Murrysville commission recommends Summerhill Phase 2 to council with conditions on sewers, culvert, property line and permits

The Murrysville Planning Commission on May 13 voted to forward a recommendation to borough council to approve SP 125 — Summerhill Phase 2 at Goldie Lane — a simultaneous preliminary and final major land development application for 64 units on about 22 acres, but attached multiple conditions and outstanding items that must be completed before final approval.

Developer and project representative Gary Hall said the submission addresses many prior comments and that the final subdivision plat will be submitted next week. He said the plan now uses gravity sewers rather than a pressure system and would tie into an existing terminal manhole near the bottom of North Duane Drive. Hall and other engineers described a revised drainage approach: a temporary sediment trap with a pipe outlet that will be replaced by a larger culvert across North Duane and discharged to a ravine; that design is under review by the regional conservation district.

Planning staff and the commission listed outstanding approvals and conditions: written acceptance from the Environmental Advisory Committee (EAC), signed sewage‑planning modules from the two municipal authorities (FTMSA and Plum municipal authority), a wetlands determination, NPDES permit materials, submission and recording of a final subdivision plat, conservation district sign‑off on the culvert/sediment controls, and an agreement with affected North Duane residents covering access, paving and sewer connections. The commission also recommended the borough review stop signage at the intersection of Shirley Lane/Logans Ferry and requested the developer address a property‑line issue between Phase 1 and Phase 2 so that condominium documents and the recorded subdivision reflect the setback condition noted on earlier plans.

Traffic and site engineering details were discussed. The project’s traffic study reported 466 total daily vehicle trips with a 42‑vehicle morning peak hour and a 47‑vehicle afternoon peak hour; the borough traffic reviewer found no thresholds requiring turn lanes or signals at the nearby intersection. A geotechnical report was cited at the meeting; engineers said borings encountered rock above deeper red‑bed strata and that slope stability had been analyzed, but residents pressed for clarity about hillside cuts, liability and protections for existing homes above the proposed grading.

Several neighbors and association representatives spoke. Joanne Hunter, president of the Summerhill Condos Homeowners Association, asked how property‑line adjustments will be handled and said the HOA will review any proposed amendments. Residents asked whether an assurance bond or developer bond would guarantee road restoration after construction; planning staff and the developer said the municipality requires developers to post a bond to cover proposed improvements, and the developer agreed to pave and restore North Duane Drive as part of the agreement with homeowners. Parks and recreation funding was also discussed: the developer offered a fee‑in‑lieu of on‑site amenities, listed in the submission as $48,800; the planning commission noted the parks commission recommended fee in lieu and said council will exercise discretion on acceptance.

After lengthy discussion and public comment, a commissioner moved that the planning commission forward the application to council with the listed conditions; the motion passed with one abstention. The recommendation is contingent on the developer completing the outstanding technical approvals and executing agreements with affected property owners.