Greensburg Victorian-era tea parlor catches fire during pressure washing |

Greensburg Victorian-era tea parlor catches fire during pressure washing

Patrick Varine | Tribune-Review
Firefighters open windows to vent smoke from a house on North Main Street on Wednesday, Sept. 13, 2017.

A fire at a Greensburg tea parlor Wednesday was sparked when the proprietor was pressure washing the outside of the Victorian-era home, according to fire officials.

Greensburg Fire public information officer Chris Tantlinger said that heat from the pressure washer transferred to the inside of a second-floor wall at The Victorian Lady of Academy Hill just before 1 p.m. Firefighters responded to an automatic fire alarm at the converted two-story home on North Main Street and discovered flames between an interior and exterior wall, Tantlinger said.

It was lucky that the heat set off the automatic alarm, “or it would have went unnoticed,” he said.

North Main Street was closed for a brief period. No one was injured.

Greensburg firefighters were assisted by 12 other stations.

The building was purchased in 2003 by husband and wife team Carol and Jeff Kornides, who converted it into a tea-style parlor and gift shop, according its website. The Queen Anne-style home was built in 1884 by a local attorney as a wedding present to his daughter and her husband, according to the site.

The interior sustained smoke and water damage during Wednesday’s incident.

Renatta Signorini and Patrick Varine are Tribune-Review staff writers. Reach Signorini at 724-837-5374, [email protected] or via Twitter @byrenatta.

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using 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.