Delmont Planning Commission turns down request for extension on plans for Speedway store, gas station
The Delmont Planning Commission voted 4-0 on Thursday to deny a request for an extension to allow Speedway to revise plans to build a convenience store and gas station on Route 66 near a residential neighborhood.
The board also recommended that borough council deny approval for the plan, citing a series of more than 40 issues with the proposal.
“I think (the denial) is a good thing, if it works,” said resident Debbie Carfang. “I live right there next to it and the safety concerns, the noise, it all would affect me.”
The Zoning Hearing Board will meet next month to decide on Speedway's application to use the property as a gas station.
“We don't know what the Zoning Hearing Board is going to do,” said Dan Hewitt, solicitor for the planning commission and borough council. “There's no point in the planning commission evaluating plans until they're final.”
Borough council will meet Nov. 12 to review the plans and the planning commission recommendation.
If council rejects the plans, Speedway can refile its proposal, but would be required to pay any fees a second time.
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.