Scottdale residents question zoning notices |

Scottdale residents question zoning notices

Some Scottdale residents showed concern recently when a resident along South Broadway received a violation notice from the borough’s code enforcement/zoning officer.

The resident was directed through the letter to remove a fence that had been installed prior to zoning approval.

But it wasn’t what was in the letter that had residents concerned. It was the date it was written – Oct. 14.

This was just three days after a borough council meeting where members of the Scottdale Borough Council asked protection committee chairman Andy Pinskey to look into the qualifications of the zoning officer, who is employed by Building Inspection Underwriters out of Avalon.

Residents thought officials took action at that meeting to hold off on issuing any more zoning violation notices until Pinskey reported back to council.

It was Councilman Bryce King who made the request of Pinskey to look into the zoning officer’s qualifications and it was Councilman Jack Davis who suggested no more zoning notices be sent out until the situation was investigated.

Councilman Angelo Pallone questioned the action of issuing the violation notice, saying he thought council had voted to hold off, but both Pinskey and Randy Klimchock with Solicitor John Toohey’s office said that even if there was a request, there was no record in the minutes that any official action had taken place.

“I checked with (Secretary) Sue (Killinger) on the minutes and there was no vote taken to suspend any code violations,” Pinskey said.

On the violation itself, Pallone said it was his understanding that the resident had recently moved to the property and might not have been aware of borough codes.

“If all they did was not apply for a permit, I’m a reasonable man,” he said. “I don’t think there was a need to cite the individual and make them take out their fence. I would have just told her to go and apply for a permit.”

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.