Big Elk Creek State Park is located in southeast Pennsylvania in Chester County, bounded by Route 841 to the west and Appleton Road to the east. The park is bisected by the approximately east-west running Strickersville Road. Big Elk Creek State Park contains 2.1 miles of the Mason-Dixon line along the Pennsylvania / Maryland state border and 3.5 miles of Big Elk Creek, a tributary of the Elk River and the Chesapeake Bay. The park is located in Elk, Franklin, and New London Townships.

The park extends an important wildlife corridor and provides refuge for a wide array of rare and threatened species. 690 different plant species have been inventoried in Big Elk Creek State Park. Fifteen of those species are endangered, rare, threatened or vulnerable – including three varieties of orchids. Approximately 70% of the plant species are native, with about 200 identified species that are not native.

Big Elk Creek State Park is part of one of the largest contiguous open spaces in the Mid-Atlantic region. The park is located to the west of Delaware’s White Clay Creek State Park and immediately to the north of Maryland’s Fair Hill Natural Resources Management Area, contributing to the total of 8,000 acres of public open space available for recreation.

Big Elk Creek State Park contributes to the 31% of Chester County that is preserved as open space. This region of Chester County is characterized by rolling farmland, quiet country roads, cool streams, and forest. As pressure from development, climate change, and other threats pose unprecedented risks for biodiversity, this property supports the local flora and fauna, conserving important open space and the habitats it comprises. The property contains Elk Township’s Springlawn Trail as well as several miles of additional park trails. Visitors today enjoy a plethora of recreational activities, including trail hiking, bird watching, fishing, and hunting. Big Elk Creek State Park is classified as a Day Use Park within Pennsylvania’s state park system.

Master Plan Timeline

The master plan process evolved over two years of work with numerous groups and stakeholders and is summarized below.

• Initial Information Gathering: May – July 2023
• Concept Development:  August – November 2023
• Public Meeting:  November 2023
• Task Force Process:  March 2024 – May 2025
• Plan Completion:  March – June 2025
• Final Presentation:  August 2025

What We Heard — Online Survey Results

DCNR developed and distributed an online survey during the initial stages of park planning. The ten-question survey was available May – September 2023. The survey was open to all commonwealth citizens including any user or potential user of the park. Those interested could take the survey via scanning a QR code posted throughout the park or from a link shared via the park’s webpage, DCNR newsletter and other social media outlets.

Summary of the over 1160 responses:

• Most respondents anticipate visiting Big Elk Creek State Park between a few times a week and a few times a year.
• Respondents strongly recognized Big Elk Creek State Park’s importance to regional trail connections, ecosystem health, and the quality of life in the area.
• Respondents strongly favored a relaxed atmosphere for the park, with some support for a secluded atmosphere.
• Opinions on appropriate activities varied. There was support for classes and hands on activities, with some support for health and fitness, arts and culture and recreational competitions (such as 5-10K races or similar activities). Most respondents opposed rentals of park space for private events (for instance, weddings).
• Over 50 percent of respondents supported development of walking / hiking, wildlife watching, fishing, water access, and biking opportunities.
• The restoration of water quality, forests, and aquatic habitat was considered critically important by greater than 80% of respondents.
• Respondents were strongly interested (over 60%) in nature programs and self guided interpretation.
• A majority of respondents supported the concept of overnight accommodations. However, common “write-in” comment responses indicated a lack of support for camping or support for rustic camping only.

What We Heard — Stakeholder Meetings

DCNR and the design team convened a series of meetings in July 2023 to involve and include representatives of five broad stakeholder groups in the master planning process. The stakeholder groups were as follows: Adjoining Land Managers, Local Government Agencies, Recreation Stakeholders, Natural Resource Conservation Stakeholders, Historical / Cultural Interests Stakeholders. Please refer to the appendix for a detailed list of stakeholder participants. Separately, DCNR contacted representatives of Federally Recognized Tribes and Nations regarding the project.

