Oakmont Council passed a revised parking ordinance despite a looming threat of litigation from a resident who owns multiple businesses in the borough.
During council’s meeting on March 18, the board passed a long-discussed ordinance that updates parking requirements in the borough’s commercial district. The vote was 6-1.
Similar to an ordinance passed in January 2024, businesses will be able to count available street parking as part of the required number of spots for their business to operate.
“The proposed ordinance is nearly identical to (the previously overturned ordinance),” said Jacob Leyland, the borough’s solicitor.
The difference, he said, is the newest version provides an opportunity for existing businesses to request their parking requirements fall under the new ordinance.
The point of the proposed ordinance is to relax the borough’s off-street parking requirement.
Oakmont resident John Keefe, who owns seven restaurants in the borough and some additional properties, previously filed an appeal on five separate grounds, challenging the validity of the 2024 ordinance.
Commonwealth Court ruled in the borough’s favor on four of them, but found the borough in violation of an equal protection claim. The state court reasoned that the ordinance created unfair advantages for new business owners versus existing businesses.
“They found that the ordinance created two classes of individuals or entities, which is impermissible,” Leyland said.
He said that under the updated ordinance, existing business owners, like new businesses, would be able to submit a traffic study to be able to use street parking rather than providing off-street parking for their customers.
Before voting, council opened the floor to public comment.
Joe Vickless, co-owner of Local Remedy Brewing on Allegheny Avenue, spoke in favor of the ordinance. He said customers have called the tap room a “novelty.”
“We’re a new business in what many told us they felt was the ‘same old, same old’ landscape with little growth,” Vickless said.
He called the ordinance a “commonsense” move by the borough, since it opens more opportunities for potential businesses to move in.
The brewery has been in an ongoing legal battle with Keefe regarding the 2024 parking ordinance. Keefe claims the brewery is operating illegally since the tap room began operating under the 2024 ordinance before it was deemed unconstitutional.
At the March 18 meeting, Gusty Sunseri, an attorney representing Keefe, adamantly objected to the revised ordinance. He accused council of having a vendetta against Keefe.
“The reason you’re passing this is a ruse. It is because you are attacking one individual, and that’s John Keefe,” Sunseri said. “You do not care about the health, safety and welfare of the people.”
The attorney went on to criticize the fact that the borough did not have a traffic study done while writing the ordinance. The ordinance requires individual traffic studies from applicants before they can utilize on-street parking.
Sunseri said he intended to “expose” the council and what’s going on behind the scenes regarding the ordinance.
Prior to the vote, he said an appeal would be filed if the ordinance was passed.
“I feel like having (a traffic study) now almost feels arbitrary because it would need to be decided on a case-by-case basis based on where something new is coming into town, where that particular place is going to be located, and how that particular new place would impact traffic,” said council member Amanda Pagnotta.
She said having a study now would fail to depict an accurate picture of how future businesses coming to the borough will affect traffic.
Council member John Arnold was the lone vote against the ordinance. He said he wants to see a traffic study done before agreeing to the ordinance.