Facing accident lawsuit, Murrysville officials might close Branthoover Cut-Off
Brandthoover Cutoff from Old William Penn Highway, Murrysville, on Monday, April 1.
Photo by Lillian DeDomenic | For The Murrysville Star
Murrysville officials are considering closing the Branthoover Cut-Off after a Churchill couple that was in a car wreck at the intersection sued the municipality.
This is the second time council has considered closing the road, which connects Old William Penn Highway and Route 22, near Leone Animal Supply Center. Documents provided by the municipality indicate that an ordinance to close the road was rejected in 2005 because “there was not any significant accident history.”
That has changed.
In July 2009, Paul and Joanne Kimelman were injured after a car struck their vehicle as they were turning from Branthoover Cut-Off onto Old William Penn Highway, according to a lawsuit the Kimelmans have filed.
The lawsuit seeks at least $25,000 in damages.
“We believe it is extremely dangerous,” said Elliott Schuchardt, attorney for the Kimelmans. “It should be closed as soon as possible; it's an 1880s farm intersection.”
Though the Kimelmans did not ask the municipality to close the road as part of their lawsuit, Schuchardt said he hasn't ruled out that request.
Council is considering closing the road by abandoning it or barricading it. The proposal suggests closing the road from Old William Penn Highway to the Y-intersection that leads to Route 22.
Documents provided to officials indicated that closing the road would cost about $4,000 to relocate guide rails, mill the asphalt and put up new signs.
Chief administrator Jim Morrison declined to comment on the proposal because of the lawsuit.
Daveen Rae Kurutz is a staff writer for Trib Total Media. She can be reached at 412-856-7400, ext. 8627, 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.