Planning commission recommends conditional-use approval for Verizon tower at Lasher Court

The Murrysville Planning Commission voted unanimously on March 11 to forward a conditional-use application for a Verizon communications tower at 4900 Lasher Court to borough council.

The tower would sit on a 10.71-acre parcel in the RR (Rural Residential) zoning district. Attorney Joe Cortez, representing Vertical Bridge and Verizon Wireless, told the commission the proposal had been revised so the “height maximum including the lightning rod” is 125 feet to address ordinance concerns. Cortez also said the application includes FCC and FAA exhibits and a radio-frequency study showing a local coverage gap.

The commission’s brief discussion focused on technical and process questions, including whether the lightning rod counts toward the ordinance’s height limit and whether a land-development plan is required for the project. Cortez said the parties believed land development might not apply and offered to submit legal authorities; he said he could provide case law supporting that communications towers do not always constitute land development under Pennsylvania law. Engineer Curtis Paxton of Mead & Hunt addressed access and easement questions and said the applicant’s survey shows the existing public right-of-way ends at the property line. Tim Stark of United Site Development, a Verizon consultant, said searches of FAA and FCC databases and a site drive showed “none were found” within a one-mile radius, supporting the applicant’s contention there are no nearby tall structures suitable for colocation.

No members of the public offered comments during the hearing. The commission first closed the public hearing by motion and later voted unanimously to forward a recommendation of approval for the conditional-use application to borough council; the planning staff noted that any final action would require review of accompanying land-development submissions and solicitor review of legal questions raised during the meeting.

The commission and applicant repeatedly said the land-development plan, stormwater and grading details, and solicitor interpretation on whether a separate land-development filing is required will be addressed before council action or in subsequent plan submissions. The applicant indicated he would provide further documentation on frequencies, RF exhibits and case law cited in support of the land-development interpretation.

If council approves the conditional use, the record indicates the applicant will still need to submit detailed land-development plans for engineering review and final permitting.