hospitals”, June 1996 (as revised by addenda dated August 4, 1997) I I 1 I I I I I 1 I I 9-2 1 I .. ._- - - - LICENSED NURSING HOM ES-CHARACTERISTICS

Bethany Village Retirement Cntr. 325 Wesley Dr. Non-Profit 69 Yes 69 69 No Mechanicsburg Blue Ridge Haven-West 770 Poplar Church Rd. Profit 313 No 252 61 No Camp Hill Camp Hill Nursing & Convalescent Cntr. 96 Erford Rd. Profit 118 No 118 31 No Camp Hill Church of God Home, Inc. 801 N. Hanover St. Non-Profit 109 Yes 34 11 No Carlisle Cumberland County Nursing Home 375 Claremont Dr. County 387 No 387 147 Yes

Cumberland Crossings Longsdorf Way 1 Longsdorf Way Non-Profit 59 Yes 59 59 No Carlisle FOES: Paik H~alihCnti. 700 ?'L'alnc;t Bottom Rd. Nm-Profit 1 ?4 NO 114 114, Yes

Healthsouth Rehab. 4950 Wilson Lane Profit I No

Newville Thornwald Home 442 Walnut Bottom Rd. Non-Profit 83 No 83 83 No Carlisle

I

I s ANTlSERV1CF.S

Cumberland County residents are offered a variety of recreation options, from publicly-owned I lands (State, County and municipal) to private facilities. I Federal Facilities The Appalachian National Scenic Trail is a National Park Service site that extends from Maine to Georgia, over 2,100 miles. The Trail was proposed in 1921 by Benton MacKaye and established in I 1932 to provide a footway linkage between the scenic high ridges of the eastern seaboard. The Trail offers a diversity of topography and a variety of vegetation and animal life. In an effort to create a more natural setting, the Trail was recently rerouted in Cumberland County. As it currently exists, the I Appalachian Trail passes through the following municipalities: Middlesex, Silver Spring, Monroe, South Middleton, Dickinson, Cooke, South Newton, and Southampton Townships.

I State Facilities

Within Cumberland County the state of Pennsylvania owns, operates, and maintains State Parks, I State Forest lands, State Game lands, and Fish and Boat Commission lakes. Information regarding the state facilities was obtained from €?e1msylvanla1991-1997,.7

1 Three State Parks are located in Cumberland County: Colonel Denning, Pine Grove Furnace, and Kings Gap. The Bureau of State Parks of the Department of Conservation and Natural Resources (DCNR) is the agency responsible for the operation, maintenance, and preservation of the State Park I system. 1 Colonel Denning State Park - A 273 acre park located in northern Cumberland County is developed around the 3.5 acre Doubling Gap Lake. Recreational activities include swimming, fishing, environmental education, hiking, family camping, hunting, cross- I country skiing, ice skating, sledding, and tobogganing. Pine Grove Furnace State Park - Located in southern Cumberland County, the 696 acre I park is developed around the 25 acre Laurel Lake and the 1.7 acre Fuller Lake. Recreational opportunities are family camping, organized group tenting, swimming, picnicking, boating, fishing, environmental education, hunting, bicycling, hiking, ice I skating, ice fishing, cross-country skiing, and snowmobiling. Kings Gap Environmental Education Center - A 1,439 acre park located in southcentral I Cumberland County. In addition to an environmental education and training center, Kings Gap offers a variety of hiking trails.

I Portions of two State Forests are located in the County, the Michaux State Forest and the Tuscarora State Forest. The Bureau of Forestry of DCNR manages these lands.

I Michaux State Forest - The 84,633 acre Michaux State Forest is located in three counties, Adams, Franklin, and southwest Cumberland. The Michaux Forest District has the 1 following recreational facilities: 65 miles of designated hiking trails, 4 miles of cross- 9-23 I I

country ski trails, picnicking, and 113 miles of snowmobile trails. I Tuscarora State Forest - The 91,026 acre forest di:jtrict is located in northwestern Cumberland County, in addition to Perry, Franklin, Huntingdon, Juniata, and Mifflin I Counties. Recreation facilities include 49 miles of designated hiking trails, a picnic area, ‘ 116 miles of snowmobile trails., 12 miles of cross-country ski trails, a Wild Area, and 3 Natural Areas. I

The State Game Lands are managed by the Pennsylvania Game Commission. The Game Commission maintains acreage throughout the state for wildlife management, public hunting, trapping, I hiking, and other recreational activities. Cumberland County has four State Game Lands: State Game Land 169 located in Upper Mifflin Township north of the Conocloguinet Creek, State Game Land 170 located in northern Hampden and Silver Spring Townships, and State Game Land 230 in North I Middleton Township, and State Game Land 305 located in South Middleton Township.

The Pennsylvania Fish and Boat Commission owns and maintains Opossum Lake located in I Lower Frankford Township. This 59 acre lake, situated on a 215 acre tract, provides fishing and boating opportunities for residents. The Fish and Boat Commission’s recent acquisition of the 2 acre Children’s Lake in Boiling Springs, South Middleton Tciwnship provides similar recreation opportunities. I County Facilities D- Cumberland County is associated witlh two recreation facilities. The Cumberland County Biker- Hiker Trail, a 5 mile trail designated for non-motorized recreational use, is located in Cooke and Dickinson Townships. The trail extends from Pine Grove Furnace State Park at Fuller Lake to Mountain I Creek Campground. Located adjacent to the trail are swimming.,camping, picnickmg, and fishing areas (Pine Grove Furnace State Park). I In addition, the County also owns the Holly Gap Preserve, an exceptional value wetland area along South Mountain. This unique site, located in the Borough of Mt. Holly Springs and South Middleton and Dickinson Townships, provides habitat for two endangered species - the Bog Turtle and I Glade Spurge. I Municipal Facilities In addition to those facilities noted above, a substantial number of local public facilities are I provided throughout the County. Table 9-10 lists these facilities by municipality . 20 of the 33 municipalities in the County have municipal r,ecreation facilities. These facilities encompass a total of 1,491 acres of land (developed and undeveloped). Hampden Township owns the most recreation land in I the County with 226 acres. Carlisle Borough and Hampden Township have more recreation facilities than any of the other municipalities. The 13 inunicipalities which do not have municipal recreation facilities are located in the western and northern (rural) portions ‘ofthe County. I Local recreation boards serve 17 of the 33 municipalitiec; in the County. Professional recreation staffs are employed by Carlisle Borough, South Middleton Township, Hampden Township, h/[iddlesex, I and Silver Spring Township and by 3 joint boards; Mechanicsburg Area Recreation Commission, Shippensburg Recreation and Parks Department, and the West Shore Leisure Services Board. I 9-24 I Table 9-10

MUNICIPAL RECREATION FACILITIES

2.;;.

~ ~ CAMP HILL BOROUGH

Chnstian LSeibert 1x 60 Memorial Spring LakeBeverly Park 2 2

Willow Park 3 2 Fiala Field 4x 40 CARLISLE BOROUGH

Biddle Mission Park 5 5

Butcher Tot-Lot 6 1 Cave Hill Nature Center 7 20

Community Center 8 --

~~ Goodyear Park 9 IX 5 HerberligPalrner Tot-Lot 2

~ - Community Pool 3

Letort Park 11 Linder Park 2 Memorial Park -14 2 Shaffer Park 15 30 Spahr Tot-Lot -16 1 Thornwald Park 17 32 Valley Meadow Park -18 18 Wenger Park 19 x1

9-25 I

Table 9-10 I MUNICIPAL RECREATION FACIILITIES 1 I I

EAST PENNSBORO I

Adam-Ricci Community I Acri Meadow Park a Ridley Park I Oyster Mill Park I

Laurel Hills Place Park HAMPDEN I TOWNSHIP Armitage Golf Course I Hampden Twp ParWPool Salem Community Park I Westover Creek Area Westover Commons I Conodoguinet Youth Park Creekview Recreation I LEMOYNE BOROUGH 1 Memorial Park I Maple Street I Ft.Couch ~ ~~ I Schell Park

9-26 I Table 9-10

MUNICIPAL RECREATION FACILITIES I 2- 3E 73% 1 5; e I 54 I LOWER ALLEN TWP I 1 Allendale Park 40 1 Creekwood Park 41 x 12

1 ' Highland Estates 42 1 Playground I Highland Park 43 2 Lower Allen Communitv 44 110

I ParkPeters Field 45 3

II WassPark ~~ I 10 Windsor Park x1 Yellow Breeches Park X 14

2

MECHANICSBURG IBORO. I ,1Northside Recreation Pond 1 t: 3 Koser Park 10 - I I Memorial Park 46

Northside Park 2

Monroe Township Park 30 MT HOLLY SPRINGS 1 BOROUGH Butler Street Park 55 11 I Easy Street Park 56 1 Trine Park 57 25 I

Talble 9-10 I MUNICIPAL RECREATION FACILITIES 1 I 1 I

Drexel Hills Park 58 I New Cumberland Borough 59 Park Twelfth Street Ballfields 60 I Sherwood Park I BOROUGH Newville Playground 1 Newville Area Community Center I NORTH MIDDLETON I TOWNSHIP I Creekview Park I North Middleton Park 65 X Village Park 66 X I SHIPPENSBURG BOROUGH 1 Dykeman Road Park 67 Veterans Memorial Park 68 I Shippensburg Community 69 Center SHIPPENSBURG TWP 1 ShippensburgTownship 70 Community Park I 1 9-28 I

~ - I

I Table 9-10 I MUNICIPAL RECREATION FACILITIES I 2 n e ul 0 E 3 6) 2 W 1 h% cd 8's 3 I I _- I --

22 I x 18 12 I 7 14 I X 103 X 2 I X 15

40

6

10 x 90

X 20

2

9-29 I Table 9-10 I MUNICIPAL RECREATION FACIIJTIES I I 1

UPPER ALLEN TWP I (CONT.) Mt. Allen Park I Grantham Park I Center Square Miller Crest 1 Spring Run Market Street I WEST PENNSBORO TWP West Pennsboro Township I Park WORMLEYSBURG BOROUGH I Leighton Nature Preserve I Municipal Playground 1 I Rupley Park I Source: Tri - County Planning Commission, Municipal Recreation Facilities Survey, November 1996 I I I

9-30 I I

I Other Facilities

Other public, semi-public, and private recreation facilities include recreation areas associated with I schools, churches, and other institutions; private health clubs and swimming pools, country clubs, golf clubs and an increasing number of private enterprises. The recreation facilities associated with 1 education facilities were discussed earlier.

Sources: l?ennsflvm.Y s ReczahLHm: 1991 - 1997, Pennsylvania Departments of Environmental I Resources and Community Affairs SvlV- .7 1991-1997 &gmmlAgqzax&x, Pennsylvania I Departments of Environmental Resources and Community Affairs I I I I I I I I I I I I I 9-3 1 I I I I I

- DAUPHIN I I

ORMLEYSBURG I I I I

BERLAND COUNTY 1 PUBLIC: RECREATION FACILITIES SITES I

UIUNKIPM PARKS I APPALACHIANTRAIL STATE ILECIWTK)N LANDS I 7YORKCOUNTY I I I I - I 1 i I I I I I I I I INSERT B RT.34 I MUNKIPM PARD ' APPALACHIAN TRAlL :. B STATE RECREATION MDS :* :m I :' 1. INDIAN HILLS PARK .I I I I I I I I

P I Police protection, fire and emergency medical services (EMS) are provided by many local municipalities. Within the boundaries of Cumberland County there are sixty-nine (69) emergency I service providers. Emergency response is coordinated through the Cumberland County Office of Emergency Preparedness in Carlisle, and can be reached through the 91 1 emergency response number. I Police Protection

Fifteen (1 5) of the thirty-three (33) municipalities have individual police departments. In I addition, four (4) municipalities participate in two regional police organizations; the boroughs of Lemoyne and Wormleysburg comprising the West Shore Regional Police Department and the Mid- Cumberland Valley Regional Police Department which is made up of Shippensburg Borough and I Shippensburg Township. A total of 219 officers and 37 community service officers are employed by the 16 departments. Municipalities not having an individual police department or participating in a regional department are provided police protection services through the Pennsylvania State Police. Table 9-1 1 I lists the police departments.

Fire Service I

According to the Cumberland County Office of Emergency Preparedness, all municipalities are provided fire service either own municipal department of through mutual aid agreements with I neighboring communities. A total of thirty-seven (37) municipal fire companies are located through out the county. In addition, non-municipal fire companies are located at the Navy Inventory Control Point in Hampden Township and at the Carlisle Bamacks in the borough of Carlisle and North Middleton I Township. Table 9-12 lists the various fire cornpanies in the county.

Emergency Medical Services I

County residents are provided ambulance and emergency medic:al services by fifteen (1 5) emergency medical service (EMS) providers listed on Table 9-13. These EMS' serve the entire County either I through direct services or by way of mutual aid agreements with atdjacent communities.

These providers include an EMS station located at the Carlisle Barracks as well as Basic Life: Support I (BLS) and Advanced Life Support (ALS)services associated with[ Cumberland Ambulance Seivice, the Chambersburg ALS (with a -location in Southarnpton Township), ;and the West Shore EMS/ALS (with I four locations). The Life Lion's two helicopter ships, stationed at the Milton S. Hershey Medical Center, are available when needed. 1 I I I 9-32 I 1 i

1 comm. comrn. Officers - CEfhfS fhl!amm Camp Hill Borough Police 11 Newville Borough Police 8 I 2201 Market Street West Street Camp Hill 17011 Newville 17241

Carlisle Borough Police 30 North Middleton Township Police 8 I 53 West South Street 21 1 North Middleton Road Carlisle 17013 Carlisle 17013

East Pennsboro Twp Police 18 Mid-Cumberland Valley Regional Police 16 4 1 98 S. Enola Drive P.O. Box 26 Enola 17025 Shippensburg 17257

Hampden Twp Police 19 3 ShiremanstownBorough Police . 6 I 230 South Sporting Hill Road 1 Park Lane Mechanicsburg 17055 Shiremanstown 1701 1

West Shore Regional Police 14 2 Silver Spring Township Police 12 I 301 Market Street 6475 Carlisle Pike Lemoyne 17043 Mechanicsburg 17055

Lower Allen Township Police 18 23 Upper Allen Township Police 14 I 1993 Hummel Avenue 100 Gettysburg Pike Lemoyne 17043 Mechanicsburg 17055 I Mechanicsburg Borough Police 14 5 102 West Allen Street Mechanicsburg 17055 I Middlesex Township Police 14 350 N. Middlesex Road, Suite #3 Carlisle 17013 I Mt Holly Springs Borough Police 6 200 Harman Street Mt Holly Springs 17065 I New Cumberland Borough Police 8 1120 Market Street I New Cumberland 17070 Source: Cumberland County Office of Emergency Preparedness, 1997 Listing I 1 I 1 I 9-33 I

-c(-- -c(-- I CAMP HIIJ, FIRE nEP- 1 Camp Hill Fire Dept. P.O. Box 633 I Camp Hill 170 11

Carlisle Barracks Fire Co. Cumberland-Goodwill Fire & Rescue Carlisle Barracks, Bldg 400 1102 West Ridge Street Carlisle 170 13 Carlisle 17.013

Empire Hook & Ladder Co. Friendship Fire Coimpany 177 Spring Rd 11 77 Spring Road Carlisle 170 13 Carlisle 17013 I Union Fire Company

35 W. Louther Street ’ Carlisle 17013 I I Citizens Fire Company # 1 Crec=side Fire Company 226 North Enola Drive 13 East Dulles Drive Enola 17025 Camp Hill 1701 1 I

Midway Fire Company Summerdale Fire Company 17 East Manor Avenue 202 Third Street I Enola 17025 Summerdale 17093

West Enola Fire Company I 118 Chester Road Enola 17025 I

Hampden Twp. Volunteer Fire Co. I P.O. Box 1249 Mechanicsburg 17055 I OYNE FIRE DEPARTMENT

Citizens Fire Company I 326 Herman Avenue Lemoyne 17043 I 9-34 I

I LOWER 8LT,EN FIRE nF.pAKTMEXE Lisburn Community Fire Company Lower Allen Fire Co. No. 1 1800 Main St-R.D.#3-Lisburn 1993 Hummel Avenue I Mechanicsburg 17055 Camp Hill 17011

B MT. H-GS EIRE D- Citizens Fire Co. No. 1 100 Chestnut Street Mt. Holly Springs 17065

I G FIREDE-

Citizens Fire & Rescue Co. # 2 Navy Inventory Control Point 1 208 South York Street Fire Division Mechanicsburg 17055 Code 894, Box 2020 Mechanicsburg 17055 I Washington Fire Company 53 East Main Street I Mechanicsburg 17055 DE-

Shermansdale Fire Company 5450 Spring Road I Shemansdale 17090 I Monroe Fire Company P.O. Box 1058-1225 Peffer Road Mechanicsburg 17055 1 w CUMBERLAND' nEP- New Cumberland Fire Dept. New Cumberland River Rescue 3 19 Fourth Street P.O. Box 445 I New Cumberland 17070 New Cumberland 17070 I Newburg-Hopewell Vol. Fire Co. P.O. Box 5 I Newburg 17240 1 9-35 TT .l .E FIRE I

Friendship Hose Company 15 East Big Spring Avenue I Newville 1724 1

I i TnnT ,ETON FTRE DEPqBTMEKll

North Middleton Twp. Vol. Fire Co. 3 10 North Middleton Road Carlisle 170 13

Perm Twp. Vol. Fire Dept. 1750 Pine Road Newville 17241

ENTS

Cumberland Valley Hose Co. Vigilant Hose Company 56 West King Street 129 East King Stre:et Shippensburg 17257 Shippensburg 17257

West End Fire & Rescue 49 Lurgan Avenue Shippensburg 17257

Shiremanstown Fire Company 3 West Main Street Shiremanstown 1701 1

New Kingstown Fire Company Silver Spring Fire Company P.O. BOX427-Locust Pt. Rd. 6471 Carlisle Pike New Kingstown 17072 Mechanicsburg 17055

SOT JTHMJnnT XTON TWP. FIRE-

South Middleton Twp. Fire Company P.O. Box 93,405 Forge Road Boiling Springs 17007

9-36 I

1 T.E 9-- I South Newton Twp. Vol. Fire Company P.O. Box 49, 16 Firehouse Road e Walnut Bottom 17266 I Upper Allen Twp. Fire Co. 104 Gettysburg Pike 1 Mechanicsburg 17055 I Upper Frankford Twp. Fire Company 4080 Enola Road 1 Newville 17241 1 TWF'. EIRE DF,P,MUBEKC Goodwill Fire Co. #1 400 Third Street I West Fairview 17025 1 West Pennsboro Vol. Fire Co. 200 Park Road 1 Plainfield 17081 1 Wonnleysburg Fire Co. #1 1 18 Market Street Wonnleysburg 17043 I Source: Cumberland County Office of Emergency Preparedness, 1997 Listing. I I I 1 9-37 Camp Hill Amb. Assoc. Carlisle Army Barracks Box 633,22nd & Walnut Sts. Dunham Army Health Clinic Camp Hill 17011 Carlisle 17013

Carlisle Community Amb. Yellow Breeches Ambulance 102 West Ridge Street P.O. Box 106 Carlisle 170 13 hllt. Holly Springs 17065

Hampden Twp. Ambulance Cumberland Ambulance Service 230 South Sporting Hill Road Trindle Road Mechanicsburg 17055 Carlisle 17013

Lower Allen Amb. Assoc. Metropolitan Medical 2238 Gettysburg Road 214 Front St. Camp Hill 1701 1 New Cumberland 17070

New Cumberland Amb. Assoc. Shippensburg Amb. Assoc. 3 19 Fourth Street 56 West King Street New Cumberland 17070 Shippensburg 17257

Silver Spring Ambulance Newville Community Ambulance P.O. Box 177 15 E. Big Spring Avenue Mechanicsburg 17055 Newville 17241

East Pennsboro Amb. Service 93 S. Enola Drive, P.O. Box 47 Enola 17025

Chambersburg Adv. Life Support West Shore Advanced Life 845 Lincoln Way East support, Inc. Chambersburg, 1720 1 503 N. 2lStStreet Camp Hill 17011

Source: Cumberland County Office of Emergency Preparedness, 1997 Listing. Eric Hoerner, Operations Coordinator, Cumberland Co. Office of Emergency Preparedness

9-3 8 Twenty-five (25) municipalities in Cumberland County are serviced by public sewers. The sewage collected in these municipalities is treated in one of sixteen (1 6)public sewage treatment facilities located throughout the County. Table 9-14, Inventory of Municipal Wastewater Treatment Facilities, describes the permitted capacities, the 1993 average daily flows, the historical 5 year average daily flow, the projected 1998 average daily flow, treatment type, receiving stream, planned upgrades and/or alterations, whether the facility receives septage, and the municipalities served by the facility. All of the facilities are expected to be within their permitted capacities by 1998 with the exception of Shippensburg Borough.

The sixteen (16) public sewage treatment facilities serve an estimated 141,000 residents of the County plus several institutions which include: the State Correctional Institution at White Hill (Lower Allen Township), Holy Spirit Hospital (East Pennsboro Township), Central Pennsylvania Business College (East Pennsboro Township), and Messiah College (Upper Allen Township).

The remaining eight (8) municipalities including; Cooke, Lower Frankford, Lower Mifflin, Penn, I South Newton, Upper Frankford, and Upper Mifflin Townships utilize private on lot sewage disposal systems exclusively.

9-39 INVENTORY OF MUNICIPAL WASTEWATER TREATMENT FACILITIES

Permitted 1993 Avg. History Projected Wastewater Treatment Treatment Daily c5-Yr. 1998 Treatment Receiving Planned Upgrades andlor Receives Municipalities Served Facility facility Flow A.D.F. A.D.F. Type Stream Alterations Septage I (rngd) (mgd) (rngd) (mgd) I Carlisle Region 7 4.05 3.43 5.1 Teritary Conodoguinet New wastewater services No Carlisle Boro. N.Middleton Twp. Creek building, sludge cake S.Middleton Twp. storage pad Middlesex Twp. & Silver Spring Twp. Carlisle Suburban Authority 0.925 0.762 0.696 0.76 Conodoguinet Constructing reed beds Yes N.Middleton Twp. Creek Hampden Twp-Pinebrook 1.76 1.45 1.28 1.34 Secondary Conodoguinet None No Hampden Twp. & E.Pennsboro Twp. Creek Hampden Twp-Roth Lane 4.65 2.25 1.9 2.66 Secondary Conodoguinet Electrical system upgrade No Harnpden Twp & Silver Spring Twp. Creek East Pennsboro Township 3.7 2.682 2.366 2.753 Secondary Conodoguinet Planning to upgrade sludge No E.Pennsboro Twp, Hampden Twp, Creek dewatering to BFP W.Fairview Boro & Wormleysburg Boro Lernoyne Borough 2.088 1.677 1.564 1.555 Secondary Susquehanna None Yes Lemoyne Boro. Camp Hill Boro & River Wormleysburg Boro ,Lower Allen Township 3.821 Secondary Susquehanna No Lower Allen Twp, U.Allen Twp, I 5.95 I 3.738 I 3.27 I I I River lNone Fairview Twp (York Co.), Shire- IIiiians:own Bore & Hsmpden Twp. Mechanicsbu rg Borough 2.08 1.29 1.01 1.14 Secondary Conodoguinet Construction of new aerated No Mechanicsburg Boro. Silver Spring Creek grit chamber Twp, Harnpden Twp, & Upper Allen Twp. Mount Holly Springs Borough 0.6 0.541 0.456 0.497 Secondary Mountain None No Mount Holly Springs Boro & Creek S. Middleton Twp. New Ciiiiibe;land Bwaur;h I 1.25 I 0.736 I 0.718 I 0.824 I Secondary I-Susquehanna Upgrade headworks and No New Cumberland Boro Klver I Giiiaiifie CGR!GC! tank !I Newville Borough 0.35 0.179 0.136 0.23 Secondary Big Spring None No Newville Boro, W.Pennsboro Twp. Creek & N. Newton Twp. Shippensburg Borough 2.75 2.9 2.07 3 Secondary Middle Spring None Yes Shippensburg Boro, Southampton Creek Twp. & Shippensburg Twp. Silver Spring Township 0.6 0.068 0.055 0.104 Secondary Conodoguinet None Yes Silver Spring Twp. Creek South Middleton Township 0.75 0.503 0.422 0.642 Tertiary Yellow Breeches Recently upgraded facility No S. Middleton Twp. & Monroe Twp. Creek to a design flow of 1.5 mgd Upper Allen Township-Granthar 1.I 0.457 0.401 0.657 Secondary Yellow Breeches None Yes Upper Allen Twp. Creek (U.Allen only)

Newburg BorolHopewell Twp. 0.055 0.026 0.02 0.05 Secondary Newburg Run None NO Newbulg BGiO 8 !-!CpS?.rl.!! Twn..r Creek

SOURCE: Cumberland County Sewerage Plan .I 995, Tri-County Regional Planning Commission

- I

1 SOT .IT) WASTE MANAGEMENT SERVICES

The Municipal Waste Planning, Recycling, and Waste Reduction Act, Act 101, delegates to counties 1 the power and duty to prepare and implement plans for the processing and disposal of municipal waste generated in the County. The responsibility and authority for the collection and transportation of . municipal waste and of source-separated recyclables is delegated to local municipalities. To implement I the plans, the Act accords to counties the authority to adopt ordinances and regulations that direct the flow of waste to designated processing and disposal sites. The Act specifically allows counties to delegate their power and duty for municipal waste planning and implementation to another body, such as I a municipal authority.

