Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Development topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Residents press planners over blasting, wells and cemetery as Hancock/Lovers Lane plan moves to supervisors
Summary
Neighbors of the proposed Hancock Enterprises Lovers Lane subdivision told the Planning Commission on June 3 they fear blasting, well damage and impacts to an adjacent cemetery; the commission recommended the plan be forwarded to the Board of Supervisors with requests that developers add a fence, share materials and set up a resident notification plan for blasting.
Developers for the Lovers Lane subdivision returned to the Upper Providence Planning Commission on June 3 and said they had met with neighbors and agreed to add a fence along Lot 1 adjacent to the Holy Ghost Church cemetery. Despite that concession, residents at the meeting urged the commission to press developers for stronger protections because the site will require deep excavation and blasting near historic stone foundations and private wells.
Allison (speaker 8) said her client agreed to add fencing at the property line and is evaluating upsizing a storm pipe if permitted by DEP and township rules. She also said the project holds an MPBS permit and is not requesting waivers at this stage.
Multiple residents described houses and wells that date to the late 1800s, told commissioners they live within roughly a 500‑foot radius of the planned blast area, and asked who would pay to repair foundation or well damage should blasting cause later problems. The developer and staff reiterated that blasting is regulated by the state and the township cannot preempt those regulations; staff recommended residents document the current condition of homes and wells and said developers and contractors normally carry insurance to address damages. Several residents requested that the township require a local, site‑specific vibration monitoring plan and a clear resident notification system.
Commissioners discussed what the commission could require at the sketch stage. Staff and counsel said the commission can include recommended conditions with its referral to the Board of Supervisors—such as including materials provided that evening in the supervisors’ packet, recommending the fence on Lot 1 be added to the plan, and asking the developer to set up a resident notification method if blasting will occur. After discussion the commission voted to forward the plan to the supervisors with those recommendations; the motion passed with one recorded dissent.
A commission member advised residents to get pre‑blast condition surveys and to document well performance so there is an evidentiary record in the event of damage. The developer said they would coordinate a notification process with residents and confirm the details of the fence and any pipe upsizing during final engineering.
