New building planned for Leetsdale Industrial Park
A new office and warehouse building will be constructed in the Leetsdale Industrial Park.
Council members last week approved, 5-1, a 47,300-square foot building at the corner of Brickworks Road and Petrun Road.
Council member Linda Michael voted “no” and Roger Nanni was absent.
No tenant has been named for the building, said Tony Rosenberg of Chapman Properties, owner of Leetsdale Industrial Park.
“We don't have a use at this point,” he said. “That's the only site left for development on Brickworks (Road).”
Because the facility will sit adjacent to several homes on Monroe Way, developers of the property will construct barriers, including a wall, and also offer a row of trees as buffer, Lennon Smith Souleret Engineering Inc., engineer John Heyl said.
At issue is a proposed, 6-foot storm-water retention pond.
While council members approved the development, they did so under a condition that they later could consider adding a fence around the pond, which is expected to hold four feet of water when necessary.
Borough engineer Dan Slagle and solicitor Megan Ott both agree that a fence should surround the pond for safety.
“The retention facility does not have a fence around it, and there's no way of deterring children or animals from getting in that detention facility,” Slagle said.
Rosenberg said he didn't want a fence, but would consider shrubbery and other natural elements to serve as a barrier.
Heyl said the pond is necessary as it “will prevent the river from backing up into the system and flooding these backyards.”
Bobby Cherry is a staff writer for Trib Total Media. He can be reached at 412-324-1408 or email@example.com.
Add Bobby Cherry 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.
- Leet treehouse that drew national headlines will be removed by December
- Sewickley Academy grad shooting for the stars at Smithsonian
- Nice play, Pirates — on and off the field
- Developer makes $1,724,000 deal for downtown Sewickley properties
- Water Works Road in Sewickley closed for months
- New Edgeworth principal brings experience, passion
- Sewickley officials tackle rising odor
- 20 communities asked for input on Route 65 issues