Act 10 1 calls for Pennsylvania counties to develop comprehensive, integrated waste management 8 plans. That is, a solid waste plan should propose the optimal complementary use of a variety of management technologies, including waste reduction, recycling, waste processing, landfill, and waste- 1 to-energy. Description of Waste

1 According to quantities reported by PADEP-permitted processing and disposal facilities, Cumberland County residents and establishments disposed of 186,61 1.1 tons (652.5 tons per day) of municipal solid waste, including construction and demolition waste per year. It is also estimated that 42,932 tons of I material were recycled in the County during the same period. Using the total of these two quantity estimates, and an estimated 1995 population, it has been calculated that the waste generation rate in Cumberland County is 1.1329 tons per person per year. This generation rate includes source-separated I recyclable materials and construction and demolition waste, and excludes sewage sludge and infectious and chemotherapeutic waste. It is estimated that municipal wastewater treatment plants in the County generate 7,639 tons per year of sewage sludge and that septage haulers dispose of approximately 6.9 I million gallons of septage annually. B Existing Waste Management System Waste collection and hauling in Cumberland County is handled exclusively by private hauling firms in 1 all municipalities except Shippensburg Borough, which provides municipal collection. Within 17 of 33 municipalities residents are responsible for arranging waste collection services with a County licensed waste hauler. However, these 17 municipalities account for less than 40 percent of the County’s 1 estimated population. 16 municipalities (that account for 60 percent of the population) contract with a hauler to provide collection to their residents. 18 of the 34 municipalities in the County have solid waste I ordinances governing municipal collection. According to 1995 operating reports filed with the PADEP municipal solid waste, including construction and demolition waste, from Cumberland County was disposed primarily at the following I disposal sites: Modem landfill, Cumberland County Landfill, Community Refuse, Ltd., Mountain View Landfill, and R&A Bender Landfill. In addition, minor volumes of municipal solid waste were disposed at Grand Central Sanitary Landfill, Inc., Pine Grove Landfill, York County Resource Recovery Center, I and the Harrisburg Materials Energy Recycling and Recovery Facility. Table 9-15 provides the estimated remaining life of these facilities and additional capacity with planned expansions. 1

1 9-4 1 TABLE 9-1 5 CAPACITY ESTIMATES FOR CUMBERLAND COUNTY CONTRACTED MUNICIPAL WASTE PROCESSING AND DISPOSAL FACILITIES (1996)

Planned Expansions (I) Expected ( uantities

Tons Per Tons Pel Capacity (Years) FaciI i ty Materials (2) Year Day (3) I Modern Landfill MSW, Residual Ash, 1,487,000 5,200 15 I 4,667 6.5 Asbestos, C&D, Sludge I

Cumberland County Landfill MSW, C&D, Sludge 90,000 31 5 31 650 10-15 Residual I u) I Mountain View Reclamation MSW, Residual I&C, 26,200 916 12 I 1,500 8 lb t3 Ash, C&D, Sludge

R&A Bender Landfill MSW, Residual 145,000 507 32 Asbestos, C&D

Dauphin Ivieadows, inclanafiii MS-W, Residual 180,000 629 15-30 Asbestos, Sludge

(1) "Current site" means the disposal area included in the permit modification application, including expansions. "Planned Expansions" means additional expansions. (2) MSW: Municipal Solid Waste other than special handling wastes; C&D: Construction and Demolition Waste. I and C: Infectious and chemotherapeutic waste. (3) All tons per day estimates are calculated for a 5.5 day week. SOURCE: Cumberland County Municipal Waste Management Plan, 1997 The Diller Transfer Station is the only transfer station in Cumberland County. Located north of Wertzeville Road in Hampden Township, the station serves predominantly Cumberland and Dauphin County waste haulers and residents. The Cumberland County Landfill, owned and operated by Community Refuse, Inc., is the only municipal waste landfill in the County.

Almost all publicly owned wastewater treatment plants in Cumberland County dispose of some or all of their sludge by land application. The few exceptions are Lemoyne and New Cumberland Boroughs, and South Middleton and Silver Spring Townships. Some facilities reported having sludge disposal problems, all of them associated with land application.

Disposal Capacity Needs

It is estimated that, for the next ten years, the County will require disposal capacity for 1,572,614 tons of municipal waste. The County is in the process of securing a disposal agreement with each of the following disposal facilities. A Request for Proposals for Waste Disposal Services was conducted to ensure adequate disposal capacity for County generated waste for a 10 year period (as required by Act 101):

R&A Bender, Inc. Landfill, Franklin County, Penna.

BFI-Conestoga Landfill, New Morgan Landfill Company, Berks County, Penna.

Cumberland County Landfill, Community Refuse Service, Inc., Cumberland County, Penna.

Dauphin Meadows Inc. Landfill, Dauphin County, Penna.

Greenridge Reclamation Landfill, Waste Management Disposal Service of PA, Inc., Westmoreland County, Penna.

The Harrisburg Materials Energy Recycling and Recovery Facility, The Harrisburg Authority, City of Harrisburg, Penna.

Modem Landfill and Recycling, Modem Trash Removal of York, Inc., York County, Penna.

Mountain View Reclamation Landfill, Community Refuse Limited, Franklin County, Penna.

Phoenix Resources, Inc. Construction and Demolition Facility, Phoenix Resources, Inc., Tioga County, Penna.

Pine Grove Landfill, Pine Grove Landfill, Inc., Schuykill County, Penna.

York County Resource Recovery Center, York County Solid Waste and Refuse Authority, York County, Penna.

9-43 Recycling

The 11 municipalities that were required under Act 101 to implement curbside recycling programs are: Carlisle Borough, Camp Hill Borough, East Pennsboro Township, Hampden Township, Lower Allen Township, Mechanicsburg Borough, New Cumberkind Borough, North Middleton - Township, Shippensburg Borough, South Middleton Township, and Upper Allen Township. Voluntary curbside recycling programs in the County include Lemoyne Borough, Shiremanstown Borough, Silver Spring Township, Wonnleysburg Borough, and Mt Holly Springis Borough.

The recycling strategy proposed for the County consists of a mix of municipal and County led programs and activities. The County will continue its current role of offering guidance to municipalities, businesses, and institutional establishments. Both the County and the municipalities have roles in public education. The County provides guidance and example materials that can be used directly throughout the County or adapted to particular municipal needs. It is estimated that current recycling efforts divert as much as 25 percent of the County's waste stream from landfills.

The County operates a yard waste composting system as a partnership between the County and participating municipalities. The County currently provides and maintains yard waste processing equipment that is used at a number of sites throughout the County. The program processes leaves, grass clippings, and brush.

Administration

Overall responsibility for implementing the County municipal waste management plan is the responsibility of the Cumberland County Solid Waste Authority. The day to day activities of the solid waste system are carried out by the County Solid Waste Department.

The County solid waste management system is funded by an administrative fee placed on each ton of municipal solid waste received from Cumberland County by each of the contracted disposal facilities. Sludge generators pay for the disposal of their sludge as required by agreement between the contractor and disposal site owner and are not subjected to the County administrative fee. Fees are set to include funds to cover costs of administering the overall system.

9-44 Community water services are provided throughout the County by thirty-six community water systems. These systems are owned by various entities including authorities, investors, water associations, and the federal , state and municipal governments. Of these water systems nineteen (19) small systems service mobile home parks (Table 9-1 6). These systems are self-contained and allow for minimal expansion to surrounding areas. A total of 3 192 people are served by these facilities.

The larger municipaVcommunity systems are described on Table 9-17, Community Water Systems. With the exception of the State Correctional Institution at White Hill, The providers all include the servicing of residential areas. As indicated on the Table, community water systems, not exclusively serving mobile home parks, provide water to 168,775 persons. The largest populations served are those using services from the Penn American Water Company West (74,s 16 persons served), Carlisle Water Treatment Plant (2 1,500 persons), United Water Mechanicsburg (2 1, 1 13 persons), and Shippensburg Borough Water (13,500 persons). These four (4) providers represent seventy-eight (78) percent of the total persons served. The sources for these systems are primarily surface water sources (i.e. Yellow Breeches Creek, Conodoguinet Creek, Furnace Run, Whiskey Run, and Trout Run). The majority of the small systems are dependent on ground water sources (wells).

9-45 TABLE 9-16 COMMUNITY WATER SYSTEMS - CUMBERLAND COUNTY ASSOCIATED WITH MOBILE HOME PARKS

SYSTEM NAME MAIL STREET MAIL CITY POPULATlO N PRIMARY OWNER

SERVED SOURCE TYPE

,BETTY NELSON MHP 16 BETTY NELSON CT. LOT 8 CARLISLE 400 GROUND INV EST0 R

BIG SPRING TERRACE MAP 7048 CARLISLE PIKE CARLISLE 388 GROUND INVESTOR

BOLLINGER'S MOBILE HOME PARK 338 MCALLISTER CHURCH RD CAR LISLE 30 GROUND INVESTOR

BONNYBROOK MOBILE HOME PARK 177 CENTERVILLE RD NEWVILLE 75 GROUND INVESTOR

BURKHOLDERS MOBILE HOME PARK 570 SHED RD NEWVILLE 195 GROUND INVESTOR

CEKOVICH MOBILE HOME PARK 12 MILLER'S GAP RD ENOLA 100 GROUND INVESTOR

C 0N 0 DOGU I N ET M 0BILE ESTATES P.O. BOX 175 R.D.4 NEWVILLE 270 GROUND INVEST0R

COOPER'S MOBILE HOME PARK 1400 NEWVILLE RD CARLIS LE 26 GROUND INVESTOR COUNTRY VIEW ESTATES P.O.BOX 175 R.D.4 N EWVILLE 60 GROUND INVESTOR HARMONY ESTATES MHP P.O.BOX 62 LEMOYNE 80 GROUND INVESTOR HILLSIDE MOBILE HOME PARK 338 MCALLISTER CH RD. CARLISLE 54 GROUND INVESTOR

MOUNTAIN VIEW TRAILER PARK 15 S. HANOVER ST-MLLY PTCHR HTL CARLISLE 30 GROUND INVESTOR

MT VIEW TERRACE MHP 250 BEETEM HOLLOW RD NEWVILLE 175 pnniunuutvu ihan iNVESTOi3

REGENCY WOODS MHP 7099 CARLISLE PIKE CARLISLE 440 GROUND INVESTOR

ROLO COURT MOBILE HOME PARK 4775 N SHERMAN ST. EXT'D BOX 1 MOUNT WOLF 260 GROUND INVESTOR

SIGMAN'S MOBILE HOME PARK 50 BONNYBROOK RD CARLISLE 89 GROUND INVESTOR

,SOUTHAMPTON MANOR MHP 414 E OLDE YORK RD CARLISLE 125 GROUND INVESTOR

VIEW MOUNTAIN MOBILE HOME PARK 122 WOODS DRIVE MECHANICSBURG 90 GROUND INVESTOR

WILLIAMS GROVE MOBILE PARK 1300 W. LISBURN RD MECHANICSBURG 305 GROUND INVESTOR COMMUNITY WATER SYSTEMS - CUMBERLAND COUNTY

SYSTEM NAME MAIL STREET MAIL CITY POPULATION PRIMARY OWNER

SERVED SOURCE TYPE

CARLISLE SUBURBAN AUTHORITY 240 CLEARWATER DR CAR LISLE 5,850 SURFACE AUTH 0 RlTY

CARLISLE WATER TREATMENT PLANT 53 W. SOUTH ST. CARLISLE 21,500 SURFACE AUTHORITY

CENTER SQUARE WATER CO P.O. BOX 413 MECHANICSBURG 1,575 GROUND INVESTOR

HUCKLEBERRY LAND WATER ASSOC. P.O. BOX 57 SHIPPENSBURG 400 GROUND UNDER SWI WATER ASSOC.

MIDDLESEX TWP.MUNICIPAL AUTH. 259 MIDDLESEX DR. CARLISLE 1,940 PURCHASED GROUND AUTHORITY

MT HOLLY SPRINGS BOROUGH AUTH. 200 HARMON ST. MT HOLLY SPRINGS 3,200 GROUND AUTHORITY

NAVICP, CODE M08151C 5450 CARLISLE PIKE MECHANICSBURG 6,631 PURCHASED SURFACE FEDE RAL

NEWVILLE BOROUGH WATER & SEWER 99 COVE AVE. NEWVILLE 1,850 GROUND UNDER SWI AUTHORITY

PENN AMERICAN WATER CO. WEST 852 WESLEY DR MECHANICSBURG 74,816 SURFACE OTHER

SHIPPENSBURG BORO WATER 60 BURD ST. SHIPPENSBURG 13,500 * SURFACE MUNICIPALITY

SOUTH MIDDLETON TWP WATER AUTH 345 CRISWELL DR., P.O.BOX 8 BOILING SPRINGS 6,600 GROUND AUTHORITY

SOUTHERN CUMBERLAND WATER ASSN 201 STROHM RD. SHIPPENSBURG 300 GROUND WATER ASSOC.

STATE CORRECTIONAL INST. P.O. BOX 8837 CAMP HILL 3,100 SURFACE STATE

US. ARMY GARRISON ATTN: DPW-E CAR LISLE 2,600 GROUND FEDERAL

UNITED WATER (MECHANICSBURG) 421 1 E.PARK CIRCLE BOX 4151 HARRISBURG 21,113 SURFACE INVESTOR

UNITED WATER PA (GRANTHAM) P.O. BOX 628, 317 N. MARKET ST. MECHANICSBURG 3,200 GROUND INVESTOR

WHITE ROCK WATER CORP. 1369 SWOPE DR. BOILING SPRINGS 600 GROUND INVESTOR

9-47 Two studies were completed which identified and evaluated a range. of alternatives to meet present and future water supply needs in Cumberland County. The first study, completed in E;ebruary 1997, was the Shippensburg Area Regionalization Study which evaluated small systems in western Cumberland County and part of Franklin County. The second study reviewed the rest of the small systems in Cumberland County and was completed in 1998.

The goal of the studies is to help small systems optimize their operations while meeting or exceeding the requirements of the Safe Drinking Water Act. The Act defines a small water system as one serving 3,300 people or less.

The following systems were reviewed in the Shippensburg Area Study:

Huckleberry Land and Water Association Lenwood Mobile Home Park* Letterkenny Army Depot* Mt. Rock Homes Mobile Home Park* Orrstown Borough Authority* Pleasant Hall Manor Mobile Home Park* Shippensburg Water Authority Southern Cumberland Water Association Southampton Manor Mobile Hiome Park Wadel’s Mobile Home Park*

*Water Systems in Franklin County

The following systems were reviewed in the second Cumberland County Regionalization Study:

Betty Nelson’s Mobile Home Park Big Spring Terrace Mobile Home Park Bonnybrook Mobile Home Park Carlisle Barracks Conodoguinet Mobile Estates Coopers Mobile Home Park Country View Estates Mobile Home Park Hillside Mobile Home Park Middlesex Twp Municipal Authority Mt. Holly Springs Borough Authority Mountain View Trailer Park Mountain View Terrace Mobile Home Park Naval-Inventory Central Point Newville Borough Water Authority Regency Woods North Mobile Home Parks Sigmans Mobile Home Park State Correctional Institution View Mountain Mobile Home Park White Rock Water Corporation Williams Grove Mobile Home Park

9-48 Major conclusions of the studies noted that surface water may be influencing small system groundwater supplies. All systems, particularly the older mobile home parks, should meet the current guidelines of Pennsylvania’s “Public Water Supply Manual”. The study also notes that although regionalization of certain systems may be the most efficient method of service, in most cases small systems do not have the financial means to regionalize via interconnection. The study provides specific recommendations for each water system and lists state programs to assist small systems in upgrades or regionalization projects.

Cumberland County is provided electric service from three companies; Pennsylvania Power and Light, Metropolitan Edison, and Pennsylvania Electric Company

Pennsylvania Power and Light Company 2 North Ninth Street Allentown, PA 18101

Metropolitan Edison Company PO Box 16001 2800 Pottsville Pike Reading, PA 19640

Pennsylvania Electric Company PO Box 16001 2800 Pottsville Pike Reading, PA 19640

The County is provided natural gas by:

UGI Utilities, Inc. Green Hill Corporate Center 100 Kachel Blvd Suite 400 Reading, PA 19607

South Penn Gas Company 55 South Third Street Oxford, PA 19363

9-49 B I , Telephone services are provided by: 1 AT&T Communications of Pa., Inc. 200 North 3'd Street, 13'h Floor Harrisburg, PA 17101 I

Bell Atlantic-Pa., Inc. 1717 Arch Street, 17" Floor 1 Philadelphia, PA 19103

MCI Telecommunications COT. 1 780 Johnson Ferry Road, Suite 700 Atlanta, GA 30342 I United Telephone Company of Pa. 6860 West 115'h Street Overland Park, KS 6621 1 I

Source: Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission, Utility name and Address System, TJtility Listings by County, October 24, 1997 1 t I 1 1 1 I I 1 I

9-50 1 1 LO?JN-Tl3lRMlXTUD~ES

B Implementation of the Comprehensive Plan is the responsibility of the administrative body of the County government. The purpose I of this section is to describe the composition and function of County government, elected and appointed officials, County authorities, and the planning commission. Existing codes and code I enforcement will be discussed relative to the planning process. The financial structure, an important element for the implementation of a Capital Improvement Program (CIP), will also be 1 summarized. The descriptions provided in this section will establish baseline data to facilitate both plan design and I implementation.

1 Cumberland County is a Fourth Class County. Classification is based on size of population. Fourth Class Counties are counties with a population between 150,000 and 225,000 persons.1 The County I Code of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania (Act of August 9, 1955, as amended) describes the laws pertaining to Third through Eighth Class Counties. Articles IV through XV of the Code describe the I rules and regulations governing the various elected and appointed officials which may be a part of county government. Figure 10-A is an organizational chart of Cumberland County government. The chart 1 shows the various departments and offices and their relationship to each other. I There are twelve elected positions in Cumberland County government. The offices include positions in executive, legislative, and judicial branches of government. For the purpose I of this discussion the executive and legislative branches are pertinent to the planning process. I The Board of County Commissioners are the chief elected officials. The Board is composed of three members, elected to a four-year term. The Commissioners are responsible for hiring and I appointing all County personnel and act as both the executive and legislative arm of the government. The Board meets regularly each week in the Cumberland County Courthouse to conduct official I business.

I I Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, The County Code, Act of August 9, 1955, Article 11, Section 210, Local Government Commission I (Harrisburg: June 1, 1981) p.2.2.

10-1 Cl4YMB-D muNm ELECTED OFFICES, BOARDS,COMMISSIONS, AUTHORITIES AND SERVICE

I I I L I c T

- MKE APPOINTMENTS TO JLuuxmu - WURTS AGlffi ACINGADVISORY BOARD -PRISON YRD AGRICULTURE EXTENSION DIVURCE MER CHILDREN AND YOUTH MSESSMENT AGRICULTURE EXTENSION BIY\RD Comrnlmlomn WHaTIC RELATIOKS COMMUNITY SERVICtS KMRD DF ELECTION3 AGRICULTURAL LAND PRESERYATION BOARD Judge DUIECNTRAL BDOKlHi DRUi AND AUX)ML BUDGET CHILDREN3 SERVICES ADYISRY WRP Eairici Aiior~y uw LIBRARY MENTAL HEALTH/ COMMUNICATIONS CO 6ERVATI 0 N D ISTR ICT sheriff PROBATION MENTAL RETARDATION WNSUMER AFFAIRS DRUG AND ALCOHOL COMMISSION Controller PUBLIC DEFENDER EMERGLNCY PREPAREDNESS MH/HR ADVISORY BOARD SPECIAL COURT ADM. FIRE SERVICES PUNNING COMMlSSlDN SALARY BOARD VICTlM/WITNESS WRWUSMTERIALS RLDfWOPMENT AUTHORITY BOI\RD Commluloner8 OPERATIONS HDUSING AUTHORITY BOARD Controller BUILDIHCS AND GROUNDS SOLID WASTE AUTHORITY SECURITY TRANSPORTATION AUTHORllY REflRCMENT BOARD PERSONNEL HUNlClPAL AUTHORITY Commlulonerr PUNNING :::Dm2!A: C~ELQPEE!!? ALTER!> m !!!E! !a r lAcluEL SJLlD WASTE LIBRARY BOARD Trwurer TRANSFORTATION WURTHDUSE fflgh tnd knowr 918 VOCTOR mNTRO1 Eat Wlrq Anmx VETERAHS' AFFAIRS OLD WURTHOUSE MghStrrl WEIGHT3 AND tlWURES OLD AIL 37 E. fflahSllwl HUtMd SERYICLS BUlLOlffi 16 W. High Street MH/MR CHILDREN AND YOUTH AGRICULTURE MTEHSION BUILDING Clrrcmnt Redd LAW LIBRARY PRISUN Clrrtrmnt Road ,IJHISTORICDRUG AND ASSOCIATION ALWtUL TRI-COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION WURSlffi HOME Cltrrrmnt Drfvo Al3mmmL FIRE ASSOCIATION AGI ffi CAPITAL AREA TRAMIT SOIL CONSERVATION CAPITAL REGION ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION WRRISBURO AREATRANSIT STUDY 1 SUSQUEWNNA EMPLOYMENT AND TRAINING CORPORATION TRI-COUNTY REGIONAL PLANNlHi COMMISSION rrp!?nL 4RE4 ?RmlfT ADVANCED LIFE SUPPORT PROGRAM FOR FEWLE OFFENDERS VICTlflNIITNESS

m m The highest appointed office in County government is the position of Chief Clerk. The Chief Clerk is responsible for the daily operation of County business. Responsibilities may include keeping accurate records of Board meetings and accounts, acting as a liaison between the Board and County departments and other governments, preparing budgets, supervising County elections, and implementing Board decisions.2 As such, the Office of County Clerk plays a vitally important coordinative role in the implementation of the Comprehensive Plan.

Planning activities for the County are provided by the Cumberland County Planning Commission and the Tri-County Regional Planning Commission. Their function is to advise the County Commissioners on planning policies and encourage coordinated land use and transportation planning through recommendations to the municipalities. These recommendations are based on the County's goals and objectives established by the Comprehensive Plan.

The Cumberland County Planning Commission consists of nine members who are appointed by the County Commissioners. The Planning Commission is supported by the planning staff of Tri-County Regional Planning Commission.

The Cumberland County Planning Commission (CCPC) was established in 1964.

The authority and responsibilities of the Cumberland County Planning Commission are set forth in Pennsylvania planning enabling legislation, Act 247, Pennsylvania Municipalities Planning Code (MPC), as amended and reenacted by Act 170 of 1988. The CCPC consists of nine members appointed by the County Board of Commissioners. Each member is appointed to a four year term. All CCPC members must meet County residency requirements. Meetings of the Planning Commission are held in the County Courthouse on the third Thursday of every month at 7:OO p.m.