Key Principles drawn from the stakeholder meetings included:

• Environmental Responsibility: Protection of the natural resources and stewardship of the place.
• Regional Connections: Work in concert with adjacent open spaces and agencies in the region.
• Quality of Experience: Emphasize quality of the park experience(s) over quantity of events.
• Community Engagement: Increase community engagement and awareness of the park.
• Education: Provide educational and interpretive opportunities for visitors, including focusing on untold stories.
• History: Respect the history of the place, while designing appropriately for our time.
• Low Impact: Minimize impact to the waterways from recreational activities in the park.
• Accessibility: Thoughtfully located and appropriately designed trails for multiple uses and users with varying levels of ability.

What We Heard — Task Force Process

The Big Elk Creek State Park Master Planning Task Force was created to provide input to DCNR from state and local government officials, county and township designees, and other community partners on the master plan for Big Elk Creek State Park. After the local public reaction and strong opposition to preliminary concepts provided at a November 2023 presentation, DCNR Leadership agreed to establish the Task Force while attending a jointmunicipal meeting in January of 2024. At the outset of the Task Force process, DCNR indicated that this master plan would not include opportunities of overnight accommodation within the park, which were initially shown in the early master plan concepts.

Comprised of 21 members, the Task Force met 7 times over the course of 2024 and early 2025, totaling 26 hours of working time between the meetings and 2 field visits. Members were encouraged to seek feedback from, and share information with, their larger constituencies to help create a master plan that met state Parks’ mission and mandate while focusing on the operational and safety needs of both park staff and future visitors to Big Elk Creek State Park. Please refer to the appendix for a complete list of task force members.

Though not a component of the physical planning of the park, a majority of task force members felt strongly about the name of the property. A significant portion of several task force meetings included discussion of the merits of “Big Elk Creek Preserve” versus “Big Elk Creek State Park”. Most task force members took the position to include of the word “preserve” within the official name of the property. In the discussion for inclusion of the word “preserve” in Big Elk Creek’s name, management and stewardship would be congruent with White Clay Creek Preserve. DCNR has taken into consideration use of the word “preserve” in the final state park name, which will be designated following the completion of the recently initiated Cultural Resources Management Plan.

Shared Concepts drawn from the task force process:

• Existing Assets: Utilize existing structures and infrastructure where possible.
• Co-location: Locate elements for easy access (such as restroom facilities near parking areas).
• Crossings: Maintain / formalize creek crossings to reduce environmental damage at the creek.
• Restoration: Pursue appropriate forest and meadow restoration, while incorporating trails.
• Transitions: Manage and land use transitions (for instance, agriculture to meadow field or forest) to avoid introduction of invasive plants, now and in the future.
• Trails: Upgrade / improve existing trails (creating new only where needed) for easy maintenance and use by a variety of abilities. Remove environmentally inappropriate trails.
• Impact: Understand environmental impact as fully as possible prior to implementation of any recommendation.

Significant area of divergence among task force members:

• Education Center: Some task force members did not agree that a building containing office and education spaces would be necessary, and that a new building should not be built on the site. Most felt that having visitor / education / office space within an existing building would be ideal, if one were available, while some participants thought that providing a dedicated space for education and administration would be essential to the function of the site.

Additional Ideas and Considerations drawn from the task force process:

• Existing Parking: Maintain parking at current “park sign” area on Strickersville Road. This existing parking area is a good spot.
• Adjacent Property: Purchase existing inholding (Strawbridge rented property) to repurpose for park/preserve use. If purchasing this property is not feasible, use of existing parking area and former building sites could work. However, these are close to road / neighbors.
• Parking: Develop smaller parking areas at distributed and safe locations, rather than fewer larger ones. Improve the western parking area at entrance to Springlawn Trail.
• Underpasses: Incorporate existing underpasses (and maintain them to be passable).
• Water Access: Provide water access for educational purposes (and perhaps recreation?).
• Creek Crossings: Provide creek crossing at southern portion of park near MD border. Provide second creek crossing somewhere (exact location TBD) north of Strickersville, to allow for trail loops.
• Hunting: A desire was expressed to clearly separate or identify hunting and pedestrian access areas, to the extent that is possible given the landscape and configuration of the trails within the park.
• Western Open Space: Disturbed western area (currently agricultural) was noted has having minimal to no existing infrastructure. Agriculture: Consider retaining area(s) of agriculture, possibly for educational purposes.

