Lambert Fisher land-development plan tabled after floodplain, H&H concerns

The Cecil Township Planning Commission on July 16 tabled application 2026-0018 from Lambert Fisher for a small office and product demonstration facility at the corner of Papp Road and Cecil Henderson Road so the applicant can complete an H&H (hydrology/hydraulics) study and address outstanding engineering comments.

Sean O'Dell, an engineer with Hirschman CE Group, told the commission the applicant reduced required parking to six spaces to meet the township ordinance and submitted revised plans that address most engineering comments. O'Dell said the firm plans to perform the H&H study and that the remaining technical comments will be resolved before the Board of Supervisors considers the plan.

The commission's substantive concern came from Dan (township staff), who flagged the property's proximity to a 42-inch culvert and McPherson Creek and said the submitted plan lacked a certified first-floor elevation. Dan noted the township's floodplain practice for unstudied watersheds over 100 acres is to assume a 50-foot floodway from the top of bank and said, in his view, the H&H data are necessary to determine whether the proposed building or parking would conflict with the ordinance.

"I just feel uncomfortable recommending the board that you approve anything tonight until we know that... we're safe from the creek," Dan said, citing past local flooding and the township's floodplain rules.

O'Dell replied that the H&H was always intended and that the applicant had revised the plans to address most engineer comments; he asked the commission either to approve now and return with any required revisions after the H&H or to allow a short table so the study could be completed. He noted that earlier approval would speed procurement for a prefabricated metal building the applicant expects to construct once permits are in hand.

Commissioners pressed the ordinance question: one member summarized that the floodplain rules can require an H&H for larger watersheds and said a complete H&H would be needed to confidently recommend the plan to the supervisors. Another commissioner suggested the ordinance language is ambiguous where it states an H&H "may be required." The commission ultimately voted to table the application pending full resolution of Gateway Engineers' July 15 comment letter and completion of the H&H study.

Separately, a commissioner advised the applicant to record any required holding-tank agreement with the deed and to post escrow in order to avoid future title problems, citing a recent local incident involving an unrecorded holding tank.

The applicant was invited to return to the planning commission next month with the completed H&H study and evidence that the engineer's comments have been addressed. The motion to table was made, seconded and approved by voice vote.

What happens next: The applicant will complete the H&H analysis and address Gateway Engineers' comments; the plan will be reconsidered by the commission and then, if recommended, forwarded to the Board of Supervisors for final action.