Murrysville planners close public hearing and table Summerhill Phase 2 amid slope, sewer and geotech questions

The Murrysville Planning Commission on Aug. 13 continued its review of Summerhill Phase 2 and, after extensive resident testimony and technical back-and-forth, closed the public hearing and voted to table further action until geotechnical review is finished.

Jeff Parabic of SYNC Consulting and Engineering, representing the developer, told the commission KU Resources had issued geotechnical comments Friday and the project team submitted preliminary responses the day of the meeting. Parabic said the team would “adjust calculations” and coordinate with KU Resources to resolve outstanding questions. He also said the stormwater pond may use a “managed release concept” — an alternative to infiltration the developer said would meet DEP water-quality requirements.

Gary Hall of Summerhill Development told the commission his team met with the neighborhood association and reached an agreement on Goldie Lane access and a financial contribution for road wear; Hall said the developer will top-coat the road when construction is finished.

Several nearby residents told the commission they were concerned about excavation and the location of five proposed townhomes that appear to require cuts into a steep hillside behind existing homes. Kathy Adesi (4802 Carrie Ann Lane) said she and other residents were surprised by the scale of the new phase and asked: “Do we have any protection? If you dig into that hillside and then we have further movement, we don't have any type of assurance bond for the road or anything.” John Sippel, a Shirley Lane resident, asked how far back excavation would go and whether proposed units would overlook existing yards.

Bud McCutcheon of KU Resources, the borough’s reviewing geotechnical engineer, told residents his priority is slope safety and that KU would work with the developer on a final analysis. McCutcheon said KU prepared the geotechnical comments and that the analysis remained under review.

Commissioners acknowledged both the residents’ concerns and the ongoing technical review. The commission moved — and the membership voted — to close the public hearing and to table action on the Summerhill Phase 2 application until the geotechnical work is completed and the engineer’s recommendations are resolved; the motion carried with one abstention (Mister Lamke). Staff noted the developer had provided an extension/waiver of time so the application could remain pending while the parties finish the analysis.

The tabled items of record included the developer’s plans showing 61 proposed units for the new phase (as cited by residents at the meeting), earlier phases of Summerhill that included 54 existing homes, the developer’s discussion of extending a gravity sewer outfall to eliminate grinder pumps on several existing homes, and the KU Resources geotechnical comments. The commission recorded that the developer’s responses to KU were submitted the day of the meeting and that KU and the developer would coordinate on revisions before the matter returned to the commission.

The Commission did not take a final vote on the plan. The tabled application will remain pending until KU Resources and the developer finalize their geotechnical recommendations; the commission directed staff to coordinate next steps and to accept written comment from residents and members before the item returns.