Existing Site Aerial View

The aerial view of the site, included previously in this report, was generated using PASDA (Pennsylvania Spatial Data Access). The site lies within the Piedmont Uplands ecoregion characterized by metamorphic geology manifesting in round hills, low ridges, relative high relief, and narrow valleys. Schists of the Wissahickon and Peters Creek formations are most common, while Precambrian gneisses can be found in the eastern area of the regions. Landcover is dominated by the Appalachian Oak forest typical of the region and cropland.

Existing Site Conditions - Rivers and Streams

This is an aerial map highlighting rivers and streams, including numerous first order streams that either originate on site or just off site. It shows the Big Elk Creek and the 100 year floodplains associated with the river and streams.

Site Conditions Analysis - Rivers and Streams

This analysis map shows the rivers and streams and includes the 100-year flood plain and the minimum 150’ stream buffers necessary to protect the water resources. No development can take place in these buffers.

Existing Site Conditions - Soil Types

This map shows the hydrologic soils types according to the US Geological Service (USGS). Soils move from Group B – moderately deep well-drained soils or gravelly sands with moderate infiltration rates and low run-off - all the way to the Group C/D - soils with very slow infiltration rates and potentially high water tables. This is sympathetic with site use to date including cropland at the high elevations on the well-drained soils to historic mill uses at the low elevations adjacent to the streams.

Site Conditions Analysis - Soil Types

This map identifies well-draining soils potentially suited to new improvements like roads and structures. It shows lower and wetter soils as areas to protect and preserve. New work for infrastructure or improvements should not occur in the poorly drained soils although some historic structures in those areas may remain.

Existing Site Conditions – Core Habitat

This map shows areas that to date have been associated with species of conservation concern.

Existing Site Conditions – Land Cover and Vegetation

This map shows existing landcover, includes three major types:

• Appalachian Oak forest typical of the region dominated by Quercus alba/ White Oak, and Quercus rubra/ Red Oak Grassland managed by yearly mowing.
  
• Cropland dedicated to agricultural production such as corn and soybeans
• There are invasive plant species present on site, but a full-scale vegetation analysis has not yet been conducted.

Site Conditions Analysis – Land Cover and Vegetation

This map begins to suggest land management direction with the restoration and management of grasslands, potential conversion of cropland to grassland and conversion of cropland to managed woodland. All areas will need some form of invasive plant management within the woodlands. A survey of existing vegetation should occur and then a full vegetation management plan should be developed. It should identify the land cover types desired in 5, 10, 20, and 50 years, an invasives removal plan, and deer control. Because deer represent the largest threat to forest regeneration and biodiversity on the east coast and lack natural predators, they must be managed to protect the forest resource. Deer management should occur before large scale plantings of native plants to avoid loss of plants to deer browse. Alternatively, deer protection measures must be taken at new plantings, though this can be more costly than effective deer management. Locally appropriate, native plants should be used for any and all replanting efforts.

Existing Site Conditions – Steep Slopes

This map shows the site slopes, from mild to steep. Steep slopes correspond to the underlying geology and soil types. In general, steep slopes occur adjacent to waterways.

Site Conditions Analysis – Steep Slopes

This map simplifies the relationship between slopes and soil types. It identifies gentler slopes better suited for potential infrastructure and amenities like roads and structures, possible water access opportunities, and possible viewshed opportunities.

Existing Site Conditions – Site Infrastructure

This map overlays built objects, infrastructure, and boundaries on the aerial. Infrastructure includes points of entry, existing trails, roads, parking lots, historical and scenic points of interest. It also shows the existing waterways.

Site Condition Analysis – Suitable Sites

This map synthesizes all the other prior resource maps, including slopes, soils, and cover type, to identify areas that are potentially suitable for more intensive use.

Site Condition Analysis – Suitable Sites (simplified)

This map simplifies the relationship between the slopes, crop land, and forested land. It identifies the gentler slopes in both cropland and forested land as potentially suitable for more intensive use.

This section of the master plan identifies and describes a range of potential park amenities that may be included within the park or constructed over time to support park activities. It is intended as a graphic “kit of parts” to inform future design and park management decisions.

Initial park amenities could include the following items, which are visually described in the following pages.

Trails: New and refurbished trails of a variety of types. Trails can and should be constructed over time, as funds and other conditions allow. The master plan indicates informed initial thoughts about potential trail routes and configurations.

