Responses: Sept 14-15, 2005 public information meetings

Information from Harbor Brook public hearing:
Responses: Public hearing, Dec 6, 2005
Transcript: Public hearing, Dec 6, 2005

Responsiveness Summary
For Harbor Brook CSO Abatement Facilities Plan

Questions and Responses
from Public Informational Meetings
held Sept. 14 and Sept. 15, 2005 & written comments received

Sept 14 meeting at Rosamond Gifford Zoo Meeting
Moderator: Matt Mulcahey, UPN 6 News
Those present representing the County Dept of Water Environment Protection:
Dick Elander, Commissioner
Stephen Martin, Sewer Maintenance Engineer
Consultants John Clare (project manager) and Dan Davis (Brown and Caldwell)

Among those also present were Sue Miller, OCWEP
County Legislators Ed Ryan, Brendan Whalen, and Jim Rhinehardt
Steve Eidt from NYSDEC
Vince Esposito from City DPW
Representatives of CDM/C&S: Bob Albright, Bob Kukenberger
Representatives from EEA: Bruce Munn
About ten interested citizens including two students from the Newhouse School of Journalism doing a story for class.

Sept 15 meeting at Pensabene's Casa Grande Banquet Hall on State Fair Blvd. Moderator: Matt Mulcahey, UPN 6 News
Those present representing the County Dept of Water Environment Protection:
Stephen Martin, Sewer Maintenance Engineer and consultants John Clare, (project manager) and Dan Davis, Brown and Caldwell.

Among those also present were Sue Miller, OCWEP
County Legislator Ed Ryan
Steve Eidt, NYSDEC
Vince Esposito from City DPW
Representative of EEA: Bruce Munn
Representatives of CDM/C&S Bob Palladine and Mark Gorthey
About thirteen interested citizens.

Total present at each meeting about 24-26 people.

Following a brief welcome and introductions of those County representatives in attendance, presentations on the project were given by John Clare, Project Manager. During and following the presentations, questions and comments were received from the public.

The following is a composite of the questions asked at both meetings and the responses given. Additional information to the responses given at the meetings is printed in italic.

1. What is the time frame for this project?
Design estimated to start in 2005 and conclude in 2007. Construction to begin 2007 and conclude in 2010.

2. How were these meetings publicized?
Direct mailing by the County to over 700 individuals who reside or own property in the immediate area of the projects plus churches, schools, businesses and organizations in the area on the west side of the city. Plus advertisements in the local Scotsmen Press Pennysaver and the Syracuse Post Standard. News Story in Post Standard. News Release faxed to all major news outlets in area.

3. How big is the footprint of the building proposed for the regional treatment and storage facility. What will it look like? Is any landscaping planned?
The dimensions for the above-ground portion of the building are estimated at 120 ft x 140 ft and 20 ft high. It will be a brick and masonry building with no open tanks. Landscaping will definitely be done as we have at other project sites. The County has and will continue to be guided by the principle to make the appearance of each area where our projects are built better than they were before our project. Landscaping in and around the buildings constructed is a major part of these improvements to enhance the areas.

4. The following possible mitigation measures and/or amenities were suggested by those present:

Consider helping to fund improvements to Frazier Pool that is near the interceptor pipeline and brook and is in major disrepair. Improvements to the pool would be great for the neighborhood. (Bob Oberst)
Many of the constituents in Lower Basin area are interested in having the sidewalks and tree plantings finished along Genesee Street, a continuation of the "automobile row" improvements including around the corner in front of homes on State Fair Boulevard so they could get some benefits as they may be directly across the street from the new facility. I would like to suggest this as a mitigation measure under this project. (Ed Ryan)
Constituents in the Upper Basin area indicated the need and interest in sidewalks being extended along Grand Avenue along with curbs and landscaping. (Ryan)
Landscaping in front of the treatment facility and shrubbery and trees along State Fair Boulevard in front of the facility were suggested. (nearby resident)
Additional suggestions for neighborhood improvements that have been discussed at local TNT Area 2-Westside meetings in recent years related to this project include the installation of sidewalks along Grand Avenue to Velasko Road—greatly needed including along the detention basin. Also TNT Area 2-Westside group was interested in possible purchase by the County and removal of the two houses and former Molly's Place bar on the corner of Grand and Delaware for possible playfields for Delaware School. Does City or State own right-of-way along basin area on Grand Avenue? The speaker noted that he realized that plowing of the sidewalk might be a concern as to who would plow and the proximity of the street. He suggested that the new sidewalk should be back from the curb.(Bob Oberst)
I would like to suggest that the County consider grooming the area behind the wall along Grand Ave and Wilbur through which Harbor Brook flows. (Ed McLaughlin)

The State owns the right-of-way along Grand Avenue near the detention basin. Plowing and placement of such a sidewalk would need to be investigated further. We are familiar with the need for sidewalks in this area and the current situation with walkers in the street. Also we are familiar with the existing "automobile row" improvements and can look into current and future plans and what areas are not currently including in those improvements.