The primary responsibility of the CCPC is to administer the County Comprehensive Plan and accomplish the goals and objectives outlined in the plan. Also, all subdivision and land development plats proposed in municipalities must be reviewed and reported on by the County Planning Commission. All amendments to municipal

2 League of Women Voters of the Carlisle Area, Cumberland County a Citizens Manual, 4th ed., p.4.

10-3 zoning ordinances and subdivisi.on/land development ordinances are required to be submitted to the County Planning Commission for review. The Commission is also charged with the task of holding public meetings and public hearings when deemed necessary.

In addition to these responsibilities the Board of County Commissioners may request the ClCPC to provide other services specified in the MPC, including but not limited to:

-Preparation of a comprehensive plan -Maintenance of files and records -Preparation of various codes and ordinances (i.e. zoning ordinance, building code, housing code) -Preparation of environmental studies -Preparation of a recommended capital improvements program

Between 1981 and 1991, Cumberland County created and maintained its own planning department which was staffed by a planner and secretary. In 1991 the County entered into an agreement with Tri-County Regional Planning Commission to provide planning services.

The CCPC is currently supported by the staff of Tri County Regional Planning Commission. In addition to routine activities of the Department, the staff prepares reviews on subdivision and land development plat applications, as well as, reviews pertaining to newly proposed local zoning and subdivision ordinances, and amendments thereto, for advisory action by the CCPC. The Commission offers a Local Planning Assistance Program, with staff attending the local planning commission meeti.ngs, thereby providing direct planning consultant services. Twenty-one municipalities in Cumberland County participated in the program during 1998.

Tri - CIoUvReslonal Plannim~mmision

The Tri-County Regional Flanning Commission represents the region comprised of Dauphin, Perry, and Cumherland counties. Its role is to serve as an advisory agency to the three counties, as well as, providing staff for all county planning commissi~on functions. The Regional Planning Cornmission does not assume any powers or functions of the planning commissions of the participating counties. One of TCRPC's prima.ry responsibilities is the coordination of County transportation planning. The Harrisburg Area Transportation Study (HATS) was initiated in 1965. It ia a continuing planning process for the purpose of establishing a transportation system which will adequately serve the future needs of the Harrisburg Urbanized Area. The HATS Planning Work Program addresses the following major issues:

:LO-4 -Critical bridges -Unresolved highway projects -Railroad branchline abandonments -Community conservation/economic development -Mass transit planning assistance -Energy conservation, congestion reduction, and safety (ECONS)

The TCRPC serves as the HATS lead agency.

In addition to the HATS program, Tri-County provides regional support services which include a Regional Annual Report, quarterly newsletters, areawide clearinghouse activities, and special studies. TRCPC also functions as an affiliate data center of census information for the PA State Data Center.

The Tri-County Regional Planning Commission has a membership of thirty-one voting members representing local planning organ- izations, municipal officials, and county planning commissions. Members are appointed by each County's Board of Commissioners for a two-year term. The TCRPC meets approximately four times yearly. The Commission Executive Committee, comprised of the Chairman, Vice- Chairman, Secretary, and Treasurer, meets those months the full Commission does not meet.

The Tri-County Regional Planning Commission staff consists of an Executive Director, Associate Executive Director, ten (10) planners, and four (4) technical and clerical staff. The staff is responsible for the daily activities of the Commission and professional planning services.

In addition to elected and appointed officials and the planning commission, four authorities function as entities of County government: the Redevelopment Authority, Housing Authority, Transportation Authority, Solid Waste Authority, Municipal Authority, and the Industrial Development Authority.

The Cumberland County Redevelopment Authority was established in 1956. Although the Redevelopment Authority has responsibilities to the County and its municipalities, it is primarily funded through state and federal grants. Most of the Authority's activities in subsequent years to the early 1980's were concentrated on funding projects (e.g. Downtown Improvement Project

10-5 and Housing Rehabilitation Programs) for the County Seat, Car1is:le. Since then, the Authority has become actively involved in supporting and administering redevelopment pro] ects .Eor municipalities throughout the County. In 1998, the Authority administered a variety of community programs throughout the county. These activities include building rehabilitation for rental and owner occupied housing, commercial facade rehabilitation projects, and public facilities improvements through Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funds. The Redevelopment Authority is a:lso involved with the Lease-Purchase Homeownership Program. In the program properties are purchased, rehabilitated, and leased to moderate income families.

The Authority is comprised of a six member Board appointed by the Board of Commissioners for it five year term. The Redevelopment Authority meets on the second Friday of every month to act on grant applications and administrative decisions. Professional staff to the Authority is composed of an Executive Director, three Division Supervisors, 14 administrative employees;, and clerical and maintenance staff.

The Cumberland County Housing Authority was established in 1970 and received formal funding in 1975. Due to similarities in activities with the Redevelopment Authority, in 1977 a Cooperative Agreement between the two Authorities designated the Redevelopment Authority staff as the staff for- both entities. Other similarities exist between the two authorities; including the number of appointed members (six members), length of appointment (five-year term), meeting day (second Friday of the month), and funding sources (Federal and State grants).

The responsibilities of the Housing Authority include, obtaining and administering rental assistance programs and providing residential opportunities for mclderate and low-income families and individuals. Programs funded include Rental Assistance Programs, Carlisle Family Housing Project, and Sen.ior housing development. Examples of these programs include the development of public housing sites in Carlisle and affordable senior housing units in Carlisle, Mechanicsburg, East Pennsboro, and Newville.

Solid -Waste _Authority

The Cumberland County Solid Waste Authority was forma:lly established in 1977 as the grow.ing need for a County-wide approach for solid waste management became necessary. The Authority meets on the third Monday of every month in the County Commissioners

10-6 I

I Board room. Nine members are appointed to the Authority by the Commissioners. The Authority also hires a consulting engineer to act as the Solid Waste Authority Staff Engineer. Since 1980, with I the enactment of the Pennsylvania Solid Waste Management Act, the County has taken on the responsibility to guide its thirty-three municipalities in the collection, transportation, processing and I disposal of municipal solid wastes. The primary activity of the Authority is the implementation of the County Solid Waste Management Plan. The purpose of the Plan is to develop a municipal I solid waste management system for the County that will serve all public and private solid waste management programs and facilities 1 that serve the County.

I The Cumberland County Transportation Authority was established by the Board of County Commissioners in 1990. The purpose of the Authority is to address itself to studies, plans, and projects that I will meet the present and future transportation needs of citizens and businesses of Cumberland County. The Authority's scope of responsibility embraces a broad range of multi-modal transportation I issues including air, rail, transit, and motor vehicle, as well as supporting infrastructure elements (e.g. highways and bridges). In fulfilling its responsibilities the Authority communicates and I coordinates its efforts with other County, Regional, State, and Federal organizations, as well as local officials and civic groups I involved in transportation matters. The Authority is comprised of seven members appointed by the County Board of Commissioners and is currently receiving staff I support from the Tri-County Regional Planning Commission. I The Pennsylvania Municipalities Planning Code (MPC), empowers municipalities, including counties, with the authority to establish I and enforce land use controls. This enabling legislation allows municipalities to prepare comprehensive plans, official maps, and to establish zoning, subdivision and land development, and planned I residential development ordinances to implement such plans. The MPC distinguishes between the jurisdiction of county ordinances in municipalities having no local ordinances and those having local I ordinances. The power of the County governing body to enact, amend, and repeal subdivision and land development, zoning, and planned residential development ordinances is limite'd tb land in I cities, boroughs, incorporated towns and townships which do not have these ordinances in effect at the local municipal level.

I Cumberland County has had a County Subdivision and Land I 10-7 I

Development Ordinance since 1965. As authorized under the MPC, the Board of County Commissioners has designated the Cumberland County 1 Planning Commission as the body charged with the responsibility for administration and enforcement of this ordinance. The County's subdivision and land development jurisdiction applies only to 1 municipalities not having a local subdivision and land development ordinance. Currently, all 33 of the County's municipalities have adopted their own subdivision and land development ordinances. I These ordinances supersede the County ordinance and gives the approval authority to the local. municipa1it.y. I Although the County does not have authority for the administration of the subdivision and land d.eve1opment regulations in the thirty-three (33) munici,palities, the MPC requires a review I and report by the County (,i.e. Cumberland County Planning Commission) . Each application for subdivision and land development in municipalities is required to be submitted to the County €or I review. County reviews must be submitted to the municipality within thirty (30) days from the date the application was received by the County. I

Cumberland County has not adopted a zoning ordinance. With the completion and adoption of the Clumberland County Comprehensive Plan I in 1990, the supporting documentation to develop a county zoning ordinance is in place. The enactment of a county zoning ordinance can be considered. If a county zoning ordinance were adopted, the I ordinance would provide zoning standards for those municipalities which do not have a zoning ordinance. Six municipalities in the I County currently do not have a zoning ordinance, they are: Cooke Township Penn Township I North Newton Township Upper Frankford Township Southampton Township Upper Mifflin Township. D It is important to note that following the adoption of a county comprehensive plan, any proposed action of a municipal governing body within the County relating to (i) the location, opening, 1 vacation, extension, widening, narrowing or enlargement of any street, public ground, pierhead or watercourse; (ii) the location, erection, demolition or sale of any public structures located 1 within the municipality; or (iii) the adoption, amendment or repeal of any official map, subdivision and land development ordinance, or zoning ordinance, must be submitted to the county planning I commission for its recommendations prior to municipal action on such matters. I Furthermore, following the adoption of a county comprehensive plan, any proposed action of any school district located within the County relating to the location, demolition, removal or sale of any I 10-8 I I

school district structure or land must be submitted to the county I planning commission for recommendations prior to action by the 1 school district. These requirements are expressly stated in the Pennsylvania Municipalities Planning Code and, therefore, are legally binding on I all local government units of the County. The adoption of a county comprehensive plan plays a significant role in placing the county planning commission in a position to formally and effectively I influence the development process throughout the County as it occurs at the local level. I The success of any county planning program is to a great extent I dependent upon the financial resources allocated by the County. The purpose of this section is to identify the current sources/categories of revenues utilized by the County, as well as, I the potential revenue sources available to the County. A more detailed analyses of County revenues and expenditures over a six year period is recommended to be undertaken in preparation of a I Capital Improvement Program to facilitate implementation of this Comprehensive Plan. 1 County revenues come from a variety of sources, as indicated I below from the 1999 Budget.

I v Eccentage of Tom Real Estate Taxes 64.3 Departmental Fees and I Commissions 13.3 Federal and State Grants 4.1 Library Tax 3.7 I Per Capita Taxes 2.0 Investment Revenues 2.5 Other Income 7.2 I Fund Transfers 2.9

The major revenue sources are those derived from tax revenues; 1 approximately 70.0 percent of the total revenues. 1 Tax-Re!enues The levy of local taxes applied by the County must be accomplished within the limits set by the Pennsylvania I Constitution, Pennsylvania legislation, and the Fourth Class County 1 10-9 Code. Taxes and the amounts levied at the County-level include:

T- T- Ammt Rec e ived Real Estate General Fund :22.6 mills Debt Service . 1.4 mills TOTAL :26.00 mills

Library Tax 1.50 mills Per Capita $5.00

The County receives approximately 30.0 percent of its total revenue from other sources. For the 1999 Budget these sources include :

Licenses and Permits Departmental Fees and Services Court Cost, Fines, and Other Income Forfeits Interest and Rentals Federal and State Grants

It is critical to establish realistic linkages between munici,pal project/service activities and the ability to provide adequ'ate financing. In order to more effectively evaluate these activities and select the proper revenue sources, a thorough understanding of County government revenue options is necessary.

A variety of state aid programs ,are available to counties for additional revenue sources. The Pennsylvania Department of Community and Economic Development (DCED) periodically publishes a list of these programs in the 'ICatalog of State Aids to Local Governmentsll . The Catalog describes programs available to local government, such as low-interest loans and direct grants, grants in connection with federal programs, and technical assistance programs provided through the Department's regional and central offices.

Programs are currently available in thirty-five different categories. Revenue sources which may support programs proposed as a result of recommendations in the Comprehensive Plan may include funding programs administered by the following State level Departments : Commerce, Community and Economic Development, Environmental Protection, Conservation arid Natural Resources, Public Welfare, and Transportation. Programs are also administered by the following State agencies: Emergency Management Agency, the Historical and Museum Commission, and Housing Finance Agency. Counties may seek assistance from programs relating to site

l0-10 development, downtown revitalization, floodplain management, solid waste management planning, historic preservation, transit, transportation planning, etc.

In addition to state revenue sources, the Federal government also,providesfunding directly to counties. Information on these federal programs is available through the ffCatalogof Federal Domestic Assistance".

County expenditures are funded by either the General Fund (money coming from conventional revenue sources) or special funds (money coming from other sources plus a County contribution). The County General Fund expenditures are classified under various categories to simplify the budgeting and accounting process. For the Cumberland County 1999 Budget, the allocated expenditures are divided into nine (9) categories:

ture Categorv ue of Tot-ure General Government 18.4 Tax Assessment and Collection 2.1 County Subsidies 10.8 Judic ia1 25.6 Corrections 21.7 Grants to Community Agencies 1.8 Other Public Services 6.1 Debt Retirement 8.4 Library Tax Disbursement 5.1

These categories prov'ide monies from the General Fund for the three County Departments-Administrative, Judicial, and Cor- rections; eighteen programs and services; and general miscel- laneous activities. Departmental expenditures may include, but are not limited to salaries, communications, general operating supplies, transportation, purchased/contracted services, and capital outlay. The eighteen programs and services which receive funding from the County General Fund are:

Emergency Management Historical Society Fire Training Program Agriculture extension Vector Control Community Services Transportation Authority Storm water Management Veterans Affairs Insurance Libraries Program Subsidies Consumer Affairs Highway Safety Grants and Contributions Debt Retirement Program Innovation and Pooled Reserve I Improvement I 10-11 -1

In addition to expenditures required for the general operation of the County', the County contributes to special funds for the 1 operation of the following programs:

Cumberland County Nursing Home Drug and Alcohol 1 Domestic Relations Liquid Fuels Childrens Services Retirement Fund 1 Office of Aging Hazmat Transportation Capital Improvement Fund Central Processing Sinking Fund I MH/MR Victirn/Witness Emergency Services Solid Waste Conservation District I 1 As can be seen from the preceding, Cuinberland County has a variety of revenue sources to draw upon to finance its County 1 operations, services, and capital outlay projects. I I I I 1 1 1 I 1 1 I 10-12 I THE CUMBERLAND COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN

1990

Volume II: Plan and Implementation Cumberland County Comprehen:rive Plan TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE Volume I: BASIC STUDIES Chapter 1 - Introduction 1-1 Chapter 2 - History 2-1 Chapter 3 - Natural Environment 3-1 Chapter 4 - Population/Socio-Ekonomic Profile 4-1 Chapter 5 - Economy and Employment 5-1 Chapter 6 - Existing Land Use 6-1 Chapter 7 - Housing 7-1 Chapter 8 - Transportation 8-1 Chapter 9 - Existing Community Facilities 'and Services 9-1 Chapter 10 - County Administration and Finances 10-1

Volume 2: PLAN AND IMPLEMENTATION Introduction 1 Chapter 11 - Statement of Goals and Objectives 11-1 Chapter 12 - Future Land Use Plan 12-1 13-1 * Chapter 13 - Transportation Plan Chapter 14 - Community Facilities Plan 14-1 Chapter 15 - Housing Plan 15-1 Chapter 16 - Plan Administration and Impleiaentation 16-1 LIST OF TABLES Table * Number Title Paae 4-1 Population Trends: 1790 - 1960 4-4 4-2 Population Density and Land Area - 1980 4-6 4-3 Population by Age by Sex 1980 4-10 4-4 Persons by Race and Spanish Origin - 1980 4-13 4-5 Private and Public School Enrollment - Persons Over 3 Years Old 4-14 4-6 Education Background - Persons Over 25 Years Old 4-14 4-7 Percent of Total Below Poverty Level 4-15 4-8 Socio-Economic Characteristics 4-16 4-9 Per Capita Income 4-17 4-10 Cumberland County Population Growth by Municipality: 1940 - 1980 4-19 4-11 Population Projections for Region 4-20 5-1 Employment by Industry by Place of Residence 5-4 5-2 1987 Annual Average Employment by Industry 5-6 5-3 Personal Income by Type of Industry - 1984 5-7 5-4 Employment by Occupation, Persons 16 Years and Older: 1980 5-8 5-5 Work Locations of Cumberland County Residents 5-10 5-6 Workers 16 Years and Over by Place of Work 5-11 5-7 Unemployment Trends: 1970, 1980, 1986 5-12 5-8 Agricultural Economy: 1987, 1982, 1978, 1974 5-14 5-9 Manufacturing Statistics Cumberland County 5-16 5-10 Wholesale, Retail, Selected Services: 1977, 1982 Cumberland County 5-17 5-11 Wholesale, Retail, Selected Services: 1977, 1982 Harrisburg SMSA 5-18 5-12 Wholesale, Retail, Selected Services: 1977, 1982 Pennsylvania 5-18 5-13 Major Employers in Cumberland County: 1987 5-20 5-14 Occupied Commercial/Industrial Properties (1987) 5-21 5-15 Cumberland County Economic Development Organizations 5-24 5-16 Local Research and Development Facilities August 1983 5-25 5-17 Major Lending Institutions Cumberland County Locations 5-26 6-1 1987 Existing Land Use: By Parcel 6-5 6-2 Existing Land Use: 1975 - 1987 6-6 6-3 Existing Land Use Change: 1975 - 1987 6-6 6-4 Existing Land Use: 1987, Percentage of County Total/Plan Development Section 6-6 7-1 Year Round Dwelling Units: 1970 - 1980 7-2 7-2 Housing Inventory: 1970 - 1980 7-2 7-3 Year-Round Dwelling Units by Occupancy: 1980 7-3 7-4 Occupied Housing Inventory: Residential Design - 1980 7-3 7-5 Household Size: 1980 7-4 a 7-6 Rooms Per Dwelling Unit: 1980 7-5 LIST OF TAElLES (Continued)

I I Table I Number Title Paae 7-7 Age of Dwelling Units 7-6 7-8 Concentrations of Older Dwellings; 7-6 7-9 Year-Round Dwelling IJnits by Plumbing Facilities: 1980 7-7 7-10 Year-Round Dwelling IJnits by Bathroom Facilities: 1980 7-7 7-11 Occupied Dwelling Units by Person Per Room: 1980 7-8 7-12 Value of Owner-Occupied Dwellings: 1980 7-10 7-13 Median Housing Values and Contract Rents 7-10 8-1 Highway Mileage by Municipality 8-8 8-2 County-Owned Bridges 8-13 8-3 Posted Bridges in Cumberland County 8-14 9-1 Characteristics of Ccunberland County School District 9-2 9-2 District Projects to Meet Projected Demand 9-6 9-3 Public School Recreational Facilities 9-7 9-4 Licensed Private Academic Schools for 1988 9-11 9-5 Non-Public Elementary' and Secondaxy Schools 9-12

9-6 Higher Education Facilities 9-13 1 9-7 Cumberland County Library System 9-14 9-8 Existing Hospitals 9-16 9-9 Licensed Nursing Homes - Characteristics 9-18 9-10 Inventory of Municipal Recreation Facilities 9-21 9-11 Cumberland County Police Departments 9-25 9-12 Cumberland County Fire Departments 9-26 9-13 Emergency Medical Service Companies 9-30 9-14 Municipal Sewer Treatment Facilities Characteristics 9-32 9-15 Estimated Yearly Generation 9-34 9-16 Estimated Remaining Lives for Landfills Senring Cumberland County Municipalities 9-35 9-17 Public Water Systems - Service Area c Source Area 9-37 10-1 Redevelopment Authority Activity 10-6 14-1 Municipal Park and Recreation Needs 14-4 14-2 County/Regional Park and Recreation Needs 14-5 15-1 Housing Needs 15-3 15-2 New Residential Buildhg Permits 15-5 15-3 $ Value of Residential Building Permits 15-5 15-4 Residential Land Use 15-6 15-5 # Residential- Sales by Municipality 15-8 15-6 Average Price Residential Sales by Municipality 15-10 LIST OF EXHIBITS Exhibit Number Title Pacle

4-A Populat,on Density by Municipali-y in 1980 4-7 4-B Population Pyramid 4-9 5 -A Total Farms by County, 1987 5-15 5-B Existing Industrial/Commercial Parks 5-22 5 -c Major Shopping Centers and Malls 5-23 6-A Existing Land Use by Parcel 6-7 6-B Land Use Comparisons by Plan Development Section 6-8 6-C Land Use Comparisons by Plan Development Section 6-9 8 -A Functional Classification Information 8-4 8-B Local Federal Aid System Roads 8-5 8-C Functional Classification Information State Highways - Cumberland County 8-6 8-D Federal-Aid System Mileage 8-6 8-E 1986-1998 Twelve Year Transportation Program 8-16 8-F Route A - New Cumberland 8-28 8-G Route B - Highland Park 8-29 8-H Route C - Carlisle 8-30 8-1 Route D - Shopper’s Special 8-31 8-5 Route F - Enola/Marysville 8-32 8-K Route K - Erford Road 8-33 8-L Route M - Mechanicsburg 8-34 10-A Governmental Structure 10-2 * 13-A Roadway Management System 13-7 13-B TCRPC Project Data Base 13-8 15-A Non-Profit Housing Corporations 15-12 LIS91 OF MAPS Title Volume I: BASIC STUDIES Flood Plain Slopes Geology Soils Associations Soils Suitable For Agriculture Soil Limitations For On-Lot Sewage Systems Soil Limitations for Building Site Development Woodlands Existing Land Use Harrisburg Urbanized Area Highway Functional Class if ication Syst.em Carlisle and Shippens,burgUrban Areas Highway Functional Classification System Rural Cumberland County Highway Functional Classification System Harrisburg, Carlisle, and Shippensburg Urban Areas 1985 Traffic Volumes Tri-County Region 1985 Traffic Volumes Educational Facilities, Libraries, and Hospitals Recreation Facilities Police, Fire, and Municipal Facil.ities Public Sewage and Public Water Service Areas Volume 11: PLAN AND IMPLEMENTATION Future Land Use Map INTRODUCTION The Need for Planning Planning is a continuing process which must pay constant attention to changing conditions and new problems that may arise. This process should take into account the changes affecting growth and development in Cumberland County. To keep abreast of these changes, the County must take stock of the past and current planning efforts in order to adjust and reshape its future course. In more specific terms, planning is usually needed to prevent or solve problems created by the following: 1. Population growth which has created a need for more housing. 2. Increased demands for public services such as water, sewerage, storm drainage, parks, and other community facilities. 3. The continued dependency on the personal automobile for transportation, creating a demand for better roads and parking opportunities. 4. Expanding residential areas which create a need for properly located supportive commercial areas. 5. A changing economic base with pressures from commerce and industry wishing to locate in the County. 6. Changing agricultural patterns with the trend of decreasing agricultural employment. Benefits of Good Planninq The following are some of the benefits of good Planning: 1. It is possible for the various segments of the County to coordinate their activities and to work toward the achievement of common goals. Planning can prevent much duplication of effort and bring about greater efficiency. 2. More efficient budgeting and capital improvements programming can be accomplished by County and local officials who know in advance what must be purchased or constructed and can plan to provide the necessary funds . 3. The needs, location, and priorities for the maintenance and expansion of public utilities, water, and sewers can be more effectively established.

i 4. Sites fox community facilities can be predetermined and purchased in advance of need; resulting in savings of time and public mone:y. 5. Industrial and commercial businesses may be attracted to the County, because commerce is interested in areas that have stable zoning, quality planning, and pro- f essional and orderly plan implementation. 6. The homeowner, merchant, utility company, developer, and industrialist can invest with more assurance that their investment will1 be a sound one. The Plannina Process The planning process is a course of action that is directed toward preparing and administering a comprehensive plan. It is a continuous process due to social and economic changes, new development policies, and changing conditions in general. The planning process contains the following major factors: 1. ASSUMPTIONS. The County makes certain basic assumptions as to how it will develop due to certain population and economic variables. 2. OBJECTIVES. Planning objectives for the County are developed to provide the best possible social, economic, and physical environment. 3. STANDmDS . Planning standards are established in terms of physical, social, and economic requirements based on need. 4. SURVEY AND RESEARCH. Research is an important part of the planning program. Information on current conditions is collected and facts about the County are compiled. Population., housing, physical conditions and resources, existing land use patterns, existing and proposed highways, and community facilities and senrices are examples of essentiail data base elements. 5. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION. As part of the planning process, residents of the County should be given opportunities to express their ideils as to how they want to see the County develop. 6. POLICY AND DESIGN CONCEPT. After sufficient research has been done, the information is analyzed and a policy and plan concept is established which should be based on the stated goals for the County's future development.

ii 7. -PLAN. The Comprehensive Plan is the official policy guide for influencing the location, type, and extent of future development. It establishes the basis for the County's decision-making and review process on zoning matters; location of public buildings, facilities, and activities; land uses; and provision of housing areas and commerce on need over a period of time. Leffal Standina of the Comprehensive Plan The Pennsylvania Municipalities Planning Code (Act 247 of 1968, as amended and reenacted by Act 170 of 1988) authorizes municipalities to prepare a comprehensive plan, which is to include, but not be limited to the following elements: 1. A statement of objectives concerning the County's future development, including the location and character of future development. 2. A future land use plan. 3. A housing plan. 4. A plan for the movement of people and goods.

