Pleasant Hills council applies for grant money
Pleasant Hills hopes for better luck with its latest bid for gaming-fueled funds for tennis courts in Mowry Park.
Pleasant Hills council voted on Monday to apply for $169,471 from Allegheny County's Community Infrastructure and Tourism Fund.
An earlier bid for $300,000 for those courts and other park improvements was rejected.
The borough's luck extended to Americans with Disabilities Act-compliant ramps for the municipal building.
Pleasant Hills sought $98,160 in federal Community Development Block Grant funding through South Hills Area Council of Governments — and may get $17,500 instead.
“There is a significant shortfall in funding,” borough engineer Ned Mitrovich of Lennon, Smith, Souleret Engineering Inc. said.
Councilman Gregory Smith wondered if the matter could be tabled, but Mitrovich said SHACOG is “pretty regimented” about such grants.
Councilors Brad Rodeheaver, Daniel Soltesz, Joseph Esper, Robert Karcher, William Trimbath and Regis Brown voted to accept the grant, while Smith voted no.
Council approved another three-month extension of the service agreement between Pleasant Hills Authority and contracting municipalities to allow time for completion of a new service agreement.
Solicitors and engineers from Pleasant Hills, Baldwin, Whitehall and South Park Township will meet on Wednesday. On Monday, Pleasant Hills council and authority members will meet regarding a new management agreement.
Mitrovich said the borough must advertise a wet weather overflow planning module meant to meet a consent order and agreement with the state Department of Environmental Protection.
Council approved an agreement between two neighbors along Grace Street that resolves a dispute over driveway encroachment.
Patrick Cloonan is a staff writer for Trib Total Media.
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 â 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.