Visitor Center and Park Office: A small building, approximately 4500 square feet, to house park office functions and classroom space(s). The building would also contain public restrooms that would be accessible from the parking area when the balance of the building is closed. Parking associated with the Visitor Center building is assumed to be on the order of 20 parking spaces, similar in size to the existing informal lot that exists at the “entrance” to the park, located on Strickersville Road.

Maintenance Building: The construction of a Maintenance Building, approximately 2500 square feet, could be inspired by local barn architecture.

Comfort Stations: Distributed small restroom facilities could be constructed if the volume of use indicates a need. If or when these are constructed they should be co-located with the distributed small parking areas (see below).

Stream Crossings: The potential for smaller and larger possible stream crossings will facilitate trails through the park and access to and between significant areas of the park.

Parking Areas: As noted above, a parking area associated with Visitor Center building could hold approximately 20 spaces. In addition, several small dispersed parking areas – some of which already exist in some form – could be provided at locations convenient to trail access. Each of these may contain 5-10 parking spots, but this is subject to consideration as the use evolves over time. Parking areas may not all be constructed at once. The overall approach is intended to be similar to how parking is handled at White Clay Creek Preserve.

Day Use Areas: Areas for low impact park use, such as bird watching, picnicking, and similar activities.

The following pages illustrate the plan for Big Elk Creek State Park, which developed from the information gathering, design process, and research described in this document. Below are brief narrative descriptions of each of the site plan images that follow.

Existing Site

The aerial view of the site, also included previously in this report, was generated using PASDA (Pennsylvania Spatial Data Access).

Site Plan

The overall proposed site plan documents the master planning decisions made during the process. As noted previously in this report, the master plan is intended as a guide to future decision making within the park. The features and elements shown on the master plan include, but are not limited to, the following items.

-A new Visitor Center / Park Office, along with maintenance structure and modest day use area are shown adjacent to Strickersville Road, near the area that currently functions as a “main” parking area for the park. Two options for the development of this area are documented in plan enlargements (see below). The area of the Visitor Center / Park Office and day use improvement constitutes less than 1% of the area of the park. -Several relatively small distributed parking areas are shown to provide multiple entry points to the park and access to trails.

-Significant areas of both forest / reforestation ecotype and meadow habitat restoration ecotype are indicated in the plan.

-New and improved trails are shown, including a half mile accessible trail that can be accessed from the Visitor Center area, and a three-mile loop trail in the western portion of the park. Trail configurations are based on a high-level understanding of the topography and site conditions, but all must be confirmed “on the ground” before trail construction.

-Stream crossings are shown in areas that appear to make sense based on existing topography, observation of existing conditions, and proposed new trail configurations. But, again, all conditions should be confirmed during future stages of design.

Facility Components Plan

The Facility Components Plan identifies the proposed elements of work within the park, as a starting point to consider the future potential phasing of improvements.

Ecological Restoration Plan

The Ecological Restoration Plan highlights the areas of forest and meadow as proposed by the master plan.

Hunting Zones

The park is generally proposed to be open to hunting, with no-hunting zones as noted on this map. The no-hunting areas include Springlawn Trail, Mt. Olivet Road, and the immediate area surrounding the Visitor Center / Office and day use space.

Visitor Center Area Enlargement, Concept 1

This concept of the Visitor Center Area clusters the new buildings, parking, and day use picnic area near Strickersville Road. This location was formerly a residential property and currently functions as the park’s main parking area.

Visitor Center Area Enlargement, Concept 2

A second option for the Visitor Center area shows the improvements located further from Strickersville Road, behind an existing hedgerow and partially concealed from views from the road by existing topography.

The proposed Big Elk Creek State Park (Park) improvements include a trail network and two options for the location of a park office/maintenance/day use area (Day Use Area). Both Day Use Area locations have similar constraints, distance from utilities/roads, etc. and would require similar infrastructure requirements. Therefore, the recommended infrastructure improvements summarized below apply to both locations.