5. A plan for community facilities and utilities. 6. A statement describing the interrelationships among various plan elements. 7. A map or statement indicating the relationship of a municipality and its proposed development to adjacent municipalities. The Pennsylvania Municipalities Planning Code defines a municipality to include cities, boroughs, townships, and counties. When a borough, or township having a comprehensive plan is located within a county which has its own adopted comprehensive plan, both the county and the borough or township shall give the plan of the other consideration in order that the objectives of each plan can be protected to the greatest extent possible. Oraanization of the Plan The preparation of a Comprehensive Plan involves three major steps: first, the collecting of all essential information relating to the people and the land; second, after careful and thorough analysis of this information, the preparation of plans which will encourage the most appropriate future development of the County while maintaining existing property values and seeking ways to provide necessary municipal facilities and services; and third, upon completion of the planning process, putting these a planning recommendations into action programs. This is accomplished through the adoption and enforcement of local zoning iii ordinances, subdivision and land deve.lopment ordinances, an official map, and the preparation and adoption of a capital I improvements program.

The Comprehensive Plan its divided into two major elements. Volume I, Basic Studies, includes the Introduction, History, Natural Environment, PopulatiodSocioeconomic Profile, Economic Base, Existing Land Use, Housing, Transportation and Circulation, Cornunity Facilities and Servjxes , and County Administration and Finances. Volume 11, Plan and. Implementation, includes Community Development Goals and Objectives, Future Land Use Plan, Transportation Plan, Community Facilities Plan, Housing Plan, and Plan Administration and Implementation.

iv CHAPTER 11 STATEMENT OF GOALS AND OBJECTIVES Introduction As the development process occurs throughout Cumberland County, it generates inevitable impacts on the social, economic, political and physical elements of the County. Such impacts are experienced in terms of costs and benefits. The resulting network of buildings, facilities, improvements, and services created through the development process can either stimulate or retard development and it's related support elements. While non- governmental market pressures induce the development and use of land, municipal plans and regulations are the final determining factors and play the most influential role in managing the development process. Therefore, the municipal governing body is the primary entity in a position to coordinate the overall pattern of growth within its corporate jurisdiction. County government in Pennsylvania operates within a limited legislative scope of plan implementation due to the autonomous nature of the local governments (i.e. Townships and Boroughs) comprising it. The plans and regulations of local governments have a tendency to be potentially conflicting. A function of the County Comprehensive Plan is to provide the instrument local @ officials need to pattern their municipal comprehensive plans and policies after in a County-wide coordinated and uniform manner. Through the adoption of this comprehensive plan, the County is taking the opportunity to assist local officials in establishing and maintaining such a coordinated planning program on a County- wide basis, while maintaining the autonomy local governments are granted through the Pennsylvania Municipalities Planning Code. The primary function of the Plan is to assist the County, it's operating agencies, and line departments in fulfilling their composite and individual responsibilities to meet the various needs of the County's citizenry. It is clear that the Plan must serve many clients, having different needs and desires. Therefore, the final Plan document is based on a planning program that seeks to balance the economic, physical, social, and political elements comprising Cumberland County. In order to create a practical and effective Comprehensive Plan for Cumberland County, it is necessary to articulate a set of acceptable goals and objectives to be accomplished through plan implementation. To achieve these goals and objectives on a County-wide basis a commitment must be made to balance loyalty to localism and the need for decision making by those in authority closest to the problem, with a loyalty to coordination and decision making evolving from intergovernmental cooperation. This is based on the principle that better planning is accomplished where there is mutual respect and understanding among decision makers. To this ends, the following statements of goals and objectives are established and presented in priority order.

11-1 To provide a clearer understanding of the purposes goals and objectives serve, they are defined as follows: GOALS - Broad Directions Goals are intended to function as ciirection-setters , not actions. They set idea:L future conditions toward which objectives are directed. They are general expressions of planning values and, therefore, are somewhat abstract in nature. They often are not quantifiable, time-dependent or suggestive of specific actions for achievement. OBJECTIVES - Specific Directions

Objectives are action-oriented statements comprised of , policies, standards and/or principles that establish a set of specific steps to which the governing body and planning commission commit themselves in an effort to achieve related goals. The following Goals and Objectives are presented in priority order and reflect serious consideration of the input received from local officials and private sector organizations of the County. LAND USE ILU): Prioritv #l GOAL: Through effective planning and intergovernmental cooperation, establish interrelated land use patterns that are logical, compatible, mutually supportive, responsive to the needs of the residents, and reflect the limitations and potential of both the natural and man-made environments of the County.

OBJECTIVES: PRIORITP LU-1 Protect existing and promote desirable future urban and rural development through the adoption of compatible municipal zoning ordinances, subdivision and land development regulations, and building codes. LU-2 Encourage and assist local governments to prepare, adopt, and implement municipal comprehensive plans that are based on cuierent planning principles and in compliance with state enabling legislation. LU-3 Establish a continuous planning program that accurately monitors growth and changing socio-economic conditions throughout the County in order to maintain a current data base for the County Comprehensive Plan and effectively coordinate the development process as it occurs throughout the County.

11-2 LU-4 Effectively administer and enforce the Cumberland County Subdivision and Land Development Regulations to properly manage development in those municipalities not having such regulations. LU-5 Support the Local Planning Assistance Program administered by the Cumberland County Planning Commission and Tri-County Regional Planning Commission. LU-6 Support the Cumberland County Planning Commission and Planning Department in their efforts to promote and implement planning projects at all levels of government and private activities.

ENVIRONMENT (El: Prioritv #2 GOAL: To promote the preservation and enhancement of the natural, historic, cultural, scenic, and environmentally sensitive features of the County so as to assure the harmonious and mutually supportive coexistence of both the man-made and natural environments. OBJECTIVES : e PRIORITY E-1 Implement a county-wide solid waste collection and waste reduction/recycling program that effectively collects and disposes of solid waste material, and recycles appropriate waste in an environmentally sound manner. E-2 Promote regulation of residential and non-residential activities to minimize or totally prevent such problems as water pollution, air pollution, noise, odor, and other possible harmful effects to the environment resulting from development. E-3A Promote greater public awareness, education, and support of sensitive environmental issues and problems, as they effect the County. E-3B Adopt and effectively implement a Cumberland County Storm Water Management Plan. E-4 Support the environmental program efforts of the Cumberland County Conservation District and encourage its utilization by both the public and private sectors in resolving and preventing environmental degradation. Incorporate appropriate provisions in the County and local subdivision and land development regulations, and local zoning ordinances for the preservation of wetlands and woodlands on development sites. 11-3 E-6 A variety of techniques such as ac:quisition, easements, environmental protection zoning, eminent domain, dedication, and transfer of development rights should be utilized by all levels of government to protect and preserve the environment. E-7 Limitations imposed hy soil suitability and geologic conditions should be a major development concern; with adequate provisions requiring developers to address such conditions being incorporated into local land management ordinances. E-8 Encourage the continued existence and adequate funding of federal and state programs which subsidize construction and maintenance of sewage treatment facilities. E-9 Development should be very 1imit.ed within established floodplain areas , with the most severe limitations occurring in the established floodway. Floodplain development must comply with provisions of the National Flood Insurance Program and the Pennsylvania Floodplain Management Act. E-10 Encourage the preservation and conservation of marine life and wildlife habitat. E-11 Support efforts of the Cumberland County Historical Society and local historical societies to preserve and maintain the significant historical, archeological, and cultural elements of Cumberland County's envirunment. E-12 Encourage good forest: management practices on public and private lands, including the production of wood products, forest stand improvement, and reforestation. E-13 Development restrictions should be placed on proposals located on land having slope-limitations; in particular those having slopes in excess of 15 percent. E-14 Support efforts to establish and enforce regulations which require mineral extraction to be conducted in an environmentally safe manner, and provide for the restoration of mineral extraction areas.

TRANSPORTATION (TI: Prioritv 13 GOAL: Through effective planning, assist in establishing an adequate, safe, convenient, and balanced transportation network in con junction with land development that provides for the efficient movement of people and goods by highway, mass transit, rail, and air desof travel.

11-4 OBJECTIVES : PRIORITY T-1 Support and participate in the Harrisburg Area Transportation Study as a positive regional approach to coordinating the development process with the provision of an adequate transportation network necessary to support land use activities. T-2 Assist State, Regional, and local governments in coordinating the location and improvement of traffic corridors in an effort to maintain proper traffic movement to and from residential and non-residential areas. T-3 Promote utilization of the best available technology to manage traffic, avoid congestion, conserve energy, and provide for safe vehicular movements. T-4 Encourage the expansion of public transit service and accessibility throughout the County based on development densities, employment locations, and the needs of the transportation disadvantaged (e.g. poor, elderly, handicapped, etc.) T-5 Encourage and support enforcement of provisions in both the County and municipal subdivision and land development regulations that require developers to properly assess and physically install street related improvements to satisfy the access and transportation demands generated by their developments. T-6 Establish and promote implementation of the Transportation Plan Element of the Cumberland County Comprehensive Plan, and support its integration into the development of an area-wide transportation plan for the Tri-County Region.

T-7 Support local area-wide efforts within the County to plan for the resolution of localized (inter/intra- municipal) transportation issues and problems. T-8 All transportation modes should be continually monitored and evaluated for their adequacy to meet local, county, state, and national needs, as well as be responsive to energy conservation concerns. T-9 Encourage local governments to maintain street upgrading and maintenance programs which are focused on areas of greatest need. T-10 Maintain an adequate County-level bridge replacement and improvement program.

11-5 T-11 Support the ef f arts of the Cumberland County Transportation Department to maintain its specified transportation services.

COMMUNITY FACILITIES AND SERVICES fCF/Sl: Prioritv #4A GOAL: To promote and assist in the provision of a complete and adequate system of community facilities and services such as police and fire protection, health services, schools, libraries, :301id waste disposaE , recreation, water supply, and sewage disposal that is responsive to the needs of the residents and non-residential establishments of the County. OBJECTIVES: PRIORITY cF/S-l Update the Cumberland County Official Sewage Plan and establish a continuous monitoring program to maintain it as a current docu:ment which can be utilized to coordinate the provision of sewage service as it occurs at the local level. CF/S-2 Promote efficient and environmentally sound methods of solid waste collection and disposal through implementation of the Cumberland County Solid Waste Management Plan. cF/s-3 Land Use Plans should be closely coordinated with Sewage and Water Supply P1an.s so as to encourage development to occur in those areas planned for the establishment or extension of sewerage and water supply systems, and discourage intensive development in areas to be serviced by on-lot systems,, cF/s-4 Encourage and assist local governments to adopt and implement Off iciall Municipal Sewage Plans that adequately plan for public collection and treatment, as well as, on-lot subsurface systems. CF/S-5 Encourage the adoption and enforcement of local ordinance provisions that require developers to accurately determine the water supply needs generated by their development proposals, assess the availability and quality of available water supply sources and, in situations utilizing on-site subsurface water supplies, design their development proposals in such a manner to avoid detrimental on-site and off-site impacts on the affected aquifer.

11-6 CF/S-6 Encourage local governments and developers to closely a coordinate development proposals with the appropriate water supplier in order to assure the proper installation of water supply systems and adequate provision of potable water for consumption. CF/S-7 Update the Cumberland County Water Supply Plan and establish a continuous monitoring program to maintain it as a current document which can be utilized to coordinate the provision of water service as it occurs at the local level. CF/S-8 Provide for effective protection services dispatching and coverage between municipal and State Police agencies, municipal fire companies, and local ambulance companies by continuing to maintain the county-wide emergency response communications network. CF/S-9A Encourage local governments to support and upgrade police, fire and rescue, emergency medical support, and member training as may be necessary to maintain high levels of efficiency. CF/S-SB Promote development of a comprehensive human services and medical facilities delivery system that facilitates coordination of the various local, County, State, and Federal programs and agency activities, and eliminates duplication or gaps in services. cF/S-lO Support local school district effort to establish and maintain educational programs and facilities necessary to service the mental, physical, and social needs of children and adults; including the gifted and handicapped. cF/s-11 The provision of a variety of recreation opportunities to satisfy the needs of County residents should be encouraged. Recreation programs and facility locations should be focused on preserving the cultural, historic, and natural features, as well as environmentally sensitive areas of the County. CF/S-12 Support the Cumberland County Library System and its appropriate expansion as needs dictate. CF/S-13 Encourage local governments to meet local recreation needs through land acquisition and park development programs; to include local ordinance provisions that require developers to provide for the recreation needs generated by their development proposals. @ CF/S-14 Where possible, recreation facilities that provide for both active and passive uses should be located close to where people live, and should be closely integrated into the planning of future residential areas. 11-7 CF/S-15 Encourage local school districts to allow for the appropriate ut ilization of their facilities for community indoor and outdoor recreation activities. e CF/S-16 Improvements and maintenance of game habitat by the Pennsylvania Game Commission and stream environments by the Pennsylvania Fish Commission should also be continued in Cumberland County. CF/S-17 Improvements to existing State Parks should be provided by the Commonwealth in accordance with the State Recreation Plan, and as the demand for their use increases. CF/S-18 The County should maintain the Cimberland County Biker- Hiker Trail, and provide for its appropriate expansion.

ECOMONIC DEVELC)P"T f ED1 : Prj-oritv #4B GOAL: To promote the establishment and maintenance of a stable, healthy, and balanced economic base which is developed in a manneir compatible with population growth and as necessary to satisfy the demand for a variety of goods and services, employmeint opportunities, and provide an adequate base of tax ratables to enhance the fiscal capabilities of the County and its municipalities. OBJECTIVES: PRIORITP ED-= Promote the establishment of i.ndustries which do not significantly contribute tu environmental degradation. ED-1B Promote the econom3.c health and expansion of existing businesses located in the County,. ED-2 Encourage and assist local governments, chambers of commerce, the Capital Regioin Economic Development Corpora tion, industrial development authorities, and other economic development organizations in attracting businesses and industries that provide job opportun- ities for the County's labor force. ED-3 Encourage the establishment and expansion of businesses and industries which add stability and broaden the County's tax base. ED-4 Promote agricultural activities as they occur throughout the County and encourage local governments to appropriately zone agricultural areas in a manner so to preserve their integrity and prevent the loss of agricultural land through development. 11-8 ED-5 Efforts to attract employers to Cumberland County should be based on a knowledge of current skills of the County labor force and be coordinated with job-training programs established to improve skill levels. ED-6 Promote theu se of public and priva.te educati on faciliti.es to assist in appropriate occupation a1 training of the County's labor force. ED-7 Support the efforts of the Cumberland County Housing and Redevelopment Authority to coordinate economic development throughout the County and Tri-County Region.

HOUSING (HI: Prioritv 45 GOAL: To promote the provision of a sufficient supply and appropriate mix of housing types within the financial reach of all citizens of the County. OBJECTIVES: PRIORITY H-1 Encourage local governments to adopt reasonable building, housing, and property maintenance codes which 0 will eliminate and prevent conditions that contribute to and perpetuate blight and poor quality living environments in the County. H-2A Support the Cumberland County Housing and Redevelopment Authority efforts to assist in the provision of low and moderate income housing opportunities throughout the County. H-2B Encourage local governments to adopt policies and ordinances that permit the expansion of residential opportunities by allowing for a variety of housing designs, types, and values to meet the housing needs of all segments of the County's present and future population. H-3 Where practicable and financially feasible, emphasis should be placed on the conservation and preservation of housing in the older areas of the County; those areas of concentration being primarily located in the Boroughs. H-4 Available federal and state funding programs should be utilized as effectively as possible by the public and private sectors for the construction and/or subsidy of housing throughout the County.

11-9 -CHAP’TER 12 FUTURE LAND USE PLAN Introduction The quality of life for Cumberland Coisnty residents is to a great extent determined by the land use patterns created by development. Those municipalities of the County that have taken the step to participate in the comprehensive planning process and implement their plans, have provided a greater-degree of assurance to their residents that proper living and working environments will be established and maintained. Currently, 23 of the 34 municipalities in Cumberland County have adopted a municipal comprehensive plan, 24 have adopted a zoning ordinance, 31 have adopted local subdivision and ].and development regulations, and 28 local governing bodies have established a municipal planning commission to advise them on local plinnning and development matters. It is therefore cleiar that the seeds of comprehensive planning have taken root in Cumberland County. Fortunately, those municipalities experiencing the greatest development pressures have the planning devices and administrative structure in place to manage growth. The Cumberland County Planning Conmission has, over the years, endorsed single-purpose comprehensive plan elements prepared by the Tri-County Regional Planning Commission. However, until now these plan elements have not been consolidated into a comprehensive plan text for adoption. Examples of such plans and reports include Conservation and O!pen Space, Stormwater Management, Organized Recreation Facilities, Historic Preservation, Agricultural Presenration, Water Supply, Future Land Use, and Community Facilities. A8 required by Pennsylvania legislation, the County Cod.ssioners have adopted a Solid Waste Management Plan and Sewerage! Plan. The Solid Waste Management plan is the most current. Unfortunately,, with the demise of the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development’s ff701” Comprehensive Planning Assistance Grant Program, funding availability has been severely reduced and updates of the previously mentioned planning elements did not take place. However, recent amendments to the Pennsylvania Municipalities Planning Code now require Counties to prepare and adopt a Comprehensive Plan. Cumberland County undertook this current planning initiative prior to the recent state mandate. PurDose The purpose of the Future Land Use F’lan element is to provide a framework of land use patterns, by major categories, that best illustrates the desired future development characteristics of Cumberland County in keeping with the Plan’s Statement of Goals and Objectives. It is intended that the application of these goals and objectives, through the Future Land Use Plan, will result in compatible land use relationships, appropriate dis-

12-1 tribution of community facilities, designation of acceptable 0 residential and non-residential development areas, expansion of the County's employment and economic bases, protection of existing agricultural activities and prime fann lands, and the preservation of environmentally sensitive areas. The plan is not intended to restrict local governments to detailed site-specific land use designations and thereby impede local options to guide growth within individual municipal corporate jurisdictions. In developing this Future Land Use Plan an attempt has been made to preserve the integrity of local zoning and incorporate it into the arrangement of land use patterns illustrated on the Future Land Use Map. Because the Pennsylvania Municipalities Planning Code requires local comprehensive plans to be "generally consistent" with the county comprehensive plan, and not in strict accordance with it, flexibility in local land use planning is legislatively inherent. As a result, the fundamental success of what Cumberland County proposes in this Plan is greatly dependant upon its acceptability and implementation by local officials. The Plan will therefore guide future land use in the County by influence, not by legal directive. Inter-governmental cooperation and a sincere commitment to planning at both the County and local municipal levels are paramount. Growth Manaaement 0 In order to effectively manaqe-- growth on a county-wide basis, local and County officials-must cooperatively endeavor to direct the rate, location, and type of growth in accordance with comprehensive plans and mutually supportive implementing devices such as zoning, subdivision and land development regulations, official mapping, and capital improvements programming. Because development initiatives most commonly originate from private developers, it is important that forums be utilized to integrate the desires and needs of both the private and public sectors into the planning process. Examples of such public and private organizational units among which coordination should be established include, Councils of Governments, Chambers of Commerce, Industrial and Commercial Development Corporations/ Authorities, Housing and Redevelopment Authorities, Community Action Agencies, Historical Societies, Conservancies, Home Owners Associations, Home Builders Association, etc. While the County's role in growth management is addressed through more specific recommendations located in the Plan Implementation Element of this Plan, it is worthy to note growth management as a prerequisite to successful achievement of the Future Land Use Plan. Land Use The geographic arrangement of major land use classifications is illustrated on the Future Land Use Map. The selected class- m ifications are:

12-2 Conservation Residential Public/Semi-Public Commercial Agriculture Industrial The County has been divided into the following Plan Development Sections for planning purposes, the boundaries of which are illustrated on the Future Land Use Map: Cumberland East Cumberland Cent& Cumberland West Camp Hill Boro. Carlisle Boro. Cooke Rrp. East Pennsboro Twp. Dickinson Twp. Hopewell htp. Hampden Twp. Middlesex Twp. Lower Frankford Twp. Lemogne Boro. Monroe Twp. Lower Mifflin Twp. Lower Allen Twp. Mt. Holly Springs Boro. Newburg Boro. Mechanicsburg Boro. North Middletori Twp. Newville Boro. New Cumberland Boro. Siiver Spring Wp. North Newton Twp. Shiremanstown Boro. South Middleton Twp. Penn Twp. Upper Allen Twp. Shippensburg Boro. West Fairview Boro. Shippensburg Twp. Wormleysburg Boro. Southampton Twp. South Newton “wp. Upper Frankford Twp. Upper Mifflin Twp. West Pennsboro Twp. Residential Land Use The Cumberland East Plan. Development: Section is the most densely populated and developed portion of the County, followed by Cumberland Central. Tlhe Cumberland West Section has experienced cons ider a b 1y 1 e s s development pres sure. Those municipalities having experienced the greatest amount of residential development between 1982 and 1988, ranked in descending order of development activity by Plan Development Section are: Cumberland East Cumberland Central Cumberland West Upper Allen Twp. Silver Spring Twp. West Pennsboro Twp. Hampden Twp. South Middleton Twp. Perm Twp. East Pennsboro Twp. Carlisle Boro. Hopewell Twp. Lower Allen Twp. Monroe “wp. Later Frankford Ikp. Mechanicsburg Boro. North Middleton Twp. North Newton Twp. The residential land use classification is purposely general in terms of specific residential unit designs and intensities to permit flexibility at the local level. Each municipality is required by the Pennsy1vani.a Municipalities Planning Code to provide for a variety of residential dwelling types encompassing all basic forms of housing; including single-family and two- family dwellings, a reasonalsle range of multi-family dwellings in various arrangements, mobile homes,and mobile home parks. The Housing Plan Element of this Plan sets forth specific county- level housing goals and recommendations to achieve those goals. Local governments are encouraged to utilize these recommendations in fulfilling their obligation to provide for a variety of residential living opportunities. 12-3 The intensity of residential development is primarily a dependent upon the provision of public sewer and water services. Higher density development should therefore occur within such service areas; through "in-filling" of vacant undeveloped land, and in locations immediately adjacent to such areas to provide for the practicable and financially feasible extension of such services. Residential development trends indicate continued high density development to predominantly occur within the immediate West Shore municipalities. Similar development densities are planned to continue, although in a somewhat limited fashion, in and around the Boroughs of Carlisle, Shippensburg, Newville, Newburg, and Mt. Holly Springs. For the purpose of preserving open space and protecting environmentally sensitive areas, local officials are encouraged to iacorporate residential cluster provisions into their zoning ordinances. Lower density, primarily single-family unit development, 4.9 projected to occur in the form of radial corridors emanati:ng outward from the Boroughs and within isolated nodes throughout the County. These radial corridors and isolated nodes reflect the preference of continued, but limited expansion of current development levels. Expansion of these areas is proposed to be limited and remain at lower densities due to the lack of public services and the desire 1 to preclude further encroachment into prime agricultural activity I and environmentally sensitive areas. lI

in Pennsylvania, in cash receipts for agricultural crops. With approximately 360 commercial dairy farms, the County ranks development rights provisions into their zoning and subdivision and land development ordinances. Conservation Land Use Conservation areas constitute the second largest future land use classification. These areas are comprised of such environmentally sensitive areas as flood plains, areas with slopes exceeding 15 percent, and large woodland areas. Flood plain areas are primarily those corridors following the Yellow Breeches and Conodoguinet Creeks and their tributaries. The intent, however, is to include all flood plains designated as within the Regulatory 100 Year Flood Plain by the Federal Flood Insurance Program. All designated wetlands are also included by reference as being within the conservation land use class- ification. More detailed investigation and identification is necessary for the mapping of wetlands areas. Federal and State efforts are currently underway to provide this data. Two salient natural features of Cumberland County are North Mountain forming the border with Perry County, and South Mountain forming the borders with Adarns, York and Franklin Counties. The large steep-sloped areas associated with these two mountains as well as their woodlands are included for conservation and protection against development activities. Local governments are encouraged to incorporate steep-slope development standards, and provisions for the protection of environmentally sensitive areas into their municipal land use and development ordinances. Municipalities having been officially identified as containing designated flood hazard areas are required by the Pennsylvania Floodplain Management Act to adopt local floodplain management regulations qwhich are in compliance with the Act and the Federal Flood Insurance Program. Cumberland County has incorporated floodplain management provisions into the Cumberland County Subdivision and Land Development Regulations. It is recommended that the Cumberland County Board of Commissioners create a Conservation and Open Space Task Force to study the options available to County and local officials for the preservation of environmentally sensitivle areas. It is further proposed that these areas be targeted for future expansion of recreation opportunities for County residents.

