ShareThis Page

$1.5M upgrade to Hampton pump station presents unique challenge

| Monday, Feb. 26, 2018, 11:00 p.m.
Hampton received a $500,000 grant to upgrade its sewage treatment facility, state Rep. Hal English, R-Hampton announced Tuesday, Jan. 2, 2018.
Hampton received a $500,000 grant to upgrade its sewage treatment facility, state Rep. Hal English, R-Hampton announced Tuesday, Jan. 2, 2018.

A major upgrade to Hampton's Glannon pump station will be a challenge because of its precarious location on a hillside, township officials said.

An estimated $1.5 million is earmarked to renovate the station off Mt. Royal Boulevard near the Shaler line.

“This is not going to be an easy project,” Christopher Lochner, Hampton's manager, told council members at a recent meeting.

James Degnan, director of environmental services for Hampton, told council the Glannon pump station is “incredibly undersized and incredibly old.”

“It's literally hanging off the edge of the hillside,” said Degnan, adding that it's supported by a concrete block.

Lochner said there's not enough land around station.

There are three other pump stations in Hampton that are newer than the Glannon station and functioning well, Lochner said. The stations are off East Hardies Road near Bruntonshire Drive, Green Valley Drive and in the McAlister Farms Plan off Hampton Oaks Drive, he said.

Hampton is also upgrading its water pollution control plant at a cost of roughly $43.6 million, according to a recent study. Work on the plant, which was built in 1971, will be done over three years because it must remain operational for customers during renovations.

Lochner said the work might begin in late 2019 or early 2020. The plant has required several repairs. Degnan told council three pumps recently failed and one must be replaced. They are working to keep the other two operational.

Degnan assured council that the plant is complying with operational standards.

Natalie Beneviat is a contributing writer.

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using 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.

click me