Entrance: A new small access road is proposed off Strickersville Road (SR 3006) to serve a new Day Use Area and parking lot (to be located at one of two potential locations). A PennDOT Highway Occupancy Permit will be required for this new access road/parking lot entrance. The posted speed limit on Strickersville Road is 40 mph and PennDOT may require a Traffic Study and an improved entrance with a deceleration lane. Three additional small parking lots are proposed: one off Strickersville Road (which will require a Driveway Entrance Highway Occupancy Permit from PennDOT), one from Appleton Road (SR 3007) on the east side of the park which will also require a Driveway Entrance Highway Occupancy Permit from PennDOT, and one from Walker Road to the north of the park. The Day Use Area potential locations have been located in areas outside or adjacent to existing forest and oriented to reduce disturbance of steep slopes and limit excessive earthwork as much as possible.

While the soil is not very erosive, site disturbance should be kept to a minimum to avoid erosive conditions. Unpaved trails located on slopes should be designed to minimize slopes and to implement practices to reduce and control trail erosion.

Streams and Setbacks: Site improvements have been located to avoid stream crossings and floodplains and to maintain a 150-foot forested stream buffer to protect stream health within the park. The 150-foot riparian buffer would encompass the PaDEP defined floodplain area for tributaries within the park and is required under 25 PaCode Chapter 102.14 for Special Protection Waters. The streams in Big Elk are High Quality Special Protection waters but are not Exceptional Value and may be eligible for certain General Permits, such as for trail stream crossings.

Installation of structures or improvement of stream trail crossings is subject to PaDEP approval under Pennsylvania Code Title 25 Chapter 105 if the upstream drainage area is greater than 100 acres.

Stormwater Management and Regulatory Requirements: Site disturbance over 1-acre will require stormwater management and permitting. Because the streams within the Park are Special Protection Waters, a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit for Post-Construction Stormwater Management and Erosion & Sediment Control would be required to be issued under an Individual Permit from the Chester County Conservation District. Stormwater management must meet the requirements of Pennsylvania Code Title 25 Chapter 102 and the current PaDEP NPDES regulations.

Stormwater management systems will be required at the Day Use Area and three parking lots. Stormwater management could consist of small bioretention areas or the parking lots could potentially be constructed of porous pavement. Small bioretention or similar systems that are located close to the runoff source, are low maintenance, promote infiltration and disperse stormwater into the landscape are recommended.

Utilities:

Telcomm: The existing overhead service from Comcast can be extended from Strickersville Road. The service would be run underground on park property to the site of the new Visitor Center.

Electric: The existing overhead service from PECO can be extended from Strickersville Road. The service would be run underground on park property to the site of the new Visitor Center.

Water: Water supply for the Park is anticipated to be provided by wells as public water service is not available. Well water will require treatment and testing requirements as a noncommunity water system (a public water system supplying drinking water to an average of 25 or more people per day). The anticipated daily water demand is approximately 770 gallons per day based on proposed improvements and the PaDEP Public Water Supply Manual.

Any existing wells on site should be examined for information related to both treatment requirements and capacity. The minimum water volume flow rate required is 2 gallons per minute at each outlet or plumbing fixture. Nearby wells vary from 3-7 gallons per minute according to records on PaGEODE. It is recommended that a new well be installed in the vicinity of the Day Use Area with a treatment and anticipated storage system, depending on well capacity.

Sewage: The anticipated daily sewage load is approximately 1,145 gallons per day based on proposed improvements and the Pennsylvania Code Title 24 Chapter 73 Sewage Flows. There are slight variations in the PaDEP assumptions for water and sewage flows.

On-site sewage would consist of sewage treatment followed by disposal via drip irrigation or spray. Sand mound or pressure systems may also be viable but standard septic fields are not anticipated to be viable due to limiting soil conditions.

Sewer disposal areas require consideration of the horizontal offsets and maintenance access in addition to soil suitability. On-site systems allow treated effluent to infiltrate back through the soil to the water table, which is important if the site water supply is dependent on groundwater.

