North Huntingdon commissioners deny plan for site of weddings
A North Huntingdon backyard barn that unexpectedly became an in-demand spot for weddings and graduation parties must cease operation since it has failed to meet site plan criteria, despite multiple extensions.
Commissioners voted to deny the site plan for the Guffey Barn Venue, 14179 Lincoln Way. Outgoing Commission President Lee Moffat cast the sole vote against a denial.
Owner Steven Guffey, who has previously told commissioners that he was willing to cooperate to meet criteria, did not attend the meeting Thursday . He did not respond to a request for comment.
The site plan had been approved for five extensions to complete work, according to records. The plan was denied based on six criteria.
The barn, on the rear of a single-family lot in North Huntingdon, has been used for banquets, receptions and weddings.
It has not been inspected or approved for public assembly, according to township zoning minutes.
Among the criteria listed, the site plan fails to provide sufficient parking, fails to provide required detention pond slopes and fails to provide off-site easements for storm water and sewage lines.
The site plan was set to be denied in October, but Guffey pleaded with commissioners to grant an extension. Commissioners granted a two-month extension, which expired this month .
The barn was built in either 2002 or 2003, according to meeting minutes. It can be accessed through either Guffey's driveway or a private road that leads up to Guffey's other business, a Johnston the Florist branch.
Amanda Dolasinski is a staff writer for Trib Total Media.
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.