Giant Eagle executive joins rezoning appeal
An Upper St. Clair woman and a senior vice president at Giant Eagle have filed the latest appeal in the Allegheny County Court of Common Pleas against a development project set to include a Whole Foods Market.
Last week, residents Margaret Witner and Joseph Lucot appealed the township's April 7 decision to rezone property at Washington and Fort Couch roads for a mixed-use development, claiming that the township didn't properly advertise the zoning change before its passage.
Whole Foods has signed a lease for a 40,000-square-foot store and underground parking proposed for part of the development, on the former Consol Energy Inc. headquarters site.
But rival grocer Giant Eagle Inc. said it has been providing legal support to residents fighting the project, because it shares their concerns about traffic the development could generate.
The developers contend they will make road improvements and that their proposal would cause less traffic than other potential projects for the site, such as an office park.
Witner has filed appeals challenging the project. Lucot is senior vice president and chief people officer for the O'Hara-based grocery chain.
Matthew Santoni is a staff writer for Trib Total Media. He can be reached at 412-380-5625 or firstname.lastname@example.org.
Add Matthew Santoni to your Google+ circles.
Show commenting policy
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.