Please E-mail suggested additions, comments and/or corrections to Kent@MoreLaw.Com.
Help support the publication of case reports on MoreLaw
Waldron St. Brook Co. v. Pittsburgh
Date: 04-18-2001
Case Number: 1590 C.D. 1999
Judge: Flaherty
Court: Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania
Plaintiff's Attorney: Stuart M. Levine, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania
Defendant's Attorney: Sharon M. O'Neill, Pittsburg, Pennsylvania
(Bradley's) appeals from an order of the Court of Common Pleas of Allegheny
County (trial court) which sustained the preliminary objections filed by the City of
Pittsburgh (City) and the Urban Redevelopment Authority of Pittsburgh (URA) in
response to Bradley's petition under Section 502(e) of the Eminent Domain Code
(Code), Act of June 22, 1964, Special Sess., P.L. 84, as amended, 26 P.S. ยง1-
502(e), for the appointment of viewers. We affirm.
In 1994, Bradley's entered into a lease for premises at 223 Fifth
Avenue in the block between Wood and Market Streets in Pittsburgh, commencing
February 1, 1995. Although the lease expired on January 31, 1998, Bradley's
continues to occupy the space on a year-to-year basis. The premises are located in the Inner Triangle Study Area, certified as blighted by the Planning Commission
(Commission) in accordance with the Urban Redevelopment Law, and designated
as Redevelopment Area No. 54.
The facts in this case as determined by the trial court and not
challenged on appeal are as follows. In March of 1997, two and one-half years
after Bradley's opened for business, the City began a street renovation project
known as the Fifth Avenue Project Phase II (Phase II) along several blocks of Fifth
Avenue, including Bradley's block. Phase II consisted of installation of new water
lines, elimination of vaults under sidewalks, new traffic signs and street lighting,
and reconstruction of curbs and sidewalks. Smithfield Street and Liberty Avenue
were closed to pedestrian and vehicular traffic from 8:30 p.m. to 4 a.m. Monday
through Thursday, but they were never closed during daylight business hours.
Pedestrians were able to walk down Fifth Avenue from Wood Street to Market
Street on both sides of the street, although barricades and fences were erected for
safety reasons. Access to all stores including Bradley's was maintained via the use
of walkways to each storefront with handrails on both sides. Legal crosswalks
were maintained and a hundred-foot loading zone lane was established to enable
merchants to receive deliveries. During the renovations to Fifth Avenue, the URA
imploded buildings on Fifth Avenue and Wood Street to make room for
construction of the Lazarus department store. Renovations to Fifth Avenue were
completed on October 31, 1998.
In addition to the Lazarus construction and street improvements, the
City and URA were planning an upscale retail development known as The
Marketplace at Fifth and Forbes (Marketplace). Reports indicated that the
Marketplace would encompass Bradley's premises.
On March 25, 1998, Bradley's alleged a de facto taking and petitioned
for the appointment of viewers. On April 6, 1998, a board of viewers was
appointed. On April 24, 1998, the City and URA filed preliminary objections.
The trial court thereafter sustained the preliminary objections and vacated the
appointment of viewers. This appeal followed.
* * *
Click the case caption above for the full text of the Court's opinion.
About This Case
What was the outcome of Waldron St. Brook Co. v. Pittsburgh?
The outcome was: Affirmed.
Which court heard Waldron St. Brook Co. v. Pittsburgh?
This case was heard in Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania, PA. The presiding judge was Flaherty.
Who were the attorneys in Waldron St. Brook Co. v. Pittsburgh?
Plaintiff's attorney: Stuart M. Levine, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. Defendant's attorney: Sharon M. O'Neill, Pittsburg, Pennsylvania.
When was Waldron St. Brook Co. v. Pittsburgh decided?
This case was decided on April 18, 2001.