Fight over pool in Unity goes to court
A dispute in a Unity neighborhood over an above-ground pool has gone to Westmoreland County Common Pleas Court, where a homeowners association has asked the court to order the pool removed on the grounds it violates the development's regulations.
The East High Acres Community Association Inc. of 1318 Dellview Drive filed a lawsuit on Oct. 18 against Richard and Deana Rohrer of 1151 Sullenberger Road. It claims the couple violated the association's restrictive covenants when they set up an above-ground pool this past summer in the Level Greens plan of the development, according to court documents.
The Rohrers could not be reached for comment and have not yet responded to the lawsuit.
The association, which is seeking reimbursement for attorney fees, says in its suit that the homeowners association or its representatives notified the Rohrers that their pool was built in violation of the covenants. The Rohrers, who bought the property in 2008, allegedly continued to erect the above-ground pool and have not removed it, the suit states.
East High Acres attorney Donald J. Snyder of Latrobe notified the Rohrers on Sept. 6 that the pool violated the restrictive covenants, which state that no above-ground pools can be installed or maintained on any lot, before or after construction. The association, which gave the Rohrers 30 days to remove the pool, said it has the authority to enforce the covenants originally imposed by Adam Eidemiller Inc., the developer of the property.
The case was assigned to Judge Anthony Marsili.
Joe Napsha is a staff writer for Trib Total Media. He can be reached at 724-836-5252 or firstname.lastname@example.org.
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 â 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.