EXISTING CONDITIONS

Project Location

Big Elk Creek State Park (Park) is located in Elk, Franklin and New London Townships in Chester County, Pennsylvania (Figure 1). The southern boundary of the park is the Pennsylvania - Maryland border. Across the border in Maryland is the Fair Hill Natural Resource Management area, which has existing campsites, trails, and a nature center. Most of the park is in Franklin and Elk Townships; the northwestern corner of the park is in New London Township. The main park access is from Strickersville Road (PennDOT State Road 3006) which bisects the park from southwest to northeast. The posted Speed Limit on Strickersville Road is 40 miles per hour. Chesterville Road (PennDOT State Road 841) borders the park on the west and north. Walker Road (Franklin Township Road 303) and Mount Olivet Road (Franklin Township Road 356) border the park in the north and east. The park area is 1,890 acres including water bodies according to the park boundaries as measured in GIS.

Natural Features

The Park is in the Elk River Watershed, which is within the Chesapeake Bay Watershed. Big Elk Creek flows through the center of the park, flowing from the northwest to south of the park. The Park is in the Northern Piedmont Region and, according to the EPA Level III Ecoregions Map, is within the Piedmont Uplands Ecoregion (64c). This ecoregion is characterized by urban land, agriculture, and wooded cover. The Park is approximately 1,700 acres in area and primarily covered by agriculture (58%) and wooded (39%); these and the other minor landcovers are listed in Table 1 and shown in Figure 2. The landcover GIS data and land use types were obtained from the Delaware Valley Regional Planning Commission via Pennsylvania Spatial Data Access (PASDA).

Table 1: Landcover Types and Approximate Area Percentages

Site Topography and Slopes

The site has significant topography including moderately steep slopes (15-24%) and very steep (>25%) slopes as shown in Figure 3. Steep slopes can be a constraint to development and park improvements. 34% of the site is steep slopes, with approximately 22.4% of the site comprised of moderately steep slopes, and 11.5% of the site in very steep slopes. Areas of the steepest slopes are generally found adjacent to the Big Elk Creek and its tributaries. The areas currently in cropland are in locations with slopes less than 15%.

The park elevations range from a high point of 400 feet in the southwest/west portion of the park, to a low point of 160 feet where Big Elk Creek leaves the park's southern boundary. Park topography, in 10-foot contours, is shown in Figure 4.

Waterbodies

Streams within the Park include Big Elk Creek and its tributaries, which include Hodgson Run and several unnamed tributaries which are shown in Figure 5. Designated stream uses are identified in Pennsylvania Code Chapter 93, Water Quality Standards, and impact regulatory permitting requirements. The designated uses and impairments are summarized in Table 2. Creeks and tributaries within the park are designated as high-quality trout stocked streams (HQ-TSF).

The high-quality designation of the streams within and adjacent to the Park classifies these streams as "Special Protection Waters". This classification impacts PaDEP permitting requirements as well as design standards for stormwater management, wastewater systems, and stream crossings. PaDEP regulations that are required for special protection waters include:

• National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permits for Post-Construction Stormwater Management and Erosion & Sediment Control can be issued under individual permits
  
  
• Permits related to stream crossings and discharge locations can be issued under individual permits however some projects may be eligible for general permits (GPs) since the streams are not Exceptional Value.
  
  
• On-site wastewater treatment and disposal systems are subject to additional requirements for Special Protection waters
  
  
• A 150-foot riparian stream buffer is required by regulation.

Although the streams in the park are Special Protection Waters, they are also listed as impaired under the Pa 303(d) list for failing to achieve all designated uses. The causes of impairment are urban runoff and agriculture.

Recommendations to reduce impairment include increasing forested riparian buffers and stormwater best management practices for agricultural uses within the park.

Floodplains

The FEMA mapped 1% (formerly 100-year) floodplains along Big Elk Creek, Hodgson Run, and the Unnamed Tributary to Big Elk Creek-112189028 are shown in Figure 6. Other tributaries within the park are not mapped by FEMA however, Pennsylvania Code Section 25, Chapter 105 defines a floodplain as "in the absence of these {FEMA] maps or studies or any evidence to the contrary, the area within 100 feet measured horizontally from the top of the bank of a perennial stream or 50 feet from the top of the bank of an intermittent stream". Perennial streams within the park should be assumed to have a 100-foot floodplain on each side, and intermittent streams should be assumed to have a 50-foot floodplain on each side. The unmapped tributaries are assumed to be perennial and require a 100-foot floodplain. The approximate floodplain for the streams not mapped by FEMA are shown in Figure 6.

