My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
5/23/1984
CBCC
>
Meetings
>
1980's
>
1984
>
5/23/1984
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/23/2015 11:50:24 AM
Creation date
6/11/2015 4:25:16 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Type
Regular Meeting
Document Type
Minutes
Meeting Date
05/23/1984
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
143
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
I will address each <br />terms that I think <br />person. <br />r <br />of these elements,individually in <br />should be understandable to the lay <br />1. ODOR: Because of the nature of the material being <br />handled in the long force main (causing sewerage to <br />become septic) it is recommended that the following <br />modifications be made: <br />A. That the plant itself, be moved into the Southwest <br />corner of the property, thereby increasing the <br />distance to the St. Edward's School property. <br />B. That the inlet into the plant (inffulent) be <br />submerged in an area having a high DO (dissolved <br />oxygen). <br />C. That odofus be i.,- injected upstream from the <br />plant to minimize odors. <br />2. NOISE: <br />A. At present the blowers and generator are housed <br />in the mechanical room at the West end. The <br />generator and radiator, etc. vent out through the <br />North wall at the set -back line. It is suggested <br />that rotating the building at 90 degrees counter- <br />clockwise will place the noise source further a- <br />way from the school property and living quarters. <br />An additional advantage would be two masonry walls which <br />"would be between the noise source and the school <br />property. <br />3. AEROSOL EFFECT: <br />A. The relocation of the plant into the Southwest <br />corner, as recommended earlier, has the benefit <br />of locating that section of the plant, which pro- <br />duces the greatest amount of aerosol, the fur- <br />thennost distance from the St. Edward's School <br />property within the site plan. It is suggested <br />that a heavy undergrowth of trees, shrubby, etc., <br />be placed between the school property and the <br />plant to inhibit the aerosol drift onto the school <br />property. <br />I think it should be brought to everyone's atten- <br />tion that the plant itself is some 12 to 13 feet <br />high and very difficult to conceal. <br />4. AESTHETICS: Aesthetically, it is very difficult to hide <br />a wastewater treatment plant, but many things can be done <br />to minimize the effect on neighbors. A great deal of <br />planting in the area would disguise or shield the <br />elements of the plant, i.e., equipment , office. <br />The further these elements are from the property line <br />the lessor the impact will be, due to the fact that <br />it provides more room for planting, etc. <br />The other elements of the plant, filters, mudwell, <br />etc., are nominally low profile and produce little <br />or no noise and have minimal odor problems and shall <br />be placed between the noise producing elements and <br />the abutting property. <br />In the writer's opinion, these recommendations and the <br />re -orientation of the elements as suggested by Hutchison <br />Utilities, Inc. would minimize the impact on the adjacent <br />property. <br />Sincerely, <br />R49eF. <br />LLOYD & ASSOCIATES, INC. <br />RFL/bc <br />MAY 2 3 1984 <br />53 <br />BOOK 57 PAGE 1 72 <br />I <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.