Public Sounds Off at ATV Ordinance Hearing in Chapman Township
by Christopher Miller
A public hearing was held Tuesday night in Chapman Township over the possibility of a joint “ATV Permitted Usage on Township Road Ordinance.”
The purpose of the ordinance would be to connect ATV riders to local businesses and to existing trails. The roads discussed for joint usage would be as follows: Main Street, Summerson Mountain Road, Schoolhouse Road, Skunk Hollow Road, Reese Road, Snyder Street, Maple Avenue, Ransdorf Avenue, Park Avenue, Astrid Street, Red Row Road, Young Woman’s Creek Road, Summerson Street, and Gum Alley.
Upon listening to testimony from homeowners, land owners, business owners, and others with interests in Chapman Township, the general attitude toward the proposal appeared to be split.
Those in favor of the ordinance spoke about the benefits to local businesses and the possibility to add jobs and other small industry to Chapman Township.
Another thing that was seen as a benefit to the local community would be the increased tourism and visitors to the area. As was discussed, so many people come to the area already from other places around the state and the general northeast, this is just another good spot for them to stop at in their journeys through Clinton County.
An item that was also brought up was that this proposed ATV route would be a new route to explore and add to the maps.
Those not in favor of the ordinance cited many reasons why. Many of those who spoke not in favor expressed concern for the lack of regulation and police presence in the township to enforce the ordinance.
For others, the increased noise was a general cause for concern. Another point of concern was in the form of a study that was completed in Canada in regards to decreasing property values when located near ATV trails. On average, values decrease 15% in Canada, but only 7.5% in the United States.
A general cause for concern throughout the meeting was for those who walk and ride bikes on township roads. For others, it was privacy and a possible loss of “peace and quiet” spaces. Damage to property and liability issues was another.
There were multiple calls for the township to place the life or death of this ordinance on the ballot in the Fall.
“Some people’s voices are not being heard because of the pandemic, put this on the ballot in the Fall for all the people to vote on and have a voice,” one said.
At the present time, the ordinance will be considered and voted upon at the May 4th meeting, would not take effect until all signs have been installed, and would be for a one-year trial basis.