The Reporter (Lansdale, PA)

Blasting plans outlined; some residents object

- By Bob Keeler bkeeler@21st-centurymed­ia.com @bybobkeele­r on Twitter

Blasting at the site of a planned new housing developmen­t is expected to take place over a two-week period and include six or seven blasts, the head of the company doing the work told the Lower Salford Township Board of Supervisor­s at its April 21 morning work session meeting.

The blasts typically happen between 11 a.m. and 2 p.m., Matt Ryan, president of Rock Work, Inc., of Blue Bell, said.

When people think about blasting, they often think of scenes in a western movie in which someone throws a stick of dynamite and there is a huge explosion, he said.

“Our job is to do the complete opposite,” Ryan said. “Nothing’s flying in the air. It’s a very controlled blast.”

The blasting is planned for a 43-acre property on Maple Avenue on which Metropolit­an Developmen­t Group is building 48 single family homes. It will take place on the Alderfer Park side of the site, John Rathfon, Metropolit­an’s assistant vice president of land developmen­t, said. Hammering will be done to break rocks on the other side of the site, he said.

While the discussion at the meeting was labelled a waiver request, it was actually about following state blasting regulation­s that take precedence over the township’s ordinance, Lower Salford board Chairman Doug Gifford said.

“If we follow Lower Salford’s ordinance, there’s things in that ordinance that are in direct conflict with what we’re required to do from the state,” Ryan said.

One of the most obvious examples of that is in the rules for blowing horns before blasting, he said.

“Sounds pretty simple, right?” Ryan said.

“However, the township requires those horns to be blown in a specific sequence. The state requires a different sequence,” he said. “It is impossible for us to blow the horns and adequately meet the requiremen­ts for both Lower Salford and the state.”

Ryan said his company has previously done constructi­on blasting in Lower Salford at the Tractor Supply and neighborin­g businesses on Route 113 and at The Reserves at Salford housing developmen­t, both of which were larger projects and closer to neighborin­g homes than the Maple Avenue blasting will be.

In answer to questions from board member Kevin Shelly about why hammering, which costs more, was not planned for the entire property, Rathfon said blasting is quicker and less disruptive.

“Hammering comes with its own set of issues,” he said. “Hammering takes a lot longer. It is a lot bigger equipment. It is also a larger duration of a lot of noise.”

Each of the blasts lasts for less than three seconds, Ryan said.

“If we’re talking six or seven of them, we’re talking less than 30 seconds of blasting versus weeks of hammering, so the disruption is much less,” he said.

Notificati­on letters with informatio­n about the blasting will be sent to homes within 800 feet of the blasting and free pre-blasting surveys will be offered to the owners of homes within 500 feet, Rathfon and Ryan said.

The township will be notified of scheduled blast times and can post that informatio­n on its website, they said.

In answer to Shelly’s question of what would happen if the township did not approve the request, Gifford said the blasting would still be allowed.

“They have the state permit,” he said. “If we vote no, they can go ahead and do whatever they want as long as it meets the state requiremen­ts.”

Four members of the public who joined the meeting by Zoom asked clarifying questions and commented on the plans. One, speaking on behalf of his daughter who owns a neighborin­g property, said she opposes the blasting.

The request was approved in a 4-1 tally with Shelly casting the dissenting vote.

He said he thinks waiver requests should be discussed at a meeting time that is more convenient for the public to attend, rather than at the 7:30 a.m. work session.

“Well, if they were really waivers, I’d agree with you, but they’re not,” Gifford said.

Board member Doug Jones said he thinks its obvious that the board should consider changing its ordinance.

“By leaving it on the record as it is now, it’s obviously creating a lot of misunderst­anding and a lot of misinforma­tion both for developers and the public,” he said.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States