ShareThis Page

Arguments set for Sewickley condo development lawsuit

| Tuesday, Aug. 15, 2017, 11:51 a.m.

Arguments are scheduled Aug. 16 in a lawsuit filed by two residents who are trying to block a condominium development in Sewickley.

Sewickley residents John LeCornu and Anne Clarke Ronce filed the lawsuit in Allegheny County Common Pleas Court in March against the borough, stating that council's approval should be set aside because a public meeting violated the Sunshine Act.

Arguments are set before Judge Timothy O'Reilly in Common Pleas Court, Downtown, records showed on Aug. 7.

Borough council last year approved the conditional use sought by property owner Hoey's Run LLC for the development. The lawsuit says the borough building meeting room on Thorn Street where council approved the project contains about 40 seats which were full, people were standing in the aisles, and not all could hear or participate in the proceedings.

“This was not just a crowded meeting, where people have to wait their turn ... it was impossible to hear what was going on much of the time. It was the most uncivil and chaotic public meeting I've ever attended,” said Clarke Ronce, a member of Character Matters, a group of citizens concerned about the effect of the condo development on the community.

She said the buildings will “dominate the landscape in a way that nothing has been able to do for 150 years.”

Attorneys for the borough did not respond to inquiries for comment before the Herald's print deadline Monday.

Downtown-based Zamagias Properties proposed two four-story buildings between Blackburn Road, Centennial Avenue and Locust Place, according to documents filed with the borough.

Kimberly Palmiero is a Tribune-Review contributing writer.

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com 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.