Dunbar authority updated on project
Dunbar Township Municipal Authority will find out if there is any charge from the Rails-to-Trails Conservancy for a right of way along a section of the Great Allegheny Passage.
Glenn Wolfe of Widmer Engineering updated the board Monday on the progress of the Phase 2 sewage project and a change order that will be needed to replace a 15-inch pipe with a 30-inch pipe along the bike trail between Ridge Boulevard and Adelaide.
Wolfe said the RTC originally was going to charge the authority extra for use of the right of way, but because the authority will be using the previous set right of way for which they pay monthly, there is no additional charge.
However, Wolfe said, they may need to pay the RTC for a temporary right of way for the construction equipment. Authority solicitor Don McCue said the easement might cover that cost. He will check into it.
Wolfe said the amount for that addition to the project will be $367,315. McCue said they might have to advertise because the change order was so high.
Wolfe said he'll check with the U.S. Department of Agriculture to find out if the authority can legally approve the request without advertising.
Any change order will be contingent upon approval by the USDA.
In other business, the authority announced the tap-in bills for Phase 2 will be going out in the mail soon. The charge will be $850 per ECU.
Mark Hofmann is a staff writer with Trib Total Media. He can be reached at email@example.com or 724-626-3539.
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.