Soils

GIS soils data was obtained from the NRCS Web Soil Survey and the Chester County Soil Survey. Soil data provides information on the site suitability for different uses. There are eight (8) main soil formations within the park, including Baile, Chester, Codorus, Gaila, Glenelg, Glenville, Hatboro and Manor as shown on Figure 7. The Codorus soils are alluvial soils primarily located along Big Elk Creek that are flood deposited materials. The Baile, Chester, Gaila, Glenelg, Glenville, Hatboro and Manor soils are well-drained silt loams that can be subject to erosion. The dominant soil group in the park is the Manor series, encompassing 75% of the park. The Manor series consists of deeper, well drained soils of uplands whose parent material is weathered micaceous schist. These soils and associated characteristics are listed in Tables 3 and 4. The soils have a variety of depth to the water table (Figure 8) and depth to bedrock, (Figure 9). The upland soils are the most suitable for building development.

Hydrologic Soil Group (HSG) ratings indicate the amount of runoff expected from the soil when rainfall occurs, with Group A soils being well drained with the least amount of runoff, while Group D soils have low infiltration capacity and generate the most stormwater runoff. Figure 7 and Table 3 show the hydrologic soil groups throughout the Park. Manor series soils, which encompass much of the site, are hydrologic soil group B which is well drained with moderate runoff.

The soils data indicates that most of the park does not have a high-water table. The stream buffer areas in Figure 5 correspond to shallow water table depths of less than 80 in. These areas are limited for construction of structures and on-site wastewater systems.

Soil types and their characteristics, including features such as the depth to rock and water table, impact the site suitability for different uses such as recreational features, structures, and on-site wastewater disposal systems. Based on these characteristics, the NRCS Web Soil Survey and the Chester County Soil Survey provide general recommendations as to each soil type's suitability for various uses. This data is summarized in Table 4 and was used to inform the recommendations in this report.

Geology

The bedrock of the park is dominated by Oligoclase Mica Schist within the Glenarm Wissahickon formation (Figure 10). According to the 2002 USGS Report: "Geohydrology of Southeastern Pennsylvania," the Oligoclase-Mica Schist forms undulating hills of medium relief that have moderately steep but stable slopes. These rocks are relatively soft to moderately resistant to weathering. There are currently four (4) wells within the park boundaries according to records from PAGEODE (Figure 12). They have yields ranging from 3-7 gpm.

Sensitive Species

According to a Pennsylvania Natural Diversity Inventory Request potential sensitive species habitats cover the majority of the Park, see Figure 11. Both proposed Day Use Area sites are located within potential sensitive species habitat areas. Common names of species with mapped habitat in the park include:

·       Downy Lobelia

·       Elliott's Beardgrass

·       Fringe-tree

·       Horrible Thistle

·       Lion's-foot

·       Maryland Golden-aster

·       Scribner's Panicgrass

·       Short-eared Owl

·       Tawny Ironweed

·       Vase-vine Leather-flower

·       Velvety Panic-grass

Existing Gas Pipeline

One gas pipeline crosses the Park in its far northeast extent shown in Figure 12. The ROW is owned by Chesapeake Utilities. While development near the pipeline is unlikely, efforts should be made to avoid development near the pipeline ROW.

Existing Utilities

Existing utilities within, and surrounding the Park, are shown in Figure 12 and discussed below.

Existing Electric and Telecom Service

Existing electric lines run along Strickersville Road in the central portion of the Park. PECO is the electric service provider. According to PECO GIS data, the line is active, overhead, and is 3-phase. Existing telecommunications services are provided by Pike Telecom and are available along Strickersville Road (State Road 3006), Walker Road (Township Road 303), and Chesterville Road (State Route 841) in the north, west, and central area of the Park.

Existing Water and Sanitary Sewer Service

The park currently includes four (4) onsite water supply wells north of Strickersville Road and east of Mount Olivet Road. It is unknown if there are any on-site septic systems within the park.

The preliminary soils information indicates that the soil types are generally not well-suited for on-site septic systems with standard adsorption fields for disposal. Site soil suitability for septic system absorption fields is shown in Figure

13. However, the soil data indicates the upland areas of the Park are suitable for wastewater disposal using drip or spray irrigation systems (Table 4). Site soil suitability for drip irrigation fields is shown in Figure 14.

