« PreviousContinue »
LINSLY R. WILLIAMS, M.D., Acting State Commissioner of Health:
I beg to submit the following report on our examination of plans for a proposed sewer in the village of Irvington, Westchester county, submitted to this Department for approval on March 5, 1917. An application for the approval of the plans was received March 12, 1917.
The records of the Department show that original plans for a comprehensive sewer system covering practically all developed portions of the village of Irvington were approved by the then State Board of Health on October 14, 1891. These plans provided for the 6-inch sewer in Broadway south of Clinton avenue. According to the application recently submitted by ihe board of trustees this has not been constructed.
The plans now submitted provide for an 8-inch sewer in this portion of Broadway extending from a point 275 feet south of Clinton avenue to Hudson avenue, à distance of about 2,700 feet in place of the 6-inch scwer shown by the approved plans. The proposed sewer is to be constructed with a slope of from .7 to 2.6 per cent and is to be provided with a flush tank at the upper end. Manholes are to be installed at all points of change of slope and alignment and at intermediate points not exceeding 300 feet apart.
From our careful examination of plans it appears that the design of the proposed sewer is satisfactory with respect to slopes and capacity and provision for cleaning and inspection, and that if properly constructed the sewer should satisfactorily meet the requirements for which it was designed.
I would, therefore, recommend that the plans be approved. It should not be necessary, however, to issue a permit in connection with the approval of these plans inasmuch as they provide simply for modifications of the proposed sewer in this portion of Broadway and do not provide for the discharge into the Hudson river of any additional sewage not contemplated by the original plan.
ITHACA (New York State Veterinary College)
HERMANN M. BIGGS, M.D., State Commissioncr of Health:
I beg to submit the following report on our examination of amended plans for sewage disposal for the new cattle barn at the New York State Veterinary College, Cornell University, submitted to this Department for approval by the State Architect in accordance with the provisions of section 14 of the Public Health Law, on May 3, 1917.
Original plans for water supply and sewage disposal for this building were approved by this Department on August 16, 1916. These plans provided for a water supply to be derived from a cased 6-inch driven well approximately 100 feet deep and for a sewage disposal plant consisting of a watertight cesspool and subsurface irrigation system to care for the sewage from one sink, one lavatory, one water closet and one bath tub. On February 6, and again on March 23, 1917, plans providing for a number of modifications and changes in the original plans were submitted for approval. According to data submitted with them, the proposed changes were necessary because the bids received by the University exceeded the amount of money available for construction. The plans as presented, however, were not in satisfactory condition for approval and were, therefore, returned to the State Architect for modification.
According to the plans and data now submitted, it is proposed to omit the installation of the water closet, lavatory and bath tub at the barn and the water-tight cesspool and subsurface irrigation system, and to install a privy with tight removable containers and also a sink, the wastes from which are to be disposed of in a leaching cesspool to be located north of the building. The subsurface drains and floor drains of the building are to be discharged into the highway gutter about 1l5 feet from the building as originally planned.
The proposed cesspool is to be 5 feet in diameter and 6 feet deep below the flow line, and if-properly constructed, should satisfactorily care for the limited amount of wastes from the sink. Additional cesspools or a subsurface irrigation system could, however, be constructed in the future if necessary. If any objectionable conditions are created by the discharge of the floor drains and subsurface drains into the highway gutter, cesspools could be constructed to care for these wastes. In view of the above, I would recommend that the plans be approved.
HERMANN M. BIGGS, M.D., State Commissioner of Health:
I beg to submit the following report on our examination of plans for the proposed reconstruction of the sanitary sewers in the lower part of Delaware avenue in the village of Kenmore, Erie county, submitted to this Department for approval on September 15, 1917.
The records of the Department show that original plans for a sewer system in the village submitted by the board of trustees, were approved by this Department on April 3, 1907. These plans provided for an 18-inch sewer on each side of Delaware avenue between Delaware road and the village line at Kenmore avenue. These sewers discharge into two 24-inch sewers tributary to the Hertel avenue sewer in the city of Buffalo.
According to the report submitted with the present plans the greater portion of the 2 18-inch sewers in Delaware avenue below Delaware road, which have been constructed under cement sidewalks in the village have collapsed and the reconstruction of them would require the tearing up of these sidewalks.
It is proposed, therefore, to replace these sewers by a new 24-inch sewer laid on a slope of .2 per cent under the pavement near the middle of Delaware avenue and to connect the lateral sewers tributary to the Delaware avenue sewers with the new sewer at each stret intersection. The flow of the proposed sewer will be divided at Kenmore avenue and will discharge into the two 24inch city sewers through two short lengths of 18-inch sewers.
It is stated by the report of the engineers that the storm water catch basins which were formerly connected with the two existing Delaware avenue sewers have been disconnected and the storm water is now cared for in the storm water sewer recently constructed in this section.
From our careful examination of the plans it would appear that they are satisfactory and meet the requirements of this Department.
I would, therefore, recommend that the plans be approved. It should not be necessary, however, to issue a permit in this case inasmuch as the plans do not provide for any additional discharge of sewage over that contemplated by the existing sewers.
