Housing complex on armory site gets planners' OK
Ligonier Borough planning commissioners will recommend to council a 17-unit housing complex to be built where the former National Guard armory once stood.
During their meeting Tuesday -- the fifth held to discuss the project -- planners and other borough officials said there were no outstanding issues with the proposal.
Representatives from developer Economic Growth Connection of Westmoreland County and designer Montgomery & Rust Inc. will present the plan to council members at their meeting 7 p.m. Thursday.
The plan calls for the construction of five detached single-family homes, six townhouses and six homes designed as flats on the parcel near the intersection of Walnut and West Main streets. Houses will not be built until they are sold, the same manner in which construction was done on West Church Street.
Resident Bill Clark told commissioners he was concerned about the construction process because of what happened with the Church Street project.
"There were piles of dirt, building materials, refuse as tall as 10, 12 feet," he said. "It's an eyesore. It's like a junkyard."
Planners and engineer Ben Faas drafted a stipulation as part of the plan that would prevent that, Montgomery & Rust representative Greg Green said.
The clause stipulates that after infrastructure -- a loop road, utilities and a storm-water basin -- is complete, disturbed land where construction is not occurring for more than 30 days must be returned to grass.
Although Montgomery & Rust designed the four-home project on Church Street, Green said the company had no control to put in temporary landscaping while construction continued.
"Not having control of that site was one of my biggest frustrations," he said. "It wasn't our money to spend and fix it."
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.