This land use c1assific:ation includ.es land areas within the County intended to support such activities and facilities as recreation, municipal services, education, public utility enterprises, federal and. state installations, hospitals, libraries, and other public or semi-public owned and maintained lands. It is impractical to graphically depict and plan for the future expansion of all these types of land uses, therefore the Future Land Use Map contains only those land uses of significant area. As the development process occurs throughout the County it

12-5 is reasonably expected that existing public/semi-public land areas and facilities will be expanded to support specific needs. e More specific narrative, statistics, and graphics on existing and proposed public/semi-public lands are contained in the Existing Community Facilities and Services Chapter and the Community Facilities Plan Chapter of this plan document. Commercial Land Use Commercial development activities and associated employment opportunities are most intensively located in the Cumberland East Plan Development Section, followed by the Cumberland Central and Cumberland West Plan Development Sections, respectively. Those municipalities containing the greatest number of commercially developed parcels, ranked in descending order of development activity by Plan Development Section are:

Cumberland East Cumberland Central Cumberland West Hampden Twp. Carlisle Boro. Shippensburg Boro. Lower Allen lrtrp. Silver Spring Twp. Newville Boro. Mechanicsburg Boro. South Middleton Twp. West Pennsboro Twp. East Pennsboro Twp. Middlesex Twp. Shippensburg Twp. Camp Hill Boro. North Middleton Twp. South Newton Twp. New Cumberland Boro. Mt. Holly Springs Boro.

On a County-wide basis, those municipalities experiencing @ the largest number of commercial subdivision or land development plat application proposals between 1987 and 1989, ranked in descending order are: Lower Allen Township South Middleton Township Upper Allen Township Hampden Township Middlesex Township Silver Spring Township By Plan Development Section, over the same period of time, Cumberland East experienced the greatest amount of development pressure with a total of 60 plat applications, followed by Cumberland Central with 41 plat applications, and Cumberland West with only 10 subdivision or land development plat applications. Statistics on commercial construction building permits issued between 1987 and 1988 reflect similar commercial development pressures by municipality and Plan Development Section; with 196 construction permits issued in the Cumberland East Section, 53 permits issued in the Cumberland Central Section, and only 10 issued in the Cumberland West Section. Commercial development sites, both existing and proposed, are primarily located adjacent to the major transportation corridors of the County; with major commercial corridors impacting the eastern segments of Route 11, Route 15, Route 641, Route 34, Old Gettysburg Road, Market Street (Camp Hill and Lemoyne Boroughs), Carlisle Pike (Hampden Township, Camp Hill Borough, and East Pennsboro Township), and Bridge Street (New Cumberland Borough). 12-6 The Future Land Use Map proposes continued development expansion in those areas of the County experiencing the greatest amount of development pressure, with most future development being proposed to occur on undeveloped and partially developed land contiguous to existing sites. The pattern of radial commercial corridors established throughout the County has created major traffic congesticin and safety problems, and should therefore be limited in terms OE incremental lot-by-lot infilling resulting in the proliferation of direct ingress and egress to the collector roads they are adjacent to. Therefore, several major land areas have been proposed to receive commercial development at such locations that minor streets can be utilized to feed traffic to and from (commercial concentrations and the collector roads servicing the County. Commercial corridors along these roads are purposely limited in length, and separated by residential and agricultural land uses for the purpose of providing visual breaks in commercial strip development, as well as, reducing the number of direct street access points producing a large number of motor vehicle turning movements. For the purpose of providing localized commercial diversity and flexibility, specific types of commercial land uses and activities are not addressed in this Plan; thereby being preserved as a local option to be expressed in municipal zoning ordinances. It is, however ,, strongly recommended that local zoning ordinances contain effective buffer provisions to protect residential areas from the impacts of adjacent non-residential uses. Local officials are adso encouraged to utilize planned residential development provisions to provide for commercial convenience and other compatible non-residential services at appropriate locations within residential areas. The provision for such services could also be administered through special exceptions and/or conditional uses contained in the zoning ordinance. Caution must be taken so as to select only those types of uses and apply effective standards that will prevent . detrimental impacts on residential areas. Likewise, similar provi.sions for c:ommercial agricultural support activities are recommended to be included in local agricultural zoning districts. This will not only promote expansion of the County's commercial base, but provide for such activities at locations convenient to fanning activities. Industrial Land Use Cumberland County benefits from a diversified industrial base. General employment opportunities within the County are reflected by Census statistics which indicate that almost 66 percent of employed C0unt.y residents work in the County. Cumberland County has, in recent years, experienced the lowest unemployment rate in the Tri-County Region.

12-7 Industrial development activities are most intensively located in the Cumberland Central Plan Development Section, followed by Cumberland East and Cumberland West, respectively. Similar development characteristics are reflected in the number of industrial subdivision and land development plat application proposals submitted between 1987 and 1989. Statistics on industrial construction permits issued between 1987 and 1988 place the Cumberland East Plan Development Section as the leader in actual construction of new industrial establishments with 18 permits issued, closely followed by the Cumberland Central Section with 17 permits issued. No permits were issued for new industrial establishments during this time period in the Cumberland West Section. On a county-wide basis the leading industrial growth municipalities, in descending order were Hampden Township, South Middleton Township, Upper Allen Township and Carlisle Borough (tie), and Middlesex Township. Industrial development activities, in particular the traffic generated by truck terminals, have resulted in traffic congestion and safety problems at several intersections and along segments of several collector routes. Industrial sites, both existing and proposed, are not concentrated along lengthy segments of collector road corridors, as is characteristic with commercial development in the County. They appear as isolated nodes of both small and large site sizes throughout the County. The Future Land Use Map proposes continued development expansion in those areas of the County experiencing the greatest amount of pressure, with most new development occurring on undeveloped and partially developed land contiguous to existing sites. An attempt is made to locate industrial land use areas within existing industrial zoning districts; where adequate transportation access is available and proposed road improvement projects are scheduled; adjacent to existing rail corridors (where possible); adjacent to non-residential land uses to reduce the possibility of immediate impacts on residential developments; and at locations currently receiving or proposed to receive public sewerage and water services. For the purpose of providing localized industrial base diversity and flexibility, specific types of industrial uses and activities are not proposed in this Plan; thereby being preserved as a local option to be expressed in municipal zoning ordinances. It is strongly recommended, however, that local zoning ordinances contain effective buffer provisions to protect nearby residential areas from the impacts of industrial activities. Local officials are also encouraged to utilize cluster development provisions to provide for open space and protection of environmentally sensitive areas. Selected industrial uses could be permitted in other non-residential land use areas through special exception and/or conditional use # provisions in local zoning ordinances. Caution must be taken, however, to select only those types of uses and apply effective standards which will prevent detrimental land use conflicts and transportation problems. 12-8

CHAPTER 13 TRANSPORTATION PLAN Introduction The Transportation Basic Studies Chapter of this Comprehen- sive Plan provides an inventory of the County's existing transportation system. The Plan's Future Land Use Element, as well as other elements of the Plan, indicate that development will continue throughout the County, thus increasing mobility and access demands on impacted segments of the County's transporta- tion system. In the more rural areas this growth is expected to continue at a relatively slow pace. However, in the urbanizing areas where public sewer and water services are available development is expected to expand more rapidly and at greater densities. Mobility and access demands in these areas can be adequately accommodated only if the transportation network servicing them is properly maintained and expanded. Current highway related maintenance and safety needs, let alone existing and future capacity deficiencies, far exceed available funding capabilities. The transportation planning process, in and of itself, must continue to monitor traffic movement conditions, identify system deficiencies, program projects for engineering and construction, and place a greater emphasis on how project needs can be funded. It should also be realized that proper land use planning will effectively deal with 0 existing system deficiencies, as well as avoid future deficiencies. The Harrisburg Area has an ongoing and responsive trans- portation planning process in place. This process is coordinated through the Harrisburg Area Transportation Study (HATS) which attempts to identify and prioritize system problems and solutions. It is a difficult task to prioritize deficiencies and projects since they often vary by type and scope. They normally belong to one or more of the following categories: safety, capacity, structural (maintenance), and community disruption. HATS is the federally mandated Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) for the Area. The products of the HATS planning process are the main source of recommendations found in this Plan. Functional Classification The Basic Studies Section and related maps describe the functional classification system of roadways in Cumberland County as developed through HATS. HATS regularly updates its Functional Classification/Federal-Aid System Map and an update will occur soon because of the 1990 Decennial Census of Population and Housing which will, no doubt, show expanded urban boundaries in the Harrisburg Urbanized Area and the Carlisle and Shippensburg Urban Areas. Since HATS will be updating its map in the near e future, no changes to the functional classification of roadways

13-1 is currently recommended in thiis Plan. Changes to functional classification that result from the HATS effort should be incorporated into this Plan. The County and municipalities should use the adopted HATS functional classification map in conducting transportation planning, programming, and imple- mentation activities. Desiqn Standards PennDOT has developed a set of rural and urban design standards for local roads. These are contained in Publication 70, "Guidelines for Design of Local Roads and Streets". The criteria should be used by the County and municipalities when designing and implementing roa&way and bridge improvements. Deficient Cartwav Widths As part of the development of this Plan, the cartway widths of state highways in the County were ana.lyzed. Exhibit 13-A, shows the results of this analysis. It is recommended that PennDOT consider widening the cartways of these roads as they undergo restorations and resurfacing. Hiahwav and Bridae Improvement Needs The Basic Studies Section describes the Twelve Year Program process as well as the process utilized in identifying capacity, safety, and structural deficiencies. This Plan relies on these processes, which result in adopted Twelve Year Programs (every other year) and annual Harrisburg Area Transportation Study Transportation Improvement Program/Annual Elements (TIP/AE's), for the identification of highway and bridge improvement needs. Exhibit 13-B contains a list of 53 highway and bridge projects that have not advanced to construction, but are contained on the Twelve Year Program (1988-2000), the TIP/=, or one of the four Commonwealth Bridge Bills. Some of the major projects in this listing include the Center Street relocation in East Pennsboro Township; the Interstate 81 Connector project in Hampden Township; the Gettysburg Road widening project (17th Street to U.S. 15) in Lower Allen Township; the U.S. 11 (Miracle Mile) project in Middlesex Townshrip; and the U.S. 15 interchange projects (at Winding Hill and Lisburn Roads) in Upper Allen Township. Of these projects, the one with the most influence on the highway system is the Interstate 81 Connector project, which will complete the limited-ac:cess circumferential loop in the Harrisburg Urbanized Area. The project will siphon some of the travel demands from north-south arteries on the West Shore Area of Cumberland County and, in particular, from the Carlisle Pike (U.S. 11 from the Harrisburg Expressway to Interstate 81 to the west). In addition to the projects listed in Exhibit 13-B, two other major projects not on the 12 Year Program, TIP/AE or a Bridge Bill deserve mention. These include the New Kingstown bypass project involving relocation of the northbound U.S. 11 lanes, and the improvement of the U.S. 11/15 and Harrisburg Expressway Interchange. 13-2 Additionally, other recent traf fic/transportation plans should be considered in updating the Twelve Year Program and TIP/AE. These include: Hampden Township Traffic Study - 1989; Carlisle Area Transportation Study - 1989; East Pennsboro Transportation Partnership Program; the U.S. 11/15 Corridor Study (Market Street in Womleysburg to Interstate 81); the U.S. 11 (Carlisle to PA 114) Corridor Study; and various current municipal comprehensive plans. Recommendations General 1. The County should continue and expand, as needed, its role in transportation planning, programming and project implementation. This role, as identified and discussed in the Basic Studies Section, includes: 1) Operating the Cumberland County Transportation Department and its paratransit services; 2) Maintaining and improving County bridges; 3) Partial funding of Capitol Area Transit's operating budget; 4) Planning and programming activities for the transit sys tem and f ederal-aid system highway improvements through involvement in HATS; 5) County Planning Commission reviews/approvals of subdivision and land development plans and comments on municipal zoning and subdivision ordinance proposals and amendments; and 6) Planning and programming activities of the Cumberland County Transportation Authority.

Hiahwavs and Bridaes 1. The transportation planning process should place a greater emphasis on how to fund needed improvements. At the local level, county officials should encourage intermunicipal cooperation and the "partnership" approach in gunding needed projects. The state should be encouraged to expand its funding of highway and bridge projects through expansion of existing revenue programs or development of new ones. The federal government should be encouraged to develop and implement a responsive highway program that gives maximum flexibility to state and local governments now that the Interstate Highway construction program is essentially complete. 2. Land use planning must be utilized in conjunction with adequate project funding in order to most effectively deal with existing and future transportation system demands. 3. The HATS functional classification scheme for roadways should be used by the County and municipalities when conducting transportation planning, programming, and implementation activities. Periodic changes to the functional classification scheme should be made by HATS and incorporated into this Plan and municipal plans.

13-3 4. PennDOT's design criter.ia for lOCiSl roads should be incorporated into local ordinances and used in the design and construction of local roadway and hridge improvements. 5. PennDOT should consider widening the cartways of state roadways listed in Exh,ibit 13-A, when they undergo restorations or resurfacing. 6. Additional project recommendations not: currently on the 12 Year Program, TIP/= or a Bridge Bill should be considered by HATS for programming in future updates of the Twelve Year Program and TIP/=. 7. PennDOT's "turnback" program should be promoted as a means to better manage and maintain the highway system through the transfer of roads to municipalities that serve purely a local function.

Public: Transit 1. Continue to support the Cumberland County Transportation Department and its paratransit servi.ces for the elderly, poor and handicapped. It; is imperative that the "quarter mile" regulation remain in effect for the Pennsylvania "Section 203" Program. This rule requires all able-bodied senior citizens to use the fixed route bus services available to them when their origins and destinations are within a quarter mile of a Capital &:ea Transit route. By requiring that this rule be followed, the ridership base on Capital Area Transit remains stable and the drain of dollars from the Pennsylvania Lottery Program is reduced. Mitigating factors must be taken into consideration on a trip by trip basis to determine if paratransit service is required. 2. Continue to support Capitol Area Transit through the shared provision of needed operating assistance funding. 3. Promote Public transit as an alternative to automobile use. In response to traffic congestion and increased air pollution, the County and local municipalities should examine public transit as an alternative to automobile use. If improved service is desired, local funding support must be increased. The CAT Board policy has been that additional services will not be added .if it will increase the CAT deficit. With decreasing Federal funlds, the money will have to come from local jurisdictions, agencies, and/or private groups committed to suppolrting public transit.

13-4 4. Promote local support for transit studies. Improved service to other areas in the County will only occur after a detailed transit feasibility study is performed. Past Cumberland County studies have included the Carlisle Intra- Borough Study and the Carlisle to Mechanicsburg Inter- Borough Study. The Carlisle Intra-Borough Study indicated a potential for transit service, but originally no response to CAT inquires were received from Carlisle area legislators. Recent recommendations in the Carlisle Borough Comprehensive Plan indicate possible support for additional service. Carlisle Borough and CAT should meet to discuss this service. Upper Allen Township expressed an interest in transit service, however, local officials were not willing to finance the study and the proposal was dropped. 5. Continue implementation of necessary CAT route service adjustments. Small service adjustments are made almost every year. Most are made in response to funding availability and performance evaluations made in the annual Short Range Transit Plan. No major route changes are currently being proposed, however, all service is contingent upon the amount of funding CAT receives, as well as passenger support. 6. Utilize private operators for charter services. Due to Federal regulations enacted in 1987, charter service is almost exclusively available through private operators. Tax-exempt agencies would still qualify for charter service through CAT, however, because of the administrative work involved in securing charter service, CAT has chosen to limit charter service as part of its operating program. 7. Assist in the coordination of paratransit services. Paratransit vehicles are available to non-profit agencies through the Urban Mass Transit Administration's Section 16(b)(2) Program. Application for such funding is made to PennDOT, and is administered on a state-wide competitive basis. Vehicles are then either operated by the acquiring agency or leased to a local transportation provider to provide service. A coordinative service plan should be established to prevent possible duplicative service among the transportation providers. The Cumberland County Transportation Department and Transportation Authority should play a major role in both the preparation and implementation of such a plan. Rail and Aviation 1. Efforts to maintain and improve rail facilities and concepts that serve intra-regional and inter-city travel and distribution should be supported in order to maintain and improve the areas social and economic postures. These services and facilities include AMTRACK and CONRAIL, the proposed High Speed Rail System in Pennsylvania, and feasibility of a light-rail (commuter) system between Carlisle and Palmyra. 13-5 2. Other rail related issues to be considered include the possible abandonment of the CON!RAIL line between Mechanicsburg and Carlisle, establishment of a railroad station at Harrisburg International Airport, continued operational viability of th.e Gettysburg short line railroad, and promoting local zoning schemes which appropriately optimize utilization of rail facilities by potential rail users. 3. Efforts to improve the Region's air facilities should also be supported in order to maintain and improve the Region's social and economic postures. The Cumberland County Transportation Authority can play a major role, on the County's behalf, to ensure proper planning, development, and utilization of the Capital City Airport and Harrisburg International Airport.

13-6 Ex hibit 13-A

Approximate Limits SR From To Road Name Municipality MFC Width AADT(’88)

0074 LynesRd Forge Rd Pa 74 MonroelS Middleton C 18-19 3412-6346 0233 US 11 Parker Rd PA 233 W Pennsboro C 18 3768 Wildwood Rd Park Circle PA 233 N Newton C 16-18 1777 0696 Chamberlin Rd Ridge Rd PA 696 Southampton/Hopewell D 16 1808 0944 Willow Mill Rd Beard Rd PA 944 Silver Spring D 15-18 4452 Pine Hill Rd Magaro Rd PA 944 E Pennsboro C 16 6532 1001 us11 Rebecca St Cavalw Rd N Middleton 0 18 3047 I1004 IHamDden Hts IA St IHamDdenlE Penns ID 114-18 11530-3977 I 1011 us 11 Conodoguinet Cr Lambs Gao Rd iamDden lo 14-18 14933 1013 Hempt Dr 100 Woodland Dr Good Hope Rd iampden 14-1 6 3200-7298 1015 Magaro Rd Teakwood Ln Center St 16-1 8 2096-7784 2002 ThroDe Rd Shady Lane Claremont Rd ““I;Hiddlesex 16-18 4333 2004 Mill Rd Bumble Bee Hollow Rd Lisburn Rd J Allen 14-18 3399 2010 Fisher Rd York St Winding Hill Rd J Allen 14 1699 ‘2011 Williams Grove Rd Dagwood Run ‘Williams Grove Rd Monroe 0 16-18 3478 201 2 Texaco Rd Bare Rd State Rd Silver Spring/M-burg E 14 1539 Entire Lenath ‘Lisburn Rd -ewer Allen lo 14-1 9 2245-3847 12021 ILisburn Rd ICedar Run 1Rossmovne Rd ILower Allen IC 116 12378 I EO31 lYellow Breeches ILisburn Rd ISDanalers Mill 1Lower Allen ID I18 14360-6797 I

13001 (Walnutst ~ (Burd Run IBritton Rd khiooensbura iSt%iG Rd- Rock Ledge Rd Pine Rd S Middleton d 14-16 1669 1W. King St Springhouse Rd N Fayette St Shippensburg D 16 4617

Source: PennDOT Roadway Management System - 1989

Notes: Cartways selected are roadways of 18 or 19 feet width with a maintenance function classification of collector or higher and an AADT of 3000 or greater, and any roadway less than 18 feet wide with an AADT of greater than 1500.

