ShareThis Page
Proposed development in Pine has some residents concerned |
North Hills

Proposed development in Pine has some residents concerned

| Tuesday, February 6, 2018 1:03 p.m

A proposed housing development has some Township of Pine residents worried.

Eddy Homes wants to build 41 houses on 33 acres of mostly vacant land near the intersection of Brennan Road and State Route 910. The proposed development is to be called Wexford Station. Developers will appear before the township planning commission on Monday, Feb. 12 at 7 p.m.

Commissioner Ed Holdcroft says if the plans do not violate any zoning ordinances it will pass.

Concerned neighbors maintain that the busy thoroughfare is already overcrowded with homes, which have not only increased traffic, but caused noise pollution, disturbed wetlands and upset the rural character of Pine. They organized a group and, on Jan. 29, held a public meeting to share and receive information.

A petition against the plan was circulated and has, thus far, garnered more than 100 signatures. The group also sent a letter to PennDOT about the dangerous amount of traffic on 910.

Although there were about 25 people at the January meeting, organizers hope more citizens will show up to the Feb. 12 planning commission meeting. Kati Lefeber, one of the residents who spearheaded the campaign, has a PowerPoint presentation she plans to show to the board detailing concerns.

If the development can’t be stopped, residents hope some concessions can be made, such as reducing the number of homes being built.

Kristy Locklin is a Tribune-Review contributor.

Categories: North Hills
TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.