Delmont council asks for storm water alternatives in library plans |

Delmont council asks for storm water alternatives in library plans

Canzian/Johnston & Associates
Architects concept art for the new Delmont Public Library, which includes solar panels on the roof. The library is also being built with additional “green” elements.

Delmont officials are waiting to see some additional stormwater disposal options before voting on a site plan for the new Delmont Public Library .

Proposed for 1.4 acres of borough-owned property behind the existing borough building, the new library would include a number of “green” features, including an array of solar panels, geothermal heating and pervious pavement, a parking area whose paving material contains less sand, allowing water to filter through into the ground, as opposed to running into a storm drain.

Councilman Stan Cheyne said he would like to see some alternatives to a proposal for pervious pavement in the 40-space parking lot.

“I think it’s reasonable to ask that because of the cost of maintenance on pervious pavement,” Councilman Bill Marx said.

The National Ready Mixed Concrete Association recommends, at minimum, monthly visual inspection of pervious pavement to ensure it is clean of debris and sediment, along with regular maintance and seeding of upland and adjacent grassy areas, sweeping or vacuuming pervious parking spots, and the diversion of any excessive water flow that is carrying debris.

“Because this permable surface is a filter, like any filter it must be cleaned periodically,” the NRMCA literature states.

Cheyne said he would like to see the price of installing a stormwater storage tank vs. the use of pervious pavement.

“We have a stormwater issue in the borough that we don’t wish to add to,” solicitor Dan Hewitt said. “So if we’re able to retain additional water and release it more slowly, so much the better.”

Library board trustee Tim Schmida said the building’s “green” concept includes features that will retain all of the stormwater from the building’s roof, and that the budget for the new building remains in flux.

“We have not heard back yet about the ($500,000 state-supplied) Keystone grant,” Schmida said. “The cost associated with the building is $1.5 million. If we get the Keystone grant, we’ll have just about enough for the construction.”

Borough officials have also said they do not plan to plow any pervious pavement in the winter because of the high potential for damage.

Council tabled a vote on the site plan, and asked Schmida to bring some stormwater alternatives to its October meeting, set for 7 p.m. Oct. 9 in the borough building at 77 Greensburg St.

Patrick Varine is a Tribune-Review staff writer. You can contact Patrick at 724-850-2862, [email protected] or via Twitter @MurrysvilleStar.

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using 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 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.