Maint. Func. Classification Codes: A=lnterstate, bother ExpswaylPrimary Arterial, C=Minor Arterial, D=Coilector, E=Locai Access, F=Ramp

AADTEAverage Annual Daily Traffic (Voltrme); MFC=Maint. FunctionalClassification; !%=State Route (Number) 'EXHIBIT' 13-B TCRPC Project Data Base Field and Informati.on Descriptions

Columns 1 & 2: Self Explanatory Column 3: PMS NUMrPennWT mject ganagement System Number FAS=Federal Aid System: FM=Federa.l Aid Interstate FAprFederal Aid Primary FAU=Fe&d Aid Urban FAS-Federal Aid Secondary STAIState (Non Federal Aid) LOC-Local won Federal Aid) F"D=Various Feded Funding Codes SP CODEzState Planning Code: BRPIrBridge Replacement BRST=Bridge Restomtion ECON=Energy Conservation and Safety HCON=Highway Construction - Major 'Projects HCObHighway Completion - New Facility HRST=Highway Restoration HSAF=Highway Safety IRST=Interstatc Restoration LRST=Lacal Highway Restoration TSMI=Transpomuon System Management

Column 4: C0STS:Design. Right-of-way, Construction and Total Column 5: 88-2000 PR1988-2000 Twelve Year Program Period (1st. 2nd or 3rd four year period) AE PHASEHATS Annual Element Phase: C Construction: R Right-of-way: E Engineering TIP PHASE:HATS Transportation Improvement proSram Phase: Same as AE codes (Cp & E) Column 6: BR. B1LL:State Bridge Bill I, n. IXI or IV OIILIG. PLAN:PennDOT Obligation Plyl Column 7: Em,LET=Estimatcd Letting Date EST. NTPtEstimrucd Notice to Proceed Date NTP ISS.=Notice u] Roceed Issued Date Column 8: EST DES COM=Eshated Dcsign Completion Date EST PROJ COM=Estimated Project Completion Date PROJ COMPLETE=Project Completion Date DES APPROVED=Dcsign Approval Date

13-8 PLANNED CUMBERLAND COUNTY HIGHWAY /BRIDGE PROJECTS ON 12 YEAR PROGRAM, HATS TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAN/ANNUAL ELEMENT OR BRIDGE BILL (I -1V)

COUNTY 1% NUM. lPMS MUM. ]COSTS 112 YEAR PR.IBR. BILL [EST. LET /EST DES COM MUNICIPALITY ILOCATION IFAS (D/ROW/ I IOBLIG. (EST. NTP [EST PROJ COM ROAD NAMEINO. JLIMIT FROM 1 FUND ICONSTR (AE PHASE I PLAN INTP ISS. IPROJ COMPLETE PROJ. DESCRIPTION (LIMIT TO (SP CODE ITOTAL ITIP PHASE I I (DES APPROVED

C I I I I I IV I I DI CKINSON IOVER YELLOW BREECHES I I I I I I DICKINSON SCHOOL RD. I I 1300 I I I I BR IOGE REHAB. I I 1300 I I I I

C I I I I I IV I I 0 I CK I NSON (OVER YELLOW BREECHES 1 I I I I I BURNT HOUSE RD. 1 I 1400 I I I I BRIDGE REHAB. I I 1400 I I I I

C I I 157 I 111 I I DI CK I NSON )OVER YELLOW BREECHES CK. ILOC 19 I I I I ENCK'S MILL RD. T462 1 ISTA 1268 I I I I BRIDGE REPL. I IBRPL 1334 I I I I

C 13021 I 172 I I IV I I DICK INSON IOVER YELLOW BREECHES I 110 I I I I BURNT HOUSE RD. I I 1480 I 1 I I BRIDGE REHAB. I I 1562 I I I I

C I I 160 IZND I1V I I E. PENNSBORO IOVER TRIB CONOOOGUINET ILOC 110 I I I I CREEKSIDE OR. 8R. I I STA 1284 I I I I BRIDGE REPL. I IBRPL 1354 I I I I C I I 1190 I I11 I I E. PENNSBORO IOVER CONRAIL I LOC 120 I I I I RIVER ROAD I ISTA (1263 I I I I BRIDGE REPL. I IBRPL 11473 1 1 I I

C I1015 (082L3002 (336 (1ST I 14/24/90 11/16/90 E. PENNSBORO I I FAU 1200 I I I I CENTER ST. lPOSSUM HOLLOW RD. I LEU 11900 IR 1 I I 2 LANE RELOC. IPA 944 ILRST 12436 IC I I I

C I 1082L005 I40 llST 111 I111 )12/7/89 I HAMPDEN !OVER TRIB. CONOOO. ILOC 19 I I 12/5/90 I SEARS RUN DRIVE I SlA 1245 (CR I I I BRIDGE REPL. I I BRPL 12% I I I I C I1013 I 1106 (2NO 111 I I HAMPOEN JOVER CONOOOGUINET IFAU 110 I I I I GOOD HOPE RD. I 1 SCB 1710 I I I I BRIDGE REHAB. I I BRST 1826 I I I I C I9911 (082COO7 (750 IlST/3RD I 11/12/91 I10/6/90 HAMPOEN I lFAP 13750 I I I I I 81 CONNECTOR IHBG . EXPRESSWAY 130000 IR 1 I I 4 LANE REL0C.-P.E. & ROW JI 81 IHCOP 134500 I I I I

~~ ~~~

TCRPC PROJECT DATA BASE REPORT: 11/15/89 13-9 COUNTY ISR NUM. (PMS NUM, JCOSTS 112 YEAR PR.IBR. BILL !EST. LET IEST OES COM MUNICIPALITY )LOCATION IFAS (O/ROW/ I IOBLIG. \EST. NTP \EST PROJ COW ROAD NAME/NO. ]LIMIT FROM 1 FUND 1CONSTR (AE PHASE 1 PLAN INTP ISS. IPROJ COMPLETE PROJ. DESCRIPTION [LIMIT TO JSP CODE ITOTAL ITIP PHASE 1 I JOES APPROVED

C loo11 (082S202N (60 IlST I I I HAMPDEN/SILVER SPRING I 14 I I Il2/4/89 I CARLISLE PIKE (PA 114 lFApITAP 1522 1 I I I SIGNAL IMPRS. (VAN FATTEN DR. IECON 1586 I I I I

C I I 159 I 111 I I HOPEWELL [OVER CONODDGUINET ILOC 19 I I 1 I RAMP BRIDGE-CO .BR I ISTA 1519 I I I I BRIDGE REPL. I IBRPL 1587 I I I I

C I 1082L001 (133 I 11 I I L. FRANKFORO IOVER CONODOGUINET ILOC 110 I I I I T393 HERTZLER BR.-CO.BR. I J STA 1885 I I I I BRIDGE REPL. I IBRFL 11028 1 I I I

C I2035 I (240 /2ND III I I LEMOYNE IOVER CONRAIL IFAU 130 I I I I THIRD ST. I IFCB 11599 I I I I BRIDGE REPL. I IBRPL 11869 I I I I C 1 1010 1082S105N 141 llST I J 18/31/69 LEMOYNE/CAMP HILL I IFAU 13 I I I I YARKET ST. I12TH ST. IFEU * 1204 ICRE I. I I :IGNAL IMPR. 132ND ST. I€CON 1248 I I I I

C I I 1100 I IIV 1 I LOWER ALLEN IOVER YELLOW BREECHES CR. I 1100 I I I I SHEEPFORD RO. T257 I I STA? 1450 I I I I BRIDGE REPL. I I eRPL 1650 I I I I

C I 1082LOO2 1430 12ND 11 I I LOWER ALLEN IOVER YELLOW BREECHES CK. (FAU 130 I I I I GREENLANE DR. I I LFB I2011 JR I I I BRIDGE REPL. I IBRPL 12471 IC I I I

C 12013 1082MOl(lA (25 I I I I LOWER ALLEN I I 15 I I I I SPANGLERS MILL ROAD IYELLOW BREECHES IDA 1249 ICRE I I I RESURFACE & WIDEN ILISBURN RD. I HRST 1279 I 'I I I C I2014 1082S002N (247 (1ST I 13/16/89 1 LOWER ALLEN I IFAU 1263 I I 15/15/89 GETTYSBURG RO. 117TH ST. IFEU 11197 jR I I I WIDEN TO 66'fCENTER LANE 1U.S. 15 IECON 11707 IC I I I

C I2022 1082C016 1593 llST 111 I 19/6/90 LOWER ALLEN IOVER CONRAWLR 123 I FAp 15 I I I I HARRISBURG EXPRESSWAY I IFAp 13954 ICRE I I I BRIDGE REHAB. I IERST (4552 I I I I

TCRPC PROJECT DATA BASE REPORT: 11/15/89 13-10 COUNTY ISR NUM. IPHS NUM. ICOSTS 112 YEAR PR.IBR. BILL (EST. LET (EST DES COM MUM I CI PAL ITY (LOCATION IFAS JD/ROW/ I JOBLIG. /EST. NTP /EST PROJ COM RON NAME/NO. (LIMIT FROM IFUND (CONSTR JAE PHASE I PLAN INTP ISS. (PROJ COMPLETE PROJ. DESCRIPTION /LIMIT TO ISP CODE ITOTAL ITIP PHASE I I (DES APPROVED

C I 1082C003 1119 1 I1 I I MIDDLESEX IOVER CONODDGUINET I I I I I I MIDOLESEX RD. BR. I (LFB (1066 1 I I 17 BRIDGE REPL. I IBRST (1185 I I I I

C I I 125 I I11 I I MIDDLESEX !OVER LETORT SPRING RUN ISTA I I I I 1 VETERINARY RD. I I I I I I I BRIDGE REPL. I IBRPL 125 I I I 1

C I0011 1082SOO2C 1100 llST I I 1 MIDDLESEX I IFAP 1110 I I I I CARLISLE PIKE 11 81 IFAp 12600 )RE I I I 5TH LANE/CONTROL LFT TRNS 1 TURNPIKE 1 HSAF 12810 IC 1 I I

C I I I I I IV I I MT. HOLLY SPRINGS !OVER MOUNTAIN CREEK I I I I I I PINE ST. I I 18 I I I I BRIDGE REHAB. I I I8 I I I I

C I2003 l082COl5 181 llST I11 I I6f 7/90 MT, HOLLY SPRINGS !OVER MOUNTAIN CREEK 113 I I I I HILL STREET I lFAsIFCB 1537 JCR I I I BRIDGE REPL. 1 IBRPL 1631 I I I I

C I0034 1082M019A (86 I I 14/5/90 I 12f 28/89 MT.HOLLY SPRGS./S. MIDD. I IFAP 15 I I 16/4/90 I N. BALTIMORE ST. I IFAp 1857 JCR I I I RESURFACE I IHRST 1948 I I I I

C I4027 l082C008 1100 IIST III I 12/1/90 N. MIDDLETON IWATTS BRIDGE ISTA 122 I I I I MCCLURES GAP RD. JOVER CONODOGUINET ISCB (1068 ICR I I I

BRIDGE REPL. I IBRPL 11190 I 1 I I I

~ C I I I59 13RD 111 I I N. NEWTON/U. MIFFLIN (OVER CONOWGUINET Iioc 19 I I I I THOMPSON BRIDGE T393-CO.BI ISTA 1529 I I I I BRIDGE REPL. I I BRPL 1597 I I I I

C I0233 1082COl3 Is0 (1ST 111 19/13/90 I11/2/89 NEWILLE (OVER BIG SPRING RUN IFAP 126 I I I I HIGH STREET I I FCB 1335 ICR I I I BRIDGE REPL. I IBRPL 1441 I I I I

C I3007 I 160 I 111 I I NEUVILLE IUNDER ABANDONED CR RR (STA 128 I I I I I ISTA 1184 I I I I BRIDGE REMOVAL I IBRPL 1272 I I I I

TCRPC PROJECT DATA BASE REPORT: 11/15/89 13-11 COUNTY ISR NUM. (PMS NUM. (COSTS (12 YEAR PR.18R. BILL /EST. LET JEST DES COM MUNICIPALITY ILOCAT I ON I FAS lO/ROW/ I IOBLIG. IEST. NTP IEST PROJ COM ROAD NAME/NO. JLIMIT FROM IFUND ICONSTR IAE PHASE I PLAN INTP ISS. IPROJ COMPLETE PROJ. DESCRIPTION (LIMIT TO (SP CODE /TOTAL {TIP PHASE I I IDES APPROVED

C I I I I I IV I I PENN (OVER YELLOW BREECHES I I I I I I LEEO RD. I I 1400 I I I I BRIDGE REHAB. I I 1400 I I I I C I0081 1082C803 I125 llST I I I10/6/89 PENN IS. OF CARLISLE IFA1 15 I I I I I 81 I 1 I4R 13800 JCR I I I EXPAND REST AREA I I IRST 13930 I I I I C I I I I I IV I I 5. MIDDLETON IOVER BOILING SPRINGS LAKE] I I I I I BOILING SPRINGS RD. I I 160 I I I I BRIDGE REPL. I I 160 I I I I

C I I 194 I I IV I I S. MIDDLETON IOVER YELLOW BREECHES 1 110 I I I I CRAIGHEAD C0.ER.T 520 1 ISTA 1628 I I I I BRIDGE REPL. I I BRPL 1732 I I I I C IO1 74 1082COl4 (60 I 111 19/13/90 5. MIDDLETON IOVER BOILING SPRINGS RUN IFAS 110 I 1 111/12/90 I BOILING SPRINGS RD. PA1741 I SA (232 IE I I I BRIDGE REPL. I I eRPL 1302 IC I I I

C 13008 (082M049A 125 1 I 14/5/90 I S. MIDOLETON (BRIDGE OVER HUNTERS RUN I 110 I I 16/4/90 I PINE GROVE RD. I ISTA I148 ICR I I I BRIDGE REPL. I I 1183 I I I I C I3023 1082H020A 154 1 I I 19/28/89 S. MIDDLETON I I 15 I I I 1 WALNUT BOTTOM ROAD IVIC. OF GARFIELD DR. IFNU 1544 lCftE I I I RESURFACE, MILL, WIDEN !PA 34 IHRST 1603 I I I I C I0696 1082S10615 (23 llST I J 8/16/90 SHIPPENSBURG BORO. I IFAP 13 I I I I ORANGE ST. IS. QUEEN ST. I TAP 190 ICRE I I I SIGNAL IMPRS. IS. FAYETTE ST. I €CON 1116 I I I I

CC 10011 (082C009 (20 IlST I )11/9/89 I SILVER SPRING I IFAp 11 1 I ll/8/90 I CARLISLE PIKE I I STA (193 ICRE I I I APPL. TRAIL FOOTBRIDGE I ITSHI 1214 I I I I C I0114 1082M059A 141 I I 13/8/90 I12/28/89 SILVER SPRING I I 15 I I 15/7/90 I PA 114 - WILLOW MILL RD. IVIC. OF I 81 I 1406 JCR I I I RESTORATION-POST TEN C0NClU.S. 11 I 1452 I I I I

TCRPC PROJECT DATA BASE REPORT: 11/15/89 13-12 COUNTY ISR MUM. (PMS HUM. (COSTS 112 YEAR PR.IBR. BILL /EST. LET JEST DES COM MUNICIPAL I TY I LOCATION IFAS lD/ROW/ I JOBLIG. JEST. NTP IEST PROJ COM ROAD NAME/NO. lLIMIT FROM I FUND ICONSTR IAE PHASE I PLAN INTP ISS. IPROJ COMPLETE 0 PROJ. DESCRIPTION ILIMIT TO ISP COOE ITOTAL ITIP PHASE I I IDES APPROVED C I 1082L003 (90 llST I1 1 I SILVER SPRING/MIDDLESEX IOVER CONRAIL I LOC 120 I I I 15/18/90 APPALACHIAN OR. (CUMB. VALLEY BR. I STA 1455 I I 16/29/89 I BRIDGE REPL. I IBRPL 1565 I 1 I I

C (0174 1082M2018 131 I IYES I 1/4/90 19/28/89 SOUTHAMPTON IOVER I 81 I STA 15 I I 13/5/90 1 PA 174 I ISTA I309 ICR I I I ERIGE REHAB. I IBRST 1345 I I I I

C I I 175 I 1 IV I I UPPER ALLEN IOVER YELLOW BREECHES I 175 I I I I HALL ESTATE BRIDGE I I 1450 I I I I BRIDGE REPL. I I 1600 I I I I

C I I 1101 I I IV I I UPPER ALLEN IOVER YELLOW BREECHES I 120 I I I I BISHOP BRIDGE I I STA 1671 I I I I BRIDGE REPL. I IBRPL 1792 I I I I

C 1 1 116 12ND I I I UPPER ALLEN I IFAU 18 I I I 1 WILSON RD. JALLENOALE RD. ILEU 1192 t I I I lU. ALLEN TWP. I LRST 1216 I I I I :TrTIXII\TION 10015 l082COl7 ll000 )2ND/3RD 1 I I e UPPER ALLEN I@ LISBURN RO. FAP I 11000 I I I I U.S. 15 IYORK CO. lFAP ~10000 I I I I CONSTR . INTERCHANGE IFISHER RD. IHSAf 112000 I I I I

C loo15 lO82COl8 140 llST 1 I I UPPER ALLEN (WINDING HILL RD. INTER. IFAP 1160 I I I I U.S. 15 (PA 114 (fSP (5800 1 I ‘I I CONVERT TO LIM. ACCESS ITURNPIKE IHCON 16000 JCR I I I

C I0015 lO82SOOlC 120 llST I 13/8/90 I UPPER ALLEN I I FAP I I I 15/7/90 I U.S. 15 ILISEURN RO. I 1105 ICE I I I SIGNAL IMPR. - 3 INTS. IWINDING HILL RD. IHW 1125 I I I I

C I 1082L020 160 12ND 1111 I 1 UPPER FRANKFORD (OVER ROCK RUN I 120 I I I I BRIDGE RO. T 429 I { STA 1190 IR I I I BRIDGE REPL. I I BRPL 1270 IC I I I

C I I 160 I 111 I I UPPER FRANKFORD IOVER ROCK RUN I LOC 120 I 1 I 1 BRIOGE RD. T-429 I ISTA 1190 I I I I a BRIDGE REPL. 1 (BRPL 1270 I I I I

TCRPC PROJECT OATA BASE REPORT: 11/15/89 13-13 COUNTY ISR NUM. IPMS NUM, (COSTS 112 YEAR PR.(BR. BILL (EST. LET (EST OES COM

MUNICIPALITY~ ..~~ (LOCATION 1 FAS (DIROWI I (08LZG. JEST. NTP JEST PROJ COM ROAD NAME/NO. ILIMIT FROM IFUND ICONSTR JAE PHASE 1 PLAN INTP ISS. IPROJ COMPLETE PROJ. DESCRIPTION ILIMZT TO JSP CODE !TOTAL lTIP PHASE I I IDES APPROVED

C I 1082M030A (5 I I 14/5/90 I VARIOUS I I I1 I I 16/4/90 I VARIOUS I ISA I126 lCRE I I I GUIDERAIL IMPR. I IHRST 1132 I I I I

C (4010 I 160 (2ND IIV I I W. PENNSBORO 1 UNDER ABANDONED CR RR I STA 122 I I I I MOUNT ROCK RO. I ISTA 1135 I I I I BRIDGE REMOVAL I I BRPL 1217 I I I I

C 10011 1082C012 1226 llST 111 I 16/7/90 WORMLEY SBURG IOVER CONODOGUINET I FAS 110 I I 19/13/90 ( U.S. 11/15 SOUTHBOUND I IFCB 11508 ICR I I I BRIDGE REPL. I IBRPL 11744 I I I I

e

TCRPC PROJECT DATA BASE REPORT: 11/15/89 13-14 CHAPTER 14 COMMUNITY FACILITIES PLAN The Future Land Use Plan illustrates proposed categorical allocations of residential, commercial, industrial, conservation, public/semi-public, and conservation land uses throughout the County. The Community Facilities Plan is intended to provide recommendations commensurate with the respective County and local (public and private sector) responsibilities to support such land use activities through the provision of recreation opportunities, sewer and water services, police and fire protection services, solid waste collection and disposal, and general utilities. It should be noted that due to the wide variations in development densities, land use characteristics, population densities, and fiscal resources of municipalities throughout the County, some facility and service recommendations are not yet practical to achieve. However, as development densities increase and land use composition changes over time, they can provide a basis upon which rational decisions can be made to determine appropriate levels of support. The determination of the scope of responsibilities assigned to the County and local levels is critical to the proper provision of service and facility needs. The direct implementa- tion of various community facility and service elements fall 0 within the scope of responsibilities applicable to the local level. The provision of educational programs and facilities is the responsibility of the local school districts, as they are the unit of local government created and assigned this task by state law. The provision of sewer and water services falls within the scope of responsibility of municipal authorities, developers, and water supply companies as the structure of local service dictates. Police sentices are maintained and provided by the Pennsylvania Police and local municipal police departments, while fire protection services are maintained and provided by municipal fire departments and local volunteer fire companies. Solid waste management planning is the responsibility of the County, with implementation of the plan and provision of services directed through contracts and ordinances established at the local level. The provision of general utility services (gas, electric, telephone) are provided through private sector companies under the jurisdiction of the Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission. The role of Cumberland County, in the sector of community facilities and services, primarily consists of planning, advisory, and coordination activities. Certain planning responsibilities such as sewage, solid waste management, and storm water management are required by state legislation. However, in all cases actual implementation by ordinance and/or contract of services are responsibilities assigned to local government units or municipal authorities created by local * governments. The County does play a major role in the provision

14-1 of human services type programs and facilities, as outlined in Chapter 10, County Administration and Fhances. These types of services, although extremely vital to the health and welfare of County residents, are not traditionally included within the scope of community facilities and services. It is, however, recommended that the County prepare and adopt a Comprehensive Human Services Plan to offic.ially coordinate the provision of such services throughout the County. Parks and Recreation As reflected in Chapter 9, Existing Community Facilities and Services, Cumberland County residents are offered a variety of publicly owned recreation sites and facilities. Approximately 1,200 acres of recreation land is in municipal ownership, supplemented with approximately 800 acres in School District ownership. Cumberland County currently supports one recreational facility, the Cumberland County Biker-Hiker Trail, for non- motorized recreational use. The Commonwealth of Pennsylvania owns and maintains approximatePy 40,500 acres of land open to the public for recreational use. The County has yet to prepare a Comprehensive Recreation Plan which woul.d, based on detailed analysis of recreation needs, provide County-level policy on recreation opportunities. ThLe establishment of an adequately staffed Park and Recreation Department and the preparation of a County Recreation Plan is recommended. In order to establish an initial determination of park and recreation needs, recreation ac:reage per papulation guidelines of the National Recreation and Park Associatj-on3 have been applied to U. S. Bureau of Census 1988 population estimates and the existing recreation inventory to reflect the general disposition of recreational opportunities fulfillment throughout the County. This data is reflected in Tables 14-1 and 14-2, which indicate recommended ranges of park and recreation acreage per municipality and Plan Development Section. Using this very generalized approach, the data in Table 14-1 indicates that eight of the :34 municipalities fall within the recommended acreage ranges. It. appears that several others would possibly fall within these ranges when School District recreation lands are taken into consideration. The proposition being put forth is that local recreational needs fulfillment is the combined responsibility of the local municipality and the servicing school district. l4-2

3. The National Recreation and Park Association is the nation's largest independent non-prof it public service organization -advocating quality parks and recreation, and provides services to recreation and park professionals and the general public. With head- quarters in Metropoli-tan Washington, D .C. , it has five (5) regional service centers, and fifty (50) state affiliates. County and regional (plan-development section) recreational needs fulfillment are, in turn, the combined responsibility of the County and State. Based on National Recreation and Park Association standards, general needs in terms of gross County- wide acreage are more than adequately provided. However, at the regional level the Cumberland East Plan Development Section is deficient. The National Recreation and Park Association (NRPA) has established a park classification system that is intended to serve as a guide to planning - not as an absolute blueprint. It recommends that a park system, at a minimum, be composed of a "core" system of park lands. As reflected in the Parks and Recreation Section of Chapter 9, Community Facilities and Services, most of the local municipalities have established the foundation of what could be developed into comprehensive municipal park systems to satisfy local needs. The National Recreational and Park Association's publication, Recreation, Park and Open Space Standards and Guidelines, emphasizes that recreation planning and the provision of recreation facilities are not necessarily undertaken by one agency. Parks under the control of county, state, and federal government agencies, schools, and private interests must all be considered in the provision of adequate recreation opportunities. It is recommended that the County and local municipalities prepare and adopt comprehensive park and recreation plans to * provide a thorough evaluation of the recreational opportunities within their respective jurisdictions, identify any current deficiencies, and effectively plan for the recreation needs of residents in the future. It is further recommended that the following NRPA basic recreation policy areas be considered for inclusion in the plans: ,

0 Opportunities for All 0 Proper Legal Framework 0 Resource Evaluation 0 Advance Acquisition Planning 0 Demand Projections 0 Defined Levels of Responsibility 0 Proper Distribution of Sites 0 Flexibility in Design 0 Accessibility 0 Quality of the Site 0 Citizen Involvement 0 Relationships With Other Agencies 0 School - Park Coordination 0 Park and Recreation Land Protection The policies and recommendations setforth in the Pennsylvania Recreation Plan should be incorporated into such plans, as they are applicable. Also worthy of note is that the Pennsylvania Municipalities Planning Code requires local governments administering ordinances containing provisions for dedication of recreation land and facilities, or payment of a fee 14-3 in lieu thereof, to formally adopt a comprehensive recreation plan in accordance with definite principals and standards contained in the subdivision and land development ordinance.