Site Constraints

The two proposed sites for Day Use Areas are shown in relation to various site constraints in Figure 15. The two potential Day Use Area locations are not constrained by natural features and appear well suited for future use as a Day Use Area.

Available Public Water and Sewer Service

According to the Chester County Sewer and Water Infrastructure Map, there is no public water or sanitary sewer service within or close to the Park boundaries.

Estimates of Water Needs and Wastewater Flows

Based on the proposed Park improvements, the estimated water supply need is approximately 770 gallons per day using values from the PaDEP Public Water Supply Manual, as shown in Table 5. The water needs are assumed to include the Park Office, Maintenance and Day Use Area.

Table 5. Estimated Water Demand

* Values based on PaDEP Public Water Supply Manual Table 2.2

Estimated sewage flows are approximately 1,125 gallons per day based on the Pennsylvania Code Title 24 Chapter 73 Sewage Flows, as shown in Table 6. The PaDEP Public Water Supply Manual and the Chapter 73 Sewage Flows have slightly different usage categories and flow estimates, hence the slight variation. These flow estimates are provided for initial planning purposes and should be updated when more detailed information regarding the anticipated number of visitors is known.

Table 6. Estimated Wastewater Flows

* Values based on Pa Code Title 24 Chapter 73 Sewage Flows

Stakeholder meetings were held in July 2023, with 5 stakeholder groups. Attendees accepting the invitation to participate included the list below. (Additional invitees declined to attend.)

• Adjoining Land Managers - Fair Hill Park Staff and Maryland State Park Staff

• Local Government Agencies – DCNR Forestry, National Park Service – Wild and Scenic Rivers, State Senator Committa and Staff, Chester County Commissioner, London Britain Township, Elk Township, PA Game Commission

• Recreation Stakeholders – Representatives from cycling, equestrian, hunting and fishing, and hiking groups including: Velo Amis, Trail Dawgs, PA Equine Council, Trail Spinner, DE National Interscholastic Cycling League, Friends of White Clay Creek Preserve, DE Equine Council, White Clay Fly Fishers, Wilmington Trail Club, SCCS&FA Sportsman’s Club.

• Natural Resource Conservation Stakeholders – Representatives from wildlife and water quality groups including: Elk Township Open Space, Elk Creek Watershed Association, Natural Lands - Peacedale, Delaware State Parks, Stroud Water Research Center, Brandywine Conservancy, Chester County Planning, Chester County Conservation District, University of Delaware, Penn State Extension.

• Historical / Cultural Interests Stakeholders – London Britain Township Historical Commission, Franklin Historical Commission, Elk Township Historical Commission, Lincoln University, West Chester University, and Legacy Land and Water.

• Federally Recognized Tribes and Nations – FRTN representatives were contacted directly by DCNR staff and some provided input during the process.

The Big Elk Creek State Park Master Planning Task Force was created to provide input to DCNR from state and local government officials, county and township designees, and other community partners on the master plan for Big Elk Creek State Park. Comprised of 21 members, the Task Force met 7 times over the course of 2024 and 2025, totaling 26 hours of working time between the meetings and 2 field visits. Members were encouraged to seek feedback from, and share information with, their larger constituencies to help create a master plan that met State Parks’ mission and mandate while focusing on the operational and safety needs of both park staff and future visitors to Big Elk Creek State Park. Task force members are listed below.

Big Elk Creek July 31, 2025 (Virtual) Meeting Transcript (PDF)

Big Elk Creek August 5, 2025 Meeting Transcript (PDF)

Big Elk Creek January 21, 2025 Meeting Transcript (PDF)

Big Elk Creek January 21, 2025  Meeting Slide Deck (PDF)

Big Elk Creek January 15 Virtual Meeting Transcript (PDF)

Big Elk Creek October 23 Meeting Transcript (PDF)

Big Elk Creek October 23 Meeting Slide Deck (PDF)

​Big Elk Creek May 22 Meeting Tr​anscript ​(PDF)

Big Elk Creek May 22 Meeting Slide Deck ​(PDF)

​Big E​lk Creek March 28 Meeting Tr​anscript (PDF)

Big Elk Creek March 28 Meeting Slide Deck (PDF)