Forward Township approves timbering ordinance
Forward Township's board of supervisors approved a timbering ordinance on Monday night.
The ordinance aims “to encourage the owners of woodland to continue that land use for the long-term production of timber, recreation and wildlife habitat,” promote stewardship, protect the rights of adjacent landowners and the public and minimize the impact of “improper timber harvesting.”
It sets standards, including buffer zones.
“It is going to regulate timbering and set up a permitting process,” township Solicitor Matthew Racunas said.
“We've had a few bad experiences with timberers in the township,” board chairman Tom DeRosa said.
The board authorized advertising for bids for paving eight township roads, including all or part of Brauft and Ferry streets, Ivory Lane, Dorring and Homeplace drives and Saddler's Hollow Road.
A report from Amy Cline, the township's representative to the Twin Rivers Council of Governments, prompted DeRosa to wonder why the township doesn't get federal Community Development Block Grant funding for roads, whereas it does for demolition.
“Where (other Twin Rivers COG members) get $60,000 or $70,000, that money stays there and is visible (on the roads),” DeRosa said. “When you tear down a house a contractor gets $20,000 and drives away.”
Former supervisor Tom Headley pointed to a possible need for local matches to CDBG funding. Racunas said he would look into how Elizabeth matches its block grants.
Patrick Cloonan is a staff writer for Trib Total Media. He can be reached at 412-664-9161, ext. 1967, or firstname.lastname@example.org.
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments â either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.