TABLE 14-1 MUNICIPAL PARK AND RECREATION NEEDS Cumberland County

Existing Recreation (‘1 Recommended (3) Municipality 1988 Population (l) Area (acres 1 Acreaae RanQe Camp Hill Borough 8,060 104 50-85 Carlisle Borough 20,720 136 129-217 Cooke Township 190 0 1-2 Dickinson Township 3,800 0 24-40 East Pennsboro Township 14,250 83 89-150 Hampden Township 19,720 226 123-207 Hopewell Township 1,660 0 10-17 Lemoyne Borough 4,260 28 27-44 Lower Allen Township 15,680 151 98-165 Lower Frankford Township 1,310 0 8-14 Lower Mifflin Township 1.370 0 8-14 Mechanicsburg Borough 10,510 55 66-110 Middlesex Township 4,360 27-46 Monroe Township 4,660 30 29-49 Mt. holly Springs Borough 2,140 37 13-22 Newburg Borough 320 0 2-3 New Cumberland Borough 7,790 34 49-82 Newville Borough 1,660 0 10-17 North Middleton Township 11,040 40 69-115 North Newton Township 2,170 0 13-22 Penn Township 2,130 0 13-22 Shippensburg Borough 4,420 10 27-46 Shippensburg Township 4,130 0 26-43 Shiremanstown Borough 1,550 3 10-16 Silver Spring Township 8 I 620 33 54-91 Southampton Township 3.170 0 20-33 South Middleton Township 10.130 40 63-106 South Newton Townshlp 910 0 6-9 Upper Allen Township 12,590 37 79-132 Upper Frankford Township 2,030 0 13-21 upper Mifflin Township 1,130 0 7-12 West Fairview Borough 1,500 6 9-16 West Pennsboro Township 4,600 16 29-48 Wormleysburg Borough 2,700 24 17-28

(1) U. 5. Bureau of Census Estlmates (2) 1987 Municipal Recreation Survey (3) National Recreation and park Association recreation guldellnes

14-4 TABLE 14-2 COUNTY/REGIONAL PARK AN0 RECREATION NEEDS Cumberland County

Existing State/County (*) Recommended (3) Plan Development Section 1988 Population ('1 Recreation Acreaqe Acreaqe Rancle Cumberland East 98,610 0 493- 986 Cumberland Central 65,470 9.274 327-655 Cumberland West 31,200 31,133 156-312 Cumberland County 195,280 40,407 976-1,953

(1) U. 5. Bureau of Census Estimates (2) Pennsylvania Game Commission, Pennsylvania Fish Commission, Pennsylvania Bureau of Forestry, Pennsylvania Bureau of State Parks, Tri-County Regional Planning Commission. (3) National Recreation and Park Association recreation guidelines.

Emeraencv ReSROnSe and Protective Services The primary role of the County in emergency services activity is one of administration and direction of emergency personnel training and maintenance of a public emergency response communication network. This function is carried out by the Cumberland County Office of Emergency Preparedness. The Office is functional 24 hours a day and coordinates with local police departments, fire departments/organizations, and ambulance associations. As required by State legislation, the emergency response "911" number is available throughout the County. The direct implementation of police, fire, and ambulance services is a primary role of local municipal agencies and organizations; with hospitals supplementing ambulance and emergency medical response services. Recommended options to provide such services include, establishing local municipal service organizations; consolidation of local police departments, fire companies, and emergency medical service organizations on a multi-municipal basis: contracting with neighboring municipal organizations for such services ; and entering into mutual response assistance agreements with neighboring municipal organizations. In any case, municipalities will continue to receive police protection services from the Pennsylvania State Police. The Pennsylvania Department of Cornunity Affairs provides technical assistance to local governments for such ventures. Sewaae Services Local governments are required by the Pennsylvania Sewage Facilities Act to adopt a plan for sewage services (on-lot management districts and public sewage service districts) for areas within their jurisdiction. Such plans must be in compliance with the Act and implementing rules and regulations of the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Resources. It is strongly recommended that all local governments in the County comply with this requirement, conduct appropriate updates, and coordinate regionalized sewage service planning where appropriate with adjacent municipalities.

14-5 The Cumberland County Official Sewerage Plan was prepared in 1969, and last updated in 1971. The County should initiate a major update effort as soon isS possible to provide necessary area-wide sewage planning guidance to local governments. A current plan is also necessary for the County Planning Commission to provide effective review and comment on sewage modules for land development. This review and comment activity is required input, intended to assist local governments and the Department of Environmental Resources in their sewerage plan implementation decision-making process. Solid Waste Manaaement The Pennsylvania Solid Waste Management Act requires Counties to prepare and adopt a County Solid Waste Management Plan in compliance with guidelines administered by the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Resources. The County is, with the assistance of a private consultant, preparing such a plan which upon adoption must be implemented through ordinances and service contracts enforced by local governments. Local governments should follow this planning process closely, provide practical review and comment on its proposals, and actively support its implementation when adopted. Of particular importance is support of the waste rectuction and recycling provisions of the Act. Several municipa.lities have supported implementation of privately initiated recycling programs throughout the County; others should take steps to support or directly implement such activities within tlheir jurisdictions. Water Sumlv Services Although not required by State legislation, Cumberland County has adopted a Water Supply Plan. 'Ilhe Plan, prepared and adopted in 1969, is in need of immediate update. The County has experienced significant development activit.y, which has placed a severe burden on surface water supplies; primarily the Yellow Breeches and Conodoguinet Creeks. Water supply allocation difficulties are being experienced by local water suppliers, with questionable capabilities to adequately fulfill future water supply demands. The Susquehanna River Basin Commission (SRBC) is currently preparing a water resource assessment of these two watersheds; to include an evaluation of present water usage and the determination of future needs. It is recommended that the County initiate an update effort of the 1969 Water Supply Plan as a coordinated and concurrent activity with the SRBC Study. It is important that local off ici.als and local water suppliers cooperatively develop workable programs to upgrade existing water supply system deficiencies and coordinate the expansion of water services as the development process continues throughout the County. It is recommended that such provisions be incorporated into local subdivision and land development regulations; to include provisions requiring hydrologic studies to determine well yield and water quality assessments where individual on-lot wells are to be utilized.

14-6 Storm Water Manaaement Facilities 0 Storm water management facilities are necessary to miti.gate flooding and prevent surface water runoff damage. The Pennsylvania Storm Water Management Act requires counties to prepare a storm water management plan for designated watersheds within their corporate jurisdiction. Local municipalities must, in turn, adopt and enforce storm water management regulations designed to implement the plan. The designated watersheds for Cumberland County are as follows:

0 Yellow Breeches Creek 0 Conodoguinet Creek 0 Cedar Run 0 Mountain Creek 0 HogestowdTrindle Spring 0 Susquehanna River Runs 0 Middle Spring Creek 0 Conewago Creek 0 Letort Spring Creek 0 Conococheague Cxeek It is recommended that Cumberland County continue to pursue a consistent program of prioritized watershed planning for storm water management throughout the County, and cooperatively work with adjacent Counties in the preparation of plans for joi.ntly shared watersheds. Local officials are, upon approval of the County Plan, encouraged to prepare and adopt implementing regulations within the time frame mandated by the Act. As an interim measure to manage surf ace water runoff prior to adoption of the County Plan, local officials are encouraged to e incorporate storm water management provisions into their land management regulations that require developers to plan for and provide storm water management facilities necessary to properly manage runoff generated by their developments.

14-7 -CHAPTER 15 -HOUSING PLAN One of the most critical components (of a comprehensive plan is the strategy for improving the condition and supply of housing. The primary objectives of a housing program are to improve and protect the status of existing dwellings, assure stable future housing development, and prlovide assurances that a variety of housing will be available for all age groups and income levels. Housina Needs Since Cumberland County is growing in population, new families moving into the County will need additional housing units. Using existing 1980 Census data and Tri County Regional Planning Commission population projections, it is estimated that an additional 17,253 dwelling units will be needed to house the population in the year 2000 (see Table 15-1). This estimate seems conservative when considering the high level of building permit activity in Cumberland County in recent years (see Table 15-2). It should be noted that the number of units which will actually be built to meet future needs will be highly influenced by the area's economic growth. Sewer capacity and the availability of appropriately zoned land are also important factors influencing the actual figure. Recent action by the Department of Envirolnmental Resources (DER) to impose moratoriums on sewerage systems may severedy restrict the rate of construction in some areas of the County; however, this action is not expected to impact many municipalities,. To estimate the housing needs between 1980 and 2000 by municipality, existing 1980 Census data and projected 2000 population figures were used. The 1980 data included: the population residing in dwelling units (excludes those in institutions and/or group quarters, Col.A), the number of occupied dwelling units (Col. B), the number of persons per occupied dwelling unit (a measure of averaige household size, Col. C), and the number of deficient (Col. ID) and vacant dwelling units (Col. E, adjusted). An assumption was made that the number of persons per dwelling unit would remain the same over the time period. The number of "standard vacant" dwelling units was calculated as the total number of vacant units minus the number of boarded up vacant units, sLnce the boarded up vacant units are definitely not available and would need to be replaced or rehabilitated. The estimated number of dwelling units which would be required to house the population in the year 2000 (Col. H) was calculated by dividing the projected population residing in dwelling units in the year 2000 (Col. G) by the persons per dwelling unit figure (Col. C) . The number of additional units needed between 1980 and 2000 to house the 2000 population (Col. 15-1 I) was estimated by: (1) subtracting the number of existing dwelling units in 1980 from the estimated number of units required for 2000, (2) adding the number of deficient units in 1980, since these will have to be replaced or rehabilitated, and (3) subtracting the standard vacant units in 1980, since these are available for use. The resulting figure represents the number of dwelling units that would have to be constructed or rehabilitated to provide standard housing for the entire population living in dwelling units in 2000. County-wide, it is estimated that 17,253 additional dwellings would be needed. An important component of housing need is the number of units needed to house the low income residents. To estimate this need, a commonly used assumption is made that one occupied dwelling unit is equivalent to one household, since one household generally occupies one dwelling unit. Next, we want to establish the number of low income dwellings that existed in 1980. Since the County Redevelopment Authority can presently provide housing assistance only to households earning 50 percent or less of the median income, this level of earnings was considered to be the break off point for defining "low income." Using the assumption that one dwelling unit equals one household, the total number of low income households in 1980 (i.e., those earning 50 percent or less of the median income of the municipality) is equivalent to the total number of low income dwellings that existed in 1980 (Col. F). The additional number of low income dwelling units needed for the year 2000 (Col. J) was calculated by taking the percentage of dwellings that were low income in 1980 and applying that same proportion to the total number of dwelling units needed in 2000, again using the assumption that one dwelling unit equals one household. This method of calculating low income housing needs is based upon the growth in the number of low income households as the entire population grows, and does not consider other factors such as housing quality. This factor is addressed in the "deficient" category. This figure (3,158 for the County) represents the additional number of low income dwellings to be provided due to the growth in low income households by the year 2000, either through the rehabilitation of existing homes or the construction of new units. The rehabilitation of existing dwellings is an important component of an improved low income housing stock. Information on the number of low income dwelling units needed can be used by the Cumberland County Housing and Redevelopment Authority in its program planning. Currently, the Authority has a list of 300 low and moderate income families waiting for housing assistance. This is the largest the list has ever been. With the federal government providing less funding, and recent tax law changes removing incentives for developers to e build low income units, demand far exceeds supply. Thus, the

15-2 TABLE 15 - 1 HOUSING NEEDS 1980 CUHBERLAND COUNTY 1980-2000 2000 Add it iona 1 Population I Persons Per Deficient Standard # Projected Estimated # Addt'l OU's Low Income Residing Occupied Occupied Occupied Vacant Low Income Pop. Resid. Occupied Needed Dwell ings Municipality in O.U.'s D.U.'s D.U. D.U. '5 D.U.'s thvelling Units in D.U.'s D.U.'s 1980-2000 Needed ------A------B------C------D------E------F------G------H------I------J----- Canp Hill Boro. 8360 3494 2.39 27 73 688 8557 3580 40 28 Carlisle Boro. 16349 6879 2.37 339 375 1531 20480 8641 1726 370 Cooke Twp. 184 83 2.43 10 25 17 27 1 112 14 5 Oickinson Twp. 3046 1015 2.99 67 27 202 3693 1235 260 45 East Pennsboro Twp. 13478 5198 2.59 115 197 1010 18563 7159 1879 351 Hampden Twp. 16619 5694 2.92 91 203 1031 22360 7661 1855 424 Hopewell Twp. 1408 435 3.24 23 24 82 1833 566 130 26 Lemoyne Boro. 4188 1889 2.21 51 66 328 3931 1779 -125 -8 Lower Allen Tup. 12498 4754 2.64 41 111 729 16540 6265 1441 211 Loner Frankford Twp. 1263 401 3.14 39 6 74 1659 528 160 26 Lower Hifflin Twp. 1114 351 3.20 33 39 47 1505 470 113 14 Hechanicsburg Boro. 9497 3610 2.62 55 96 580 10851 4142 491 83 .rnr cn Mlddiesex iwp. 4505 1300 2.3 86 JV 251 5925 ???E E! 139 Monroe Twp. 4828 1591 3.04 51 72 285 6470 2128 516 98 Mt. Holly Springs Boro. 2074 762 2.71 47 29 162 2332 86 1 117 19 Newburg Boro. 314 126 2.68 8 10 29 302 113 -15 -2 New Cumberland Boro. 8010 3166 2.54 52 112 555 9285 3656 430 103 Newille Boro. 1363 517 2.65 48 74 116 1092 412 -131 -25 North Middleton Twp. 9333 3092 2.98 114 102 507 13571 4554 1474 222 Nnrth Newton Twp. 1700 529 3.21 31 16 77 2155 671 157 24 Penn Twp. 1939 623 3.12 61 32 119 2452 786 192 30 Shippensburg Boro. 4356 1787 2.43 77 101 436 4248 1748 -63 -16 Sh ippensburg Twp. 1808 641 2.80 77 78 131 5780 2064 1422 282 Sh iremanstown Boro. 1735 47 2.50 9 14 131 1828 731 39 8 Silver Spring Twp. 7110 2446 2.92 64 82 359 8381 2870 406 43 Southhanpton Tup. 2951 919 3.22 98 33 187 3946 1225 371 72 South Middleton Twp. 8985 3099 2.88 127 48 483 10717 3721 701 112 South Newton Twp. 993 32 1 3.01 32 13 60 1128 375 73 11 Upper Allen Tup. 9426 3232 2.92 53 104 584 15191 5209 1926 352 Upper Frankford Twp. 1518 467 3.30 50 21 115 1954 592 154 28 Upper Mifflin Twp. 954 279 3.46 41 14 66 1210 350 98 18 West Fairview Boro. 1426 532 2.68 15 19 107 1287 480 -56 -11 West Pennsboro Twp. 4292 1398 3.05 59 26 245 5575 1828 463 84 Wonnleysburg Boro . 2760 1200 2.31 15 32 200 3057 1323 106 -8 COUNTY TOTALS 170384 62803 2.71 2106 2324 11524 219129 80274 17253 3158

SOURCE: U.S. CENSUS, CENSUS OF POPULATION AND HOUSING, 1980: POPULATION IONS FOR YEAR 2000 COMPLETED BY THE TCRPC, MARCH 1982. development of new ways to assist low and moderate income families looking for suitable housing should be a priority for the County. It is recommended that the data in Table 15-1 be updated when the 1990 Census data becomes available. Some of the information from the 1980 Census was incomplete and not comparable to the 1970 Census, for example, the data on deficient housing units. The deficient housing figures on this table were estimated by adding the number of units lacking complete plumbing facilities for exclusive use and the number of overcrowded units, then subtracting the number of units that possessed both of these characteristics. Similarly, the data related to low income housing needs should be updated after the 1990 Census. Housina Activity The unavailability of comparable data makes it difficult to track recent trends in housing activity in the County. The most consistent data available is the building permit information compiled by the U.S. Census Bureau. Tables 15-2 and 15-3 indicate the total number of units and the dollar value of residential building permits issued in the County during the time period 1981 through 1988. From 1981 to 1987, the last year for which complete figures are available, the @ number of new residential dwelling units allowed by building permits increased from 531 to 1536, for a rise of 189 percent. The total dollar value of these permits increased 405 percent over the same time period, from approximately $18 million in 1981 to $91 million in 1987. 1986 was the peak year of residential building activity, with 1658 new units permitted, while 1987 saw the highest dollar value figure for residential construction in a single year ($91 million). The 1988 figures (as of the month of December) appear to show a leveling off of the trend, with both the total number of new units and the building permit values showing a likely decline from the high levels of the previous year. However, housing building activity remains strong in the County and is expected to remain so in 1989. A land use inventory also gives information by residential type. The most current breakdown of existing residential land use in Cumberland County was completed in 1981 (see Table 15-4). At that time, a total of 39,511 acres, or 9.24 percent of all land in the County, was used for residential purposes. 35,115 of these 39,511 acres, or approximately 89 percent of all residential land, was used for single family detached dwellings. An updated land use survey would be needed to show whether the percentage of land in the County used for residences has e increased, as well as what the impact of more residential (and other type) development has been on agricultural or other undeveloped land.

15-4 TABLE 15-2 NEW RESIDENTIAL BUILDING PERMITS CUMBENAND COUNTY 19131-1988 Dwellina TYRe 1981 1982 1983 1984 1.985 1986 1987 1988 Single Family 357 386 745 827 1.035 1327 1337 914 2 Family 24 24 :L 0 32 16 40 14 8 3 and 4 Family 12 38 42 40 39 8 15 16 5 or More Fami lv 138 102 203 209 60. 283 170 118 Total New Units 531 550 loll0 1108 3.150 1658 1536 1056 Data is adjusted for information not reported, based on historical trends. "The Single Family" category includes detached dwellings, plus any attached dwellings of 2 or more, which meet both of the following criteria: 1). have a ground to-roaf party wall, and 2) have separate utility metering. Any 2 or more family dwellings which do not have a ground-to-roof party wall, and/or have common utility metering, are included in the 2 Family, 3 and 4 Family, or 5 or More Famjily categories. 1988 data is of December 1988. SOURCE: Bldg Permits Branch, Construction Statistics Division, US Census

TABLE 15-3 $ VALUE OF RESIDENTIAL BUILDING PERMITS CUHBERLAND COUNTY 1981-1988 (In Millions of :S) Dwellinn TvDe 1981 1982 1983 1984 1.985 1986 1987 1988 Single Family 14.514 16.166 32.318 40.967 54..414 73.75 86.409 68.192 Two Family 0.784 0.803 0.488 1.149 0.385 1.467 0.118 0.372 3 and 4 Family 0.384 1.034 1.063 1.245 0.865 0.22 0.326 0.328 5 or More Family 2.412 2.625 4.86 5.842 9!.378 10.154 4.521 4.11 County Totals 18.094 20.628 38.729 49.203 58.042 85.591 91.374 73.002

Figures indicate value of building as indicated on bldg permits. This usually includes material and labor, not including cost of land, overhead, etc. Figures may vary by permit issuing place. Data is adjusted for information not reported based on historical trends. Dollar values are rounded.

The "Single Family" category includes detached units, plus any attached units which meet both of the following criteria: I) have a gtound-to-roof party'wall, and 2) have separate utility metering.

1988 data is of December 1988.

SOURCE: Bldg Permits Branch, Construction Statistics Division. US Census 15-5 TABLE 15-4 Residential Land Use Cumberland County 1981

LAND TOTAL PCT # DWELLING UNITS #PARCELS USE ACRES IN OF MARKET MARKET SECOND IN CLASSIFI- CLASSIFI- TOTAL VALUE VALUE PRIMARY ARY CLASSIFI CATION CATION ACRES LAND BUILDINGS USE USE CATION (in Millions of $1 Single family det. 35 * 115 8.24 459.208 2,450.783 39,447 480 39,840 Single family semi-det . 365 .08 16.954 102.881 3,280 20 3,176 Single family attached 118 .02 7.498 53.119 1,566 32 1,441 Duplex 140 .03 6.086 25.169 880 25 497 Multifamily 322 .07 29.713 140.217 4 * 413 438 573 Mobile Home 2,944 .69 5.965 17.128 761 259 937 M.H./Parks 507 .11 2.322 1.562 2,057 274 71 CLASSIFICATION DEFINITIONS:

SINGLE FAMILY, DETACHED: A building used by one (1) family, having only one (1) dwelling unit and having two (2) side yards. SINGLE FAMILY, SEMI-DETACHED: A dwelling used by one (1) family, having one (1) side @yard, one (1) party wall common with another building. SINGLE FAMILY, ATTACHED: A dwelling used for one (1) fadly and having two (2) party walls in common with other buildings (such as row house or townhouse). DUPLEX: A building used by two (2) families, with one (1) dwelling unit arranged over the other. and having two (2) side yards. MULTI-FAMILY: A building used by three (3) or more families living independently of each other and doing their own cooking, including apartment houses.

SOURCE: TCRPC 1981

Another indicator of housing activity is the number of home sales within a given area. Table 15-5 shows the total number of residential sales which occurred in each municipality, the three Plan Development Sections, and the County from 1984 - 1988. County-wide, the number of home sales remained fairly constant over the time period. The number of home sales in the County peaked in 1986 at 3,865, corresponding with the peak in new home building permit activity in the same year. Housina Affordabilitv The National Level Owning a home is part of the American dream, and decent housing in a suitable living environment is considered to be a fundamental value of our society. Unfortunately, being able to 15-6 find decent housing at an affordable cost is becoming increasingly difficult for many Americans. While the majority of American homeowners are well-housed and benefit from significant equity in their homes, the burden of rising housing costs has fallen disproportionately upon young, first time homebuyers and low/moderate income households. Selected housing statistics illustrate the af fordability problem. The national homeownership rate is at its lowest level in 15 years, despite record levels of housing production. For households aged 25 to 29, the homeownership rate dropped from 43.3 percent in 1980 to 35.9 percent in 1987. Similar sharp declines were experienced by households aged 30 - 39. Historically high homeowner costs, coupled with declines in real income for these groups, have kept more of these young families in rental units, driving up the cost of rental housing. The effect of higher rental costs is felt most acutely by low income renter households, .who already pay too large a share of their income for rent. In addition, there has been a long- term increase in the number of low income households, in part due to the fact that these households have faced declining real incomes. Higher rents particularly impact the growing number of single parent households, and also contribute to the rise in homelessness. Meanwhile, the supply of low cost housing has dropped. More rental units are being lost to abandonment or are upgraded for higher income tenants. Changes in the federal tax laws have resulted in a drop in construction of rental housing units. In addition, federal funding of low income housing has dropped dramatically in recent years. Since 19 81, federal housing subsidies for low/moderate income households have been reduced by 70 - 75 percent. The Local Level Insufficient data exists to comple!tely analyze housing affordability at the County or sub-county level. Translating the national figures to the local level is difficult. Traditionally, average housing prices in the Tri-County area including Cumberland County are lower thinn the national average. However, similar to the national trend, if housing prices increase faster than incomes, the housing affordability gap widens, especially for first time homebuyers and low/moderate income households. The issue of housing affordability is especially urgent in thriving Cumberland County. If the number of housing units built does not keep up with the population increases anticipated (County population is projected to increase by 22 percent between .L5-7

National statistics are quoted from: The State of the Nation's Housina 1988, Joint Center for Hoiusing Studies, Harvard University. TABLE 15-5 # RESIDENTIAL SALES* BY MUNICIPALITY CUMBERLAND COUNTY 1984 - 1988 Municipality 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 CUMBERLAND EAST Camp Hill Boro 143 155 158 172 143 East Pennsboro Twp 238 226 335 362 334 Hampden Twp 378 354 520 416 404 Lemoyne Boro 96 91 102 83 84 Lower Allen Twp 224 213 279 307 309 Mechanicsburg Boro 165 177 223 180 177 New Cumberland Boro 166 125 174 146 134 Shiremanstown Boro 21 38 32 38 30 Upper Allen Twp 277 270 327 310 310 West Fairview Boro 28 17 36 30 14 Wormlevsbura Boro 52 84 51 49 54 CUMBERLAND EAST TOTAL 1788 1750 2237 2093 1993 CUMBERLAND CENTRAL Carlisle Boro 306 306 355 325 259 Dickinson Twp 55 43 91 63 56 Middlesex Twp 44 53 59 71 65 Monroe Twp 102 102 114 127 96 Mt Holly Springs Boro 28 35 33 27 32 North Middleton Twp 146 140 185 182 153 Silver Spring Twp 132 115 225 190 168 South Middleton Twp 165 130 194 199 -204 CUMBERLAND CENTRAL TOTAL 978 924 1256 1184 1033 CUMBERLAND WEST Cooke Twp 0 1 0 1 3 Hopewell !Fwp 18 23 25 21 27 Lower Frankford Twp 15 18 13 14 11 Lower Mifflin ?wp 10 8 7 17 25 Newburg Boro 3 8 6 10 11 Newville Boro 20 19 37 19 23 North Newton Twp 14 23 19 28 23 Penn Twp 17 23 34 40 24 Shippensburg Boro 89 77 61 69 66 Shippensburg Twp 14 20 25 33 22 Southampton Twp 32 32 38 37 41 South Newton Twp 19 13 21 17 18 Upper Frankford Twp 13 8 14 13 13 Upper Mifflin Twp 6 7 7 6 13 West Pennsboro Twp 54 47 65 64 71 CUMBERLAND WEST TOTAL 324 327 372 389 391 COUNTY TOTAL 3090 3001 3865 3666 3417

* Includes sales of both new and existing homes. SOURCE: Cumberland County Planning Commission

15-8 1980 and ZOOO), housing prices will rise faster than incomes, resulting in a negative impact on the healthy economic growth of the recent past. Sustaining this growth rate will become more difficult as prices rise and housing becomes financially out of reach of many in the County’s workforce. One indicator of housing affordability is the average selling price of homes within the area. Table 15-6 lists the average selling price by municipality and Plan Development Section (Cumberland East, Central and West;) during, 1984 - 1988, the time period for which comparable data is available. This table is based upon figures recorded in County tax assessment files . It should be noted that this data reflects selling activity during highly active market years of an ecclnomic recovery period. Also, the figures for a particular year can be highly influenced by a number of factors, such as a small number of residential sales which result in average prices thiat do not accurately reflect prevailing prices, or an unusually high or low selling price which heavily influences the average figure. See Table 15- 5 to compare the number of housing sales by municipality. Highlighting the information shown on the table, we find that the average selling home price for the County increased 39 percent over the 5 year time period, from $45,636 in 1984 to $63,529 in 1988. The municipalities with the greatest percentage increases in selling price were: Upper blifflin Township, West Fairview Borough, Penn Township, Dic:kinson Township and Southampton Township. The data at the Plan Development Section level shows that the Cumberland East Sectio:n consistently shows the highest average selling price. The Cilmberland Central region showed the greatest percentage increase in selling price over the time period (47.9 percent). The higher average prices in the East and Central regions are balanced by the lower prices in the Western region, where demand and housing activity are lower, resulting in a more moderate County-wide average.

