Greensburg dissolves Historic and Architectural Review Board | TribLIVE.com
Westmoreland

Greensburg dissolves Historic and Architectural Review Board

Jacob Tierney
1388850_web1_web-greensburg

Greensburg Council on Monday unanimously voted to dissolve the city’s Historic and Architectural Review Board, an advisory body that supervised construction and renovation projects in the city.

The city has been laying the groundwork for HARB’s dissolution since May. Monday’s vote passed without discussion or fanfare.

HARB will remain active until Aug. 12 while city leaders work out the details of the transition with the Greensburg Planning Commission, which will take over HARB’s duties.

Mayor Robert Bell previously said the board created unnecessary red tape for developers.

Major construction projects need to be considered by three groups — the planning commission, HARB and council, before work can begin.

Having the planning commission take over HARB’s duties will streamline the process for property owners, Bell said.

The seven-member board, established in 2007, oversaw all proposed construction in downtown Greensburg and along Main, Otterman, Pittsburgh and West Newton streets — the main roadways through the city.

It could not approve or deny projects. It made recommendations to council, which has final say over development.

When the city first announced it was considering dissolving the HARB, board Chairwoman Barbara Jones asked council to give someone from the board a seat on the planning commission to help continue the board’s mission.

The details of the transition have not been decided.

Jacob Tierney is a Tribune-Review staff writer. You can contact Jacob at 724-836-6646, [email protected] or via Twitter .

Categories: Local | Westmoreland
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.