HERMANN M. BIGGS, M.D., State Commissioner of Health:
I beg to submit the following report on an examination of the plans for a comprehensive sewerage system for the village of Kenmore, Erie county, N. Y., submitted to this Department for approval by the trustees of the village on October 6, 1917.
Plans for certain proposed sewers in the village of Kenmore tributary to the Buffalo sewerage system were approved by this Department on April 3, 1907 and October 24, 1913. In 1914 plans for a comprehensive sewerage system for the village and for works for preliminary treatment of sewage were submitted to this Department for approval. According to these plans the sewage was to be screened and the effluent from the screening chamber discharged into the Niagara river in the city of Tonawanda. These plans were approved on December 30, 1914, on condition that plans for supplementary treatment works be submitted to this Department for approval whenever required by the State Commissioner of Health.
Most of the sewers for which plans were approved in 1907 and part of those for which plans were approved in 1913 and 1914 have been constructed but none of the trunks leading to the proposed treatment plant have been built. All of the sewage from the village is now being discharged to the Hertel avenue sewer in the city of Buffalo. Plans for the reconstruction of the Delaware avenue sewer in the village were approved on September 15, 1917.
The present plans contemplate the incorporation of the existing sewers in the new system, and in a large part of the village the new sewers follow the lines and grades of the sewers as shown on the plans approved on December 30, 1914. The trunk lines of the western portion of the village, however, have been redesigned to conduct the flow to the Buffalo sewers instead of to the proposed treatment works. It is intended to connect the proposed system for the village of Kenmore to the Buffalo sewers at three points, the first being at the south end of Delaware avenue; the second at the south end of Elmwood street; and the third at the south end of Military avenue. The contract for the first of these connections, which is practically a reconstruction of the present connection, has already been let, and the engineer states that it is intended to let the contract for the second connection and the trunks leading to it as soon as the present plans are approved. In regard to the third connection, there seems to be some doubt as to whether or not the capacity of the Buffalo sewer into which the sewage coming to this connection will be discharged, is great enough to take the flow; and it may be necessary to reconstruct a portion of the sewer line in the city before the connection is made.
The proposed sewers are to be from 8 to 24 inches in diameter, and while the topography of the ground requires the use of flat grades the lines will have ample capacity to serve the needs of the different sections of the village for a reasonable future period and sufficiently steep grades to give self-cleansing velocities if the pipes are properly laid. The grades of some of the existing sewers are marked “unknown," but no complaint has been made that any of these sewers have not been operating satisfactorily.
Manholes are provided at all intersections, and at intervals of about 500 feet on all the proposed lines. There is no break in gradient or alignment between manholes on the proposed sewers. Some of the existing sewers, however, are not provided with a sufficient number of manholes and manholes should be constructed on these lines at all intersections and ends and at such intermediate points as may be necessary so that in no case the distance between them will be over 500 feet.
In view of the results of our examination of these plans and after a careful consideration of the essential features of the design and local and general requirements, I beg to recommend that these plans he approved and a permit issued for the discharge of the sewage from the system into the Niagara river through the outlet of the Hertel avenue sewer of the city of Buffalo on the following condition:
That whenever required by the State Commissioner of Health detailed plans satisfactory to the Department for the preliminary or complete
treatment of the sewage of the village, either separately or in connection
Yours very truly,
Chief Engineer ALBANY, N. Y., October 10, 1917
Application having been duly made to the State Commissioner of Health, as provided by section 77 of chapter 49 of the Laws of 1909, the “ Public Health Law, as amended by chapter 553 of the Laws of 1911, constituting chapter 45 of the Consolidated Laws, permission is hereby given to the Board of Trustees of the village of Kenmore to discharge sewage from the sewer system of the village through the sewer system of the city of Buffalo subject to agreement with said city into the waters of Niagara river through the Hertel avenue sewer within the municipality of Buffalo in accordance with the plans accompanying the petition, under the following conditions:
1. That this permit shall be revocable at any time or subject to modification or change when in the judgment of the State Commissioner of Health such revocation, modification or change shall become necessary.
2. That the issuance of this permit shall not be deemed to affect in any way action by this Department on any future application that may be made for permission to discharge sewage or effluent into the waters of this State.
3. That only sanitary or domestic sewage, and no storm water or surface water from streets, roofs or other areas shall be admitted to the proposed sewers.
4. That whenever it is deemed necessary by the State Commissioner of Health owing to lack of capacity of the sewer system of the city of Buffalo, or for other reasons, separate provisions shall be made for the collection and disposal of the sewage collected by the sewer system of the village of Kenmore, satisfactory plans for which shall be submitted to the State Commissioner of Health for approval; and after approval the works shown by said plans shall be constructed and put in operation when required by the State Commissioner of Health.
M. NICOLL, JR.,
Deputy State Commissioner of Health October 15, 1917
KINGS PARK (State Hospital)
HERMANN M. Biggs, M.D., State Commissioner of Health :
I heg to submit the following report on our examination of plans for extensions and additions to the sewage disposal plant at the Kings Park State Hospital, submitted to this Department for approval by the State Architect on July 2, 1917.
Original plans for a sewage disposal plant consisting of a screen chamber, 2 settling tanks of the Dortmund type, à dosing chamber, a sprinkling filter, final settling tank and a sludge drying