15-9 TABLE 15-6 AVERAGE PRICE RESIDENTIAL SALES* BY MUNICIPALITY CUMBERLAND COUNTY 1984 - 1988

Municipality 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 CUMBERLAND EAST camp Hill Boro 70,370 73,095 78,440 82,698 85,166 East Pennsboro Twp 48,658 49,099 54,216 66,551 74,938 Hampden 81,290 96,067 100,255 119,185 118,388 Lemoyne Boro 56,712 52,548 55,921 69,889 .83,522 Lower Allen Twp 63,058 66,949 69,984 75,369 79,683 Mechanicsburg Boro 60,295 62,821 64,504 63,275 70,235 New Cumberland Boro 53,576 54,104 61,797 61,445 70,885 Shiremanstown Boro 57,540 60,801 62 * 222 84,847 88,356 Upper Allen Twp 60,752 72,043 70,708 79,588 86,029 West Fairview Boro 20,808 33,135 33,134 32,252 49,257 Wormlevsburn Boro 65,743 68,665 75,539 69.121 70,236 CUMBERLAND EAST AVERAGE 58,073 62,666 66,065 73,111 79,700

CUMBERLAND CENTRAL Carlisle Boro 50,427 50,428 60,435 63,268 69,085 Dickinson Twp 35,737 55,415 62,826 53,833 62,991 Middlesex Twp 56,677 67,926 58,866 71,400 84,322 Monroe Twp 59,152 70,113 68,949 79,040 97,388 Mt Holly Springs Boro 30,988 37,313 38 * 222 47,515 42,941 North Middleton Twp 50,431 57,090 60,313 60,978 65,236 (I) Silver Spring 55,981 72 * 162 72,267 70,498 76,935 South Middleton TWD 50,531 59.234 63.791 85.690 77,856 CUMBERLAND CENTRAL AVERAGE 48,741 58 * 710 60,709 66,528 72,094

CUMBERLAND WEST Cooke Twp (None ) 40,000 (None) 25,000 47,833 Hopewell Twp 29,430 41,863 45,702 33,879 43,152 Lower Frankford Twp 27,923 54,289 49 ,477 5k. 785 43,087 Lower Mifflin Rrp 37,390 38,675 29,243 40,800 41,876 Newburg Boro 32,033 26,425 41,133 45,517 35,428 Newville Boro 33,510 31,638 37,488 38,719 35,258 North Newton ‘Rvp 37,857 45,320 34,692 50 929 46,333 Penn Twp 28,656 37,787 35,585 38 * 016 59 ,100 Shippensburg Boro 39,766 .47 163 43 * 022 45,551 44,338 Shippensburg Twp 45,014 31,797 48,523 56,140 43,807 Southampton Wp 29,157 38,881 41 829 59 079 50,356 South Newton Twp 40,836 37,249 30,448 64,879 50,017 Upper Frankford 39,581 33 * 356 44,429 45 * 524 53,792 Upper Mifflin Ty, 21, 050 40,071 38,789 34,855 53,115 West Pennsboro 35.057 57.702 54,742 50.512 59.040 CUMBERLAND WEST AVERAGE 34,090 40,148 41,079 45,612 47,102

COUNTY AVERAGE 45,636 51,801 54,166 59 430 63,529

* Based on sales of both new and existing homes.

SOURCE: Cumberland County Planning Commission, based on information provided by the Cumberland Co. Tax Assessment Office.

15-10 Data at the housing market: level is difficult to obtain, but is very useful in planning, considering that housing selling activity tends to occur within distinct market areas, as opposed to municipalities only. According to the Carlisle Board of Realtors, the average selling price of homles within the Carlisle Area is $75,900 and within the West Shore Area, $96,000 (as of the week of May 6, 1989).[Note: these figures are based on homes sold through Central Penn Multi-List, Inc. and therefore represent only those homes listed with the Multi-List service.] A 1988 study of community needs in the Greater Carlisle Area5 surveyed housing needs of the residents of this community. The households surveyed listed the lack of affordable housing as the third most severe neighborhood problem. The report notes that the cost of housing is expected to continue to rise as the area grows and more people move to the area. According to data provided by the State Data Center, a surprising 45 percent of all persons in Cumberland County had incomes below low (less than 50 percent of the median) or moderate (less than 80 percent of the median) income in 1979, or a total of 30,107 households. The limited number of subsidized housing units in the County (about 1500) causes many of these families to pay a disproportionately large share of their monthly income toward rent and utilities. One obstacle to affordable housing is restrictive local regulation, including zoning and subdivision/land development ordinances , which increase development costs and eventually, housing prices. This impact can be reduced by revising regulations to minimize development costs t.o the greatest extent possible, allow for innovative design, and provide for a wide variety of housing types and densities in appropriate locations. The Cumberland County Redevelopment Authority, in its 1989 Long Range Planning Document, developed a list of short and long- term activities to be undertak:en in order to meet the goal of increased housing opportunities for low/mode!rate income families. From this list, the following activities could directly involve the County: appropriating block grant funds for rental rehabilitation, working for State funding for housing, pursuing preparation of a County-wide housing needs assessment, pursuing formation of a codssion on affordable housing and encouraging municipalities to donate land/building to non-prof it housing Development Corporations. A list of the non-profit corporations in the County is found in Exhibit 15-A. Implementation of the Redevelopment Authority's long range plan should contribute toward greater opportunities for affordable housing in the County.

15-11

Choices and Challenaes, sponsored by the United Way and Dickinson College. EXHIBIT 15-A

NON-PROFIT HOUSING CORPORATIONS - CUME- COUNTY Carlisle Omortunitv Homes - Carlisle Opportunity Homes has been in existence since 1969. Originally this non-profit housing corporation was formed for the purpose of promoting affordable owner-occupied housing. Shortly after this non-profit corporation was formed, it undertook the construction of affordable owner-occupied housing through the HUD 235 Program. During the later part of the 1970's and 1980's Carlisle Opportunity Homes has concentrated on affordable renter- occupied housing. It has purchased many properties with its own funds and Community Development Block Grant Funds and rehabilitating these properties for occupancy by low and moderate income persons. Currently Carlisle Opportunity Homes has a housing inventory of in excess of 30 units.

Cumberland Shared Housinn, IncorDorated - This non-profit housing corporation is approximately two (2) years old. It is formed for the purpose of operating the County's first shared housing facility in a former Convent building in Carlisle. This structure has eight (8) private rooms and shared living room, dining room, kitchen, and laundry facilities. Currently the policy of the organization is to lease these private rooms to elderly women only.

Cumberland Senior Housinn Associates. Incoruorated - This organization was formed approximately two (2) years ago to construct additional elderly housing in the Carlisle area. It has submitted two (2) applications for "D "202" funding which have been unsuccessful to date. The organization is currently looking at the concept of "Extended Attention" which would involve constructing a facility that would offer congregate meals, laundry, and housekeeping services. This concept is very similar to personal care however there is not on-site medical facilities. This organization currently OWAS a site at the corner of North Hanover Street and Penn Street that was purchased with Community Development Block Grant Funds. It is hoped that a commitment from HUD can be secured either through the Public Housing Program, the "202" Program, or project based Section 8 Certificates can be obtained to construct the additional elderly housing. Carlisle Senior Housinn Associates. Zncomorated - This organization was formed in 1979 to construct Carlisle's first elderly housing project. The funding commitment was received from HUD in 1981 to construct 130 units of housing through the "202' Program. Since this corporation is a Borrower Corporation under MJD regulations, it is not able to conduct additional activities other than the operation and ownership of the "202' Project. .Cumberland County Coalition for Shelter, IncorDorated - This organization was formed several years ago and owns and operates the James Wilson Safe Harbour Shelter in Carlisle. The Shelter consists of bridge housing and single room occupancy units. * SOURCE: Redevelopment Authority of the County of Cumberland. 15-12 Housinq Recommendations Decent, safe and sanitary housing which is in suitable living surroundings is necessary for every individual in Cumberland County. This includes a suitable number and mix of housing units for all income and social groups which should be provided in a variety of locations throughout the County. The followinq are recommendations to be pursued if Cumberland County is to me& its housing goals: 1. A sufficient amount of housing at appropriate costs should be provided to accommodate the anticipated population growth. 2. A majority of the new housing units should be constructed by the private sector. 3. The public sector should continue to1 make investments in infrastructure, such as sewers, in areas recommended for residential development. 4. Future higher density residential development should be limited to those areas capable of being serviced with public sewerage and water systems. Concentration of development along public sewer and water lines mak:es more efficient use of these facilities, while lessening development pressure on outlying areas currently lacking these facilities. 5. Land use and development regulations in areas recommended for residential development in this plan should provide for a variety of housing types (including mobile homes) at varying price ranges. Increased opportunities for construction of townhouses and apartments, and consideration of density bonuses as an incentive to the developer, should be encouraged in areas appropriate for higher density development. Such regulations will also have the effect of promoting the development of more affordable housing. 6. Development regulations which allow for more flexible application of ordinance standards should be encouraged. For example, residential cluster development allows changes in conventional lot requirements and groups units more closely together on the most buildable portion of the site, leaving more area in open space. The resulting net density remains nearly the same as in conventional development, yet the layout is more efficient and development costs are lower. 7. The adoption of codes and ordinances to regulate the minimum acceptable conditions of use, construction, location, additions and alterations, repair, and maintenance of properties should be considered by loclal municipalities, as applicable. Examples could include building housing, mechanical and electrical, fire prevention, plumbing, and existing structures codes, as well as zoning ordinances and 15-13 subdivision/land development regulations. It is recommended that all municipalities in the County consider adopting a zoning and a subdivision/land development ordinance, a BOCA or other basic building code and a One and Two Family Dwelling Code. Within boroughs, a more complete housing code should be considered. These regulations must be properly enforced to be effective. A code enforcement officer with proper training could administer some or all of these codes. Some municipalities may consider appointing a joint code enforcement officer to share this cost. The County should continue to provide assistance to local municipalities in reviewing their applicable regulations (zoning, subdivision/land development, building and/or other codes) to achieve the results outlined in Recommendations #5, 6 and 7. 8. An emphasis should be placed on the conservation and rehabilitation of existing housing in the older areas of the County, especially the boroughs. Such efforts will promote economic reinvestment and encourage a social and economic mixture of residents within these areas. Rehabilitation helps maintain a healthy housing market while preserving the area ' s architectural heritage and providing more choice among housing types. Areas identified through a housing survey as having the most serious concentration of deteriorating housing should be designated as target areas for housing rehabilitation programs. Funding for this rehabilitation should be sought through appropriate county, state and federal assistance programs, as well as local resources. Federal funding may be applied for through the County's Redevelopment Authority, while state funding can be applied for directly from the Department of Community Affairs' Small Communities Program. 9. The County should continue, and increase, its data gathering and monitoring, to better identify housing trends and plan for the future. Such information should include2 - the number, type and value of building permits, - the number and type of new dwelling units, - new residential construction costs, - market value of new single family housing starts, - number of subdivision plats submitted and status (reviewed, recorded, etc.). Similar information for commercial and industrial development should also be recorded. This information should be compiled in the County Planning Commission's Annual Report and selectively mapped.

15-14 Follow up studies should loe done as needed. Existing studies should be updated as data becomes available (for example, the 1990 Census).

I 10. A County-wide housing needs assessment should be conducted to identify housing needs and target improvement areas. Information should be provided at the level of the housing market area, as this information is more useful to the County Housing and Redevelopment Authority than county or municipal-level data for this purpose. In conjunction with a housing needs assessment, the County should support the recommendation of the Cumberland County Redevelopment Authority that a commission on affordable housing be established to identify steps that can be taken to increase the availability of affordable housing to County residents.

11. The County should promolte the formation of nonprofit, community-based Housing Development Corporations to construct /rehabilitate multifamily housing. The Housing and Redevelopment Authority should be the County’s lead agency to coordinate this effort. 12. The County should encourage! the development of mixed housing designed to meet the special needs of the elderly and handicapped, and promote th.e availability of group homes for the mentally, physically and developmentally disabled within residential districts. Allowing for a group home by special exception or conditional use in the local zoning ordinance, with the development of criteria which must be met for its establishment and operation, will assure that the group home is a compatible residential use. For example, licensing by appropriate federal a.nd state agencies, supervision of residents, a minimum separation distance between group homes, an annual inspection, and compliance with local building, housing, health, fire and safety regulations may be required. Such provisions will help to successfully integrate the group home into the community, while providing greater residential opportunities for County residents who require assistance in daily living.

15-15 CHAPTER 16 PLAN ADMINISTRATION AND IMPLEMENTATION County government in Pennsylvania operates within a limited scope of plan implementation authority because of the autonomous nature of the local governments comprising it. The Pennsylvania Municipalities Planning Code (MPC) sets forth the Commonwealth's directive for planning, with County and local governments adopting plans and implementing regulations and programs that are within their respectively assigned authorities. County governments are required by law to adopt a comprehensive plan, while local municipalities may do so at their option. A unique feature of the Pennsylvania MPC is the advisory and recommendatory role the County plays in the plan preparation and implementation process at the local municipal level. The County, therefore, effectuates planning throughout its jurisdiction principally by influence and persuasion, rather than by directive. This position of limited County authority is clearly defined by a provision of the MPC which states that municipal comprehensive plans shall be generally consistent with the adopted County Comprehensive Plan. It is further reinforced by provisions that authorize local zoning and subdivision and land development ordinances to act as a repeal protanto to the jurisdiction of any similarly adopted ordinance by the County. The programs and plans of autonomous local governments are in many cases unilateral, and potentially or actually conflicting. Under the current scope of planning authority, the major effort in County plan implementation must be to devise a means to assure intergovernmental cooperation, coordinate functional and comprehensive planning among the various levels of government, and integrate planning and programming within the budgetary and legislative processes. In order to be effective and fulfill its purpose, the County Comprehensive Plan should function as an integrating force for local municipal plans. Successful plan implementation also requires that government and the private sector have reasonably similar views on future development of the County. Because local officials are lay citizens elected or appointed to office, they need professional guidance on a consistent basis. The County Planning Commission and Planning Department are in a position to provide this guidance. The County will certainly benefit by taking the opportunity to assist local officials in establishing and maintaining a comprehensive planning program. The County Comprehensive Plan can provide the instrument local officials need to pattern their municipal planning efforts after in a county-wide, coordinated, and uniform manner. The plan can also be helpful to the County operating agencies and line departments by providing the essential data and information which are needed in their own functional planning and

16-1 implementation activities , and by making them aware of the governing body's policies on related community development matters which might fall within the realm of their functions. In particular the Housing and Redevelopment Authorities, Solid Waste Authority, Transportation Authority, Transportation Department, Conservation District, County Engineer, Tax Assessment Office, and the County Planning Commission - supported by the County Planning Department - play mutually supporting roles in both maintenance and implementation of the comprehensive plan. The Planning Commission and Department should look to these agencies to provide much of the basic data required in comprehensive plan maintenance and monitoring. Other agencies and departments in-turn should look to the Planning Commission and Planning Department for some of their specific data needs. Furthermore, everyone stands to gain in th.e long run from being able to fit their goals, objectives, and plans into the overall framework of the County's Comprehensive Plan. General and functional (Department-specific) plans that grow out of the knowledge and experience of the various County departments and agencies are preferred - they will be much more acceptable to the parties at interest and therefore most successful when implemented. Plan administration, and implementation, therefore, involves a variety of supporting activities. The most important aspect of which is the sincere commitment. of County and local officials to achieve the goals and Objectives set f ortli in their respective comprehensive plans in a mutually supportive manner. It is imperative that both the public and private sectors fully realize the implications of a sincere commitment to the comprehensive planning process. Such a commitment requires the effective utilization of human resources to carry out the administrative, procedural, and regulatory aspects of plan maintenance and implementation, as well as, providing adequate financial appropriations targeted for supportive purposes. Successful plan implementation also requires an effective capital improvements programming process to ensure that plans for community facilities and services are carried out. Such a program can also allow improvement proposals; to be tested against a set of adopted policies and goals ; better schedule public improvements that require more than one year to complete; provide the opportunity to purchase land before costs go up; provide for long-range financial planning and management; help stabilize tax rates through proper debt management : offer an opportunity for citizens and public interest groups to participate in decision making; and contribute to more effective and efficient management of municipal affairs.

16-2 A capital improvement is normally considered any nonrecurring expenditure or any expenditure for physical facilities associated with a governmental body, including costs for acquisition of land or interests in land; construction and major alterations to buildings or other structures; street construction or utility installation; fixed equipment; landscaping; and other similar expenditures. A capital improvement budget is a list of projects together with the amounts and sources of funding for the coming fiscal or calendar year. It is normally included in the capital improvement section of the annual municipal budget. A capital improvement program is a multi-year schedule of projects, and the planned budgeted expenditures necessary to finance them. The program normally covers a six-year period; the upcoming budget year and a f ive-year period beyond. It is customary to prepare a capital improvement budget and capital improvement program annually; revising the program, as necessary and adopting the budget annually as part of the regular municipal operating budget. Preparation of a Capital Improvement Program is recommended to the County Board of Commissioners and local governing bodies to assure that a financial plan is provided for the realization of comprehensive plan recommendations. Due to the procedure of annual review and revisions to the budget and program, it is a recommended that the Capital Improvement Program adopted pursuant to a Comprehensive Plan not be included in the text, but be maintained as a separate supporting document to be evaluated and revised on an annual basis. It is recommended that the County take full advantage of available federal, state, regional, county, and local resources to achieve its planning objectives. Also, two University campuses located in the Tri-County Region function as valuable technical resources for municipal governments. The Pennsylvania State University Campus, located in Lower Swatara Township, Dauphin County, maintains a graduate level curriculum in Public Administration and the Institute for State and Regional Affairs. The staff office of the Pennsylvania State Data Center of the U.S. Bureau of Census is also located on this campus. The University and these organizations have an abundance of planning/ administrative reference materials and resources in their staffs, professors, and students that public officials may utilize for technical assistance. Shippensburg University, located in Shippensburg, Cumberland County, maintains undergraduate and graduate level planning and local government administration related curriculums that could also provide assistance to public officials in managing governmental affairs. In particular, the University maintains the Center for Local and State Governments which is located on campus. Technical assistance and services are available through the Center.

16-3 As reflected in Chapter 10, County Administration and Finances, the County has established and maintained the basic administrative, legislative, and financial commitments to support planning throughout the County. This commitment is further reinforced through efforts to prepare the County's first comprehensive plan. Successful implementation of this Plan will require continued and enhanced support into the future, if the County administration and its departments are to keep pace with and effectively manage rapidly expanding residential and economic development activities and the concurrent fiscal and service demands they generate. The following policies and courses of action are setforth as prerequisites to accomplishing this task. 1. The Planning Commission should reestablish the following standing committees to assist in its review and recommendatory pLanning functions : Land Use Committee Transportation Committee Housing Committee Community Facilities Committee Codes and Ordinances Committee 2. Maintain active representative positions on the Harrisburg Area Transportation Study Technical and Coordinating Committees. 3. Maintain active representative positions on the Tri- County Regional Plann.ing Commission. 4. The Planning Commission should participate in establishing the County-level program necessary to implement the Pennsylvania Farmland Protection Program in Cumberland County. One member of the Cumberland County Planning Commission should be appointed to serve on the Board created to administer this Program, with the Planning Department providing appropriate technical support. 5. Actively promote local government participation in the Local Planning Assistance Program and encourage the County Board of Commissioners to provide a Program funding subsidy to those local governments participating in the l?rogram. 6. Prepare quarterly newsletters on planning related activities and issues for dis;tribution to local officials and interested organizations, institutions, and individuals. 7. Encourage and assist local governments in the prep- aration and implementation of municipal comprehensive plans and implementing codes and ordinances.

16-4 8. Establish and maintain effective liaison and mutual support activities with appropriate private and public sector organizations, to include but not be limited to the following: Cumberland County Transportation Authority Cumberland County Housing Authority Cumberland County Redevelopment Authority Cumberland County Solid Waste Authority Tri-County Regional Planning Commission Chambers of Commerce Capital Area Transit Capital Region Economic Development Corporation Carlisle Area Task Force Cumberland County Transportation Department Cumberland County Conservation District Cumberland County Assessor's Office Cumberland County Engineering Consultant 9. Encourage and participate in the timely preparation, or update, of the following single-purpose functional plans necessary to implement the County Comprehensive Plan: Solid Waste Management Plan Sewerage Plan Storm Water Management Plan Recreation Plan Water Supply Plan Capital Improvements Program 10. Encourage the County Board of Commissioners to consider the creation of a Cumberland County Parks and Recreation Department and subsequent preparation of a County Comprehensive Park and Recreation Plan. 11. Support, and if deemed necessary, enhance the County Planning Department's staff capabilities .to accomplish the following planning tasks:

0 Conduct an annual development survey reflecting residential and non-residential construction activities throughout the County.

0 Update the existing land use invehtory through field survey and utilization of tax assessment records. An existing land use code should be established, with appropriate codes posted on each tax parcel.

0 Maintain the Cumberland County Subdivision and Land Development Regulations in compliance with state enabling legislation, single-purpose legislation, and current planning/engineering principles and standards.

16-5 Recommend that the County Board of Commissioners and Tax Assessor's Off ice consider preparation of new County Tax Maps based on1 aerial photography. Maintain a complete and current file of all municipal comprehensive plans , subdivision and land development regulations, zoning ordinances, sewerage plans, and oth.er planning related documents adopted at the local level.

0 Maintain a complete and current set of all municipal flood hazard boundary maps and studies.

0 Maintain a complete and current listing of all municipal governing body members, planning commission members, and local code enforcement officers, to include addresses and phone numbers.

0 Establish and maintain computerized data base files and word pr0cessin.g capabilities , with appropriate harciware and software.

0 Encourage and support staff training and professional enhancement on a continuing basis.

0 Establish and maintain a comprehensive monitoring program on appropriate planning data elements and conduct an annual update of the Basic Studies Element of the Comprehensive Plan.

0 Utilizing the updated Basic Studies Element, and single-purpose functional plans, conduct a major reassessment of the Comprehensive Plan and Implementation Element every five years.

0 Prepare a capital improvement budget and capital improvement program; revising the program as necessary and adopting the budget annually as part of the continuing planning and implementation process.

16-6