Freeport Council plans to seek funding for paving projects, new sewage pump station
Freeport Council plans to seek funding for paving projects and to pay for the new sewage pump station at the Laneville Bridge.
The borough is responsible for $95,000 of the $250,000 cost of replacing the 20-year-old pump station. PennDOT is picking up the rest.
Sewage from Laneville is pumped through pipes tunder the Laneville Bridge.
Once the Freeport Bridge overhaul is completed, a new pump will be needed.
Council President Don Rehner said he hopes the 2010 Census numbers will allow the Laneville section of the borough to qualify for federal Community Development Block Grant funding.
To qualify, 51 percent of Laneville households must earn low to moderate income. The borough as a whole doesn't qualify, Rehner said.
The borough was denied funding based on a previous application using data from the 2000 Census and a community survey.
Council plans to ask Armstrong County for about $11,000 to help pay to pave four roads. The funds, known as liquid fuels money, comes from the state's tax on gasoline and other fuels.
The borough plans to repave Third Street, Fourth Street and Stewart Street.
The paving work is expected to cost about $66,000. If the county funds come through, the borough also would pave Cherry Way, Rehner said.
“We might not get anything, but it's at the top of my priority list to apply,” Rehner said.
Jodi Weigand is a staff writer for Trib Total Media. She can be reached at 724-226-4702 or email@example.com.
More Valley News Dispatch
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.