Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Hay Minor Subdivision topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commission recommends approval of Hay Lane minor subdivision; resident raises unrelated civil‑case concerns
Summary
The commission recommended approval of a minor subdivision dividing a 6‑acre parcel, while a nearby resident raised an unrelated pending civil lawsuit that he said affects the broader Murray Crest plan; staff said the subdivision application conforms to requirements and is not encumbered.
Get email alerts on the Hay Minor Subdivision topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
The Planning Commission recommended approval of a minor subdivision (S‑9‑25, Hay Minor Subdivision) that divides a 6‑acre portion of 9.6 acres to provide separate access via an existing right‑of‑way to Hay Lane.
Applicant Chris Kearns (who recused himself from the vote) said the parcel has sanitary sewer access via an easement and that the stormwater and planning modules had been cleared by FTMSA. Planning staff advised commissioners that all outstanding engineering comments had been addressed and recommended approval.
During public comment, neighbors raised concerns about a civil lawsuit they said involves the broader Murray Crest plan and urged the commission to delay action until the legal matter is resolved. Residents provided a case number they said is filed in Westmoreland County (transcript cites case number 22CI0559). Planning staff responded that the property is not encumbered from a municipal permitting standpoint and that the subdivision application met ordinance requirements; staff noted that any preexisting or subsequent judgment could be addressed in a private conveyance context if a sale or title transfer occurs.
The commission recommended approval; one commissioner abstained due to an identified conflict of interest (the applicant’s representation or ownership relationship), and the motion carried.
What’s next: The recommendation will go to borough council for final action; staff noted that any outstanding civil litigation would be a matter for the courts and private parties rather than a bar to municipal subdivision approval unless a municipal encumbrance is recorded.

