Montgomery, Bucks and Chester Counties
June 14, 1999 6:30-8:30PM
Upper Providence Township Hall
The first public meeting for Chester, Bucks and Montgomery Counties for the Schuylkill River Conservation Plan took place on June 14, 1999 from 6:30-8:30 at the Upper Providence Township Hall. The meeting agenda was as follows:

Welcome and Introductions
Ann Smith, Director, Watershed Programs for the Pennsylvania Environmental Council opened the meeting. She briefly explained the Rivers Conservation Program, introduced the Schuylkill Watershed Conservation Plan (SWCP) partners and reviewed the agenda. She also asked that all of the meeting participants (approximately 25 not including staff members) introduce themselves by name and an organizational affiliation.

Project Background
Elizabeth Kitchel, Project Manager for The Conservation Fund, provided a project summary for the SRWCP Per Elizabeth the Department of Conservation and Natural Resources (DCNR) primary reasons for funding an RCP on this scale is to provide a framework for conservation work throughout the watershed as well as developing watershed-wide scientific data. She also stressed the importance of public participation in the RCP.

Conservation Plan Development Strategy
David Athey, River Conservation Program Manager for the Natural Lands Trust (NLT), provided an overview of how the plan will be developed. Many studies have been done on portions or particular aspects of the Schuylkill River. NLT has already begun to compile and review many of these studies. In addition, the input from these public meetings and field data will be used to form the plan and its recommendations. David noted that once the RCP is complete and approved by DCNR projects in the Schuylkill Watershed will be eligible for additional funding.

Geographic Information Systems (GIS)
Maeve McBride, staff scientist from The Academy of Natural Sciences, provided an overview of how GIs will be used to develop the RCP. Maeve presented a series of maps that have already been developed for the project. The data layers already collected include land use, soil types, transportation routes, streams and sub-watersheds. The intent is to make all of the data collected through the RCP available to local government and organizations that choose to implement recommendations or conduct more detailed studies.

Break-out Groups
The participants were then broken into three groups to provide input regarding their concerns and visions for the watershed. The groups were broken out along geographic lines: the main stem of the Schuylkill north of the Perkiomen, the Perkiomen Valley and the main stem below the confluence with the Perkiomen. The sessions were moderated by Ann Smith, Dan Trotzer and Mark McGuigan of the Pennsylvania Environmental Council. The groups each spent about 35 minutes brainstorming their concerns and visions for the watershed. Each participant was then given five stickers that they could use to ‘vote for’ their top issues.

Results
The topics or issue that the participants felt were the most important are listed at the top of each section. Please note that the issues were only voted on in the breakouts themselves therefore the total number of votes cast varies by the number of people in each breakout. The Perkiomen had a disproportionate share of the participants.

After the breakout sessions, participants were given the opportunity to review the results of other breakout sessions.

Northern Main Stem
(8) Supply protection—quality and quantity
(7) Linear parks and greenways
(7) Watershed based planning and zoning
(4) River as connector (watershed approach)
(2) Connected recreational opportunities
(2) Development impact on watershed
water availability related to maximum development
Groundwater availability (N. Coventry township)
Groundwater quality
Groundwater recharge from development
Sewer authority—relating to groundwater quality (Schuylkill Township)
Development pressure—Incorrect analysis of growth projection for Schuylkill Township (estimated way too low)
Limited visual and physical access to the Schuylkill
Increased community involvement in stewardship and use of the river
Community development
Opportunities—increased quality of life
Potential amenities
Canals, rail trails, trails and parks
Flood control
Analysis of floodplain development versus open space development
Balance of economic development and open space conservation
Transportation
Sustaining adequate river flow and groundwater levels
maintain water table
Water quality—upstream impacts—pathogens, manganese, iron
Alternative technologies
Perception of community boundaries
Interbasin transfer of water
Recreation
Enhancing quality of Schuylkill as a recreational resource
Public awareness of the existence of opportunities

The Perkiomen
(14) Integration of government programs and governmental cooperation
(13) Development—impact on recharge
(11) Water treatment capacity to keep pace with development; proper functioning
(11) Open space preservation
(8) Greenway development
(4) Nutrients and sediments
(4) Active stewardship by general public and local government
(3) Responsible public access development—use of waterway itself
(2) Recreational opportunities
(2) Stormwater runoff
(2) Floodplain development
(2) Analysis of manmade obstructions
(2) Respect for private property rights
(2) Less manicured surfaces, more natural vegetation
Channelization
Invasive species
Swimmable
Illegal dumping

Lower Mainstem
Summary
(5) Education
Value of schools
Improvement of schools
Heritage
Existence of river at all
Existing recreational opportunities
Regional nature of resource
Using monitoring as education tool to increase stewardship
(3) Economic development
Tourism
Redevelopment of built up areas
recreational development
(3) Access
Adjacent infrastructure
Adjacent landowners
Sharing of public facilities
(2) Water quality
Fish safety
Stormwater runoff
Erosions
Water supplies –the Wissahickon
Sewage issues
Trash
Low flows
Habitat protection
Open space protection
Visual sense of green valley
Loss of open space
How will land be protected? Parks? Wild? Are ballfields open space?
Riparian buffers
Recreation
Land and water
Conflict of users
Infrastructure—trails, fish ladders
Water quantity
Flooding
water withdrawals
low flows bad for recreation, water quality, wildlife
recharge

Detail
Education on value of improvement of the Schuylkill
Tourism
Recreation—conflict between users; access
Riverfront development in boroughs and towns
Economic development
Water quality on Main Stem and Wissahickon
River access
Education on the existence of the Schuylkill
Open space protection—Miquon area for example
Riparian buffers
Streambank erosion
Flooding
Boats
Transportation infrastructure near riverbanks reduce access
Access
Adjacent transportation structure
Private landowners
Sharing of public facilities
Fishing
fish ladders
Shad/migratory species
Safety of fish to eat
Trash
Get monitoring information to people
make info available; get locals involved
Stormwater runoff
Loss of open space and agriculture
Preservation of the visual beauty of this section of the Schuylkill Valley
Flooding
Heritage issues—experiencing history directly
Milling, ferries, fords
Recognition of river as regional resource
Closing

The meeting was adjourned at about 8:40.