DUI checkpoints returning to E. Cocalico
By PATRICK BURNS
100 Hill Road
Updated Feb 16, 2012 12:57

Drivers in areas patrolled by the East Cocalico Township Police Department can expect greater scrutiny from officers looking for impaired drivers.

Chief George Beever told township supervisors that the department will resume DUI checkpoints in the spring. East Cocalico police, which also covers West Cocalico Township and Adamstown and Denver boroughs, agreed to a request by the Lancaster County DUI Task Force to initiate the checkpoints that have not been manned since 2004, he said.

Beever said plans also call for targeting high traffic areas with the assistance of Pennsylvania Aggressive Driving Program. The program is part of PennDOT's campaign to target specific roads with a history of crashes associated with aggressive driving.

The program in 2011 distributed $2.1 million in federal highway funds to state and municipal police for enforcement programs, Beever said.

In other news, Supervisor Noelle B. Fortna said during Wednesday's unusual 9 a.m. meeting that an agreement is in place with BC Natural Chicken for a 24-month lease extension on the property at 1975 N. Reading Road.

The 23-acre property, which is used partially by the poultry company, is jointly owned by East and West Cocalico townships and Adamstown and Denver boroughs. Fortna said an agreement is also in place with Ephrata National Bank to refinance the remaining $3 million-plus balance on the mortgage.

The agreement modifies the current 6 percent mortgage to 4.5 percent for five years. The loan must be re-modified at that time.

Also during the meeting, Anthony Luongo, East Cocalico Township zoning officer, gave an update on the chemicals found at a home on East Summit Drive in August.

Officials suspected "a possible HAZMAT situation" and sealed the home last summer after mysterious chemicals were found in the home's garage, Luongo said.

"At the time, the zoning officer (and) HAZMAT was deployed and DEP was contacted to find that the chemicals individually were not a major hazard," Luongo said. "But those chemicals being stored in the same area were definitely a hazard."

Luongo said that while 95 percent of the chemicals were removed from the home, officials again cited the property owner on Jan. 6 because of a possible chemical leak Luongo and other emergency responders observed.

"There was a report of chemicals running down the driveway and into the street," Luongo said. "Evidently there was a little bit (of chemicals) left in a couple of barrels and somehow they were dumped into the driveway."

Charges of improperly disposing of hazardous chemicals were filed in the office of District Judge Nancy Hamill. 

Talkback on LancasterOnline

Welcome to the new TalkBack on LancasterOnline. Please use the comment box below to share your opinion on this article. If you would prefer to use the previous TalkBack forums instead, please use this link.

blog comments powered by Disqus
Switch to Full Site
Download our Apps
Tablet Zoom Control: Zoom | Normal