Officials consider offer of bridge for emergency use in Penn Twp.
Penn Township officials are pondering a developer's offer to donate a 30-foot steel bridge that would be used to provide emergency vehicles access across a creek to the skate park in Municipal Park.
If officials were to accept the bridge, they might have to reserve an estimated $8,000 to $10,000 for engineering work related to its installation, Commissioner Larry Harrison said.
Harrison broached the topic for a discussion during the Penn Township Recreation Commission's meeting on Sept. 26, but the recreation board declined to make a recommendation to township commissioners.
“It's not in (the commissioners') proposed budget at this point,” Harrison said.
The bridge likely will be a topic at the commissioners' Oct. 16 caucus meeting as they begin to prepare for passing a preliminary budget for 2014 in November.
Rec board members Kirk Farbacher and Phil Kochasic said they want to know the cost to build a foot bridge over the creek before they would consider recommending how the commissioners should proceed.
Ray Snoznik, the developer of The Village at Stonegate housing plan, is offering to donate the bridge. Besides engineering costs, the township would be responsible for paying any fees to the state Department of Environmental Protection related to the bridge installation.
Snoznik did not return a message requesting comment about the proposed donation.
Chris Foreman is a staff writer for Trib Total Media. He can be reached at 412-856-7400, ext. 8671, or email@example.com.
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.