County staff have been discussing possible mitigation measures and amenities for a number of year with the Westside TNT and local residents. We appreciate receiving these types of suggestions this evening and will keep this list together for further research into the suggestions and evaluation of their relationship with the construction project and their costs. Any proposed mitigation plans would require County Legislature approval for funding.

The County is committed to leaving areas better both in terms of an improved environment and in appearance than before we began our construction, and we have done this on other completed projects. For example, during the County's West Street sewer separation project, the County funded restoration improvements in coordination with the "automobile row" improvements along Genesee Street near Durston's and landscaping and restoration improvements carried out with construction of the Franklin Street floatables control facilities greatly enhanced that area that now serves as a "gateway" to the city.

5. How long will construction take for installation of the pipes, and what sizes will be installed? The County should supply a specific timeframe to residents in the area detailing how long disruption will be on their streets. (Rich Puchalski)

It will take multiple months to install all of the pipelines. We will provide a time estimate based on previous projects. And we will supply residents with specific timeframes for construction on their streets as we get closer to the actual start of construction. Based on our sewer separation projects to date we estimate about 2-5 days for installation of pipelines in front of individual house lots dependent on the length of their street frontage, utilities impacted, and the size of pipe installed. Later on in each project, street restoration including final paving will disrupt streets for about 3 days on a block-by-block basis. The size of pipes planned at this time include:
Hartson St. (from Holden to Herriman) - 48" pipe
Hoefler St. (from Harbor Brook to Hartson) - 18" pipe
Lydell St. (from Harbor Brook to Hartson) - 18" pipe
Herriman St. (from Hartson to Grand Ave.) - 54" pipe
Park Ave. (from Sackett to W. Genesee) - 48" pipe
State Fair Blvd. (from W. Genesee St. to Harbor Brook) - 48" pipe

Residents will be notified on specifics for their streets as construction gets closer. This project is just at the design phase right now.

6. How often and what will the treatment facilities discharge into the brook?

The majority of times the facilities will simply store all of the combined sewage and stormwater and then following the rainfall, the flow will go to the Metropolitan Treatment Plant for treatment via the Harbor Brook interceptor sewer line. It is estimated that the facilities will exceed their storage capacity and actually discharge treatment effluent to the brook about 20-30 times per year. Currently the combined sewer overflows along Harbor Brook discharge untreated into the brook about 50-60 times per year for a total volume of 139 million gallons per year. 47% of this current 139 million gallons of overflow, including the more concentrated "first flush" of combined sewage that comes at the front end of storms, will be captured by the two treatment and storage facilities and sent to Metro for treatment. Another 52% will be treated at the regional treatment facilities and discharged after treatment into the brook. About 1% will be treated and discharged to the brook through the proposed five floatables control facilities.

7. Concerns were indicated about possible smells, the looks of the facilities and other options that wouldn't have to use chemicals—like complete storage. Concerns raised about impacts of chlorine used in disinfection.

During the facilities planning process, the County researched various technologies including complete storage and assessed the associated costs, construction impacts, and environmental impacts. Based on that thorough and multi-year process, the County has recommended the alternative described in the facilities plan that includes two regional treatment and storage facilities. Both facilities will be entirely enclosed, and odor control systems will be installed.

As mentioned earlier, for the majority of times combined flow is received in the treatment facility, it will simply be stored until the storms pass. If flow exceeds the storage capacity of the facility, the effluent will have floatables removed and then be disinfected by using chlorine similar to household disinfectants and chlorine bleach to kill bacteria in the sewage. Following chlorination and before discharge to the Brook, the effluent will be treated to remove the chlorine. This chlorination-dechlorination process is standard practice for abating combined sewer overflows throughout the country and is approved by the NYS Department of Environmental Conservation and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. The major concern about the impacts of combined sewer overflows on the tributary streams and Onondaga Lake are floatables and bacteria. These facilities are intended to treat those two issues and, therefore, minimize their negative impacts on the tributaries and the lake.

8. Can the County improve the catch basins that back up stormwater into the streets now during heavy rains? (Louise Pascuzzi)

Yes, this will be one of the benefits of this project. With the installation of new sewer lines to handle the current excess flow, this should help alleviate current back ups in streets. Vince Esposito from City of Syracuse DPW also noted that a spring of water comes down into the Upper Basin area and from time to time that cause additional plugging in the catch basins at DePalma Avenue. He recommended that residents call the City Line at 448-2489 if they see a back up there, and the city DPW will come out and open up the line.

9. Concerns were raised about noise during construction and what the hours of construction would be? They mentioned that current Midland construction starts at 7:00 a.m. and made the suggestion that construction hours start at 8:00 a.m. instead on Harbor Brook. (Pascuzzi and Puchalski)

Noise is an issue during construction, and the County does limit the hours of construction by designating work hours in contract requirements. The Midland contract work hours are 7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. Hours may be extended by agreement with County to meet construction completion schedules. Hours of construction need to balance and consider optimum use of daylight hours, completion schedule needs, and consideration of local residents.

10. What is the status of the wetlands project proposed for a CSO in the retention basin? (Puchalski)

This project is a proposed project by staff of the SUNY College of Environmental Science and Forestry and Atlantic States Legal Foundation. It is not a County project.

The County is aware of the project and has been in communication with representatives of SUNY-ESF and Atlantic States Legal Foundation over a number of years on the project. It is intended to be a pilot project on the use of wetlands for treatment of combined sewer overflows and could be located in the County's retention basin.

Steve Eidt from DEC reported that currently ASLF and ESF are attempting to finalize funding from EPA and other sources for the design and implementation of the project. Prof. Richard Smarden is the lead on this project, and County representatives said additional information on the project's status should be obtained from Prof. Smarden.

11. How many vortex separators are planned for the regional treatment and storage facility to be located at Amy and Grand?

Two.

12. Will Amy Street stay open?

The County does not intend to permanently close Amy Street. During construction, the county may need some short time periods of closure to through traffic while allowing local traffic only. It should be noted that this is a very low trafficked street.

13. How much money is available for use through the County for neighborhood improvements?

We do not know how much money the County will have available for such mitigation measures, but we are continuing to look for suggestions and that is one of the purposes of tonight's meeting. Ultimately the decision on funding for mitigation/amenities will be made by the County Legislature following a proposal from WEP and the County Executive.

14. What is the projected cost of the Harbor Brook CSO Abatement Project, and where will funding come from?

The project is currently estimated at $55 million. The County will attempt to get as much federal and state aid as possible for the project; but none is in place right now. Low interest loans from the State will also assist in financing the project. At this time, the project costs will mainly be covered by Consolidated Sewer District users. The County intends to cover costs for this and other projects with controlled and gradual increases in the sewer user charges.

15. Did you look into sewer separation for any of the smaller basins? (Aggie Lane)

Yes, and this alternative is covered in facilities plan. None were found to be cost effective.

16. Indicated concerns about the functionality of floatables control facilities.(A. Lane)

Under the Harbor Brook recommended facilities plan, the County is proposing the installation of five floatables control units similar to the mechanical screen unit used in the Teall Brook project. This unit has been working very well since its installation in December 2001. The Harbor Brook FCF projects will not use net bags as used at Franklin project and the interim in-stream project operating currently near the mouth of Harbor Brook.

17. Indicated concerns about sounds/noises emanating from the facility on State Fair after it is constructed and operational? (nearby neighbors on State Fair)

Facility should be very quiet as all of the operation will be enclosed in a building. The loudest noise in the building will be from the ventilation system and pumps which will have noise controls to dampen sounds. The facility will only operate during wet weather events. This is not a sewage treatment plant that operates on a 24/7 basis for 365 days per year. During an average year, it is projected that the facilities will only operate about 50-60 times per year.

18. Will this project eliminate the "popping" manhole on State Fair Boulevard near this site and basement flooding that sometimes occurs?

Yes. By diverting water in the combined sewers for capture and treatment at the treatment and storage facility, this will reduce the backups in the system and the manhole should not "pop."

19. Homeowner along Waite Avenue concerned about what construction impacts will be in his area. (Frank Esposito)

During dry weather, the interceptor sewer behind the houses on Waite Avenue transports the wastewater flow to the Metropolitan Treatment Plant on Hiawatha Boulevard. The new pipe to be constructed will accept combined sewer and stormwater flow and transport it to the new overflow control facility on State Fair. Under the revised conveyance route, the new conveyance line will be installed in Park Avenue and State Fair Boulevard, not behind houses on Waite or on Eureka.

20. Suggestion received to put the facility further north on State Fair Boulevard nearer to the Napa Parts Store end of the property which has more industrial buildings rather than nearer to the southern end of that section of State Fair Boulevard where there were some homes. (area resident)

J. Clare indicated he uncertain why the facility was shown at the southern end of the property and would check into the matter. Final determination of specifically where on the property the facility would go will be made after the archeological and geotechnical investigations of the property are completed. The possibility of locating the facility further north on the site will be looked into by the County. Since the meeting, the archeological and soil testing were scheduled and in response to this question, the tests will cover both the northern and southern section of this vacant property on State Fair Boulevard.

21. Legislator Ed Ryan pointed out that the County Department of Water Environment Protection was out front on this Harbor Brook project for quite some time now. He noted the County responded to the lack of practice ballfields for area schools in the Upper Basin.The County built two fields in the detention basin at the corner of Velasko and Onondaga that are worth ¼-million dollars and are now available for local school use. He pointed out that this was evidence of their stated intention to make areas better than when they started.

One letter was received with written comments. That letter dated October 17, 2005 was submitted by Richard Puchalski, Executive Director of Syracuse United Neighbors and is summarized below with responses:

Summary of position:

County should consider alternatives like storage.
Response: County did consider alternatives including storage (See Questions # 7 & 15 and responses)
County should landscape the 20' high facility.
Response: The County is committed to landscaping the facility. (See Question # 3 and response )
SUN objects to any plan to take private property for the Upper Basin facility and pipe.
Response: As stated at the September 14th informational meeting, the County's plans for the Upper Basin facility and pipe do not include any plans at this time for taking private property containing occupied homes for this project. All property identified for purchase for this project is currently vacant land.

Additional Comments:

Information on the proposed wetland project should be part of this facility plan. SUN "has been on record supporting this wetland project. Originally the plan was proposed by Atlantic States and now we have been told it is a SUNY-ESF project. We expect to be informed."
Response: The County has been aware of the proposed wetlands project for a number of years starting when it was first brought to our attention by representatives from Atlantic States and SUNY-ESF and was proposed to be located behind the "wall" in the State property along the brook near Grand Avenue. The County suggested a new possible location for the wetlands pilot project in the County-owned detention basin that included two CSOs that discharged into the brook. Other meetings were held and discussions continued on the proposal, and the County has supported the pilot project in written documentation as requested by SUNY-ESF as they applied for grant monies. The proposal is not part of the County's Facility Plan and it is not a county project. However, the County has and continues to support a pilot program, and if funding is received and design completed, the County could work with the sponsors to enable the pilot project to be carried out on CSO 018 in the detention basin.
SUN wants to be informed of the timetable and length of time work will be done on the streets impacted in the Skunk City area, and SUN offers to host a community meeting before actual construction in that area begins.
Response: Residents will be kept informed along all of the streets that will be impacted by installation of new pipes in the streets as part of this project. A schedule for work and length of time that work will take to complete along each stretch of street will be provided. We appreciate SUN's offer to host a community meeting prior to construction beginning in the area on the project. We can add that based on sewer separation work accomplished in the past few years, it is estimated to take about 2-5 days to complete installation of 20-35 feet of new pipe dependent on pipe size and necessary utility relocations. (See Question #5 and response)
Noise, dust and traffic should be limited during construction. Flyers should be distributed to neighbors re when the project will impact access to their homes and supply them with a number to call with questions or complaints. Request 24-hour notice when access to home will be limited. Do not allow construction vehicles to emit noise until after 8 a.m.
Response: The County will do our best through contract requirements with construction contractors to limit the noise, dust and traffic impacts during construction of the facilities and installation of the conveyance pipes. Contact name and number will be supplied residents and 24-hour notice supplied to homes where access will be limited or power temporarily affected. In addition, the County will work with the City School District on school bus access needs for children in the area.
Since streets area being torn up.property owners should be informed in writing if they have lead water service to their homes and offered the portion to pay to convert these pipes to non-lead. Lead water lines from curb to main line must be replaced at City expense.
Response: As part of the City-County Intermunicipal Agreement on this project, the County will replace all lead water lines found from the curb to the main—as we have on all other Lake Improvement Projects in the city streets.
SUN is requesting the following neighborhood improvements as part of this project on streets impacted by construction: new sidewalks, tree plantings along the right-of-way, and building streets with curbs on the unimproved streets where the new pipe would be installed.
Response: These requests will be compiled with the other requests for mitigation and amenities—cost estimates compiled and then a proposed plan presented to the County Executive and the County Legislature for their consideration. Thank you for your suggestions.