Low-bidder extends deadline for Export roof project
Export officials have delayed awarding a roof-repair contract while they try to have an insurance agency re-evaluate a claim on 11 borough-owned buildings.
Officials opened bids for the project in May but haven't been able to award the contract because of questions regarding how the borough's insurance company evaluated the claim. Solicitor Wes Long said a Selective Insurance agent might have to re-evaluate the roofs on all the buildings that were damaged by hail and storms in 2011.
After the review, Selective paid the borough about $41,650 for repairs; however, the lowest bid on the project was for more than $60,000.
Mayor Michael Calder said the lowest bidder, Larry Faul Construction of Sheffield, Pa., agreed to extend the bid — which initially was set to expire July 12 — until next month.
Calder — who said the insurance adjuster did not evaluate all 11 buildings — said council likely will vote on the contract at its Aug. 5 meeting.
Borough officials said the roof-repair list includes the maintenance building, salt shed, park restroom, park food stand, entertainment building, the playground pavilion, playground restroom, playground dugout, as well as the three buildings on the Murrysville property that businessman Joseph “Junior” Hall bequeathed to the borough.
Long said he is working with Selective to get a complete evaluation and estimate.
Daveen Rae Kurutz is a staff writer for Trib Total Media. She can be reached at 412-856-7400, ext. 8627, or firstname.lastname@example.org.
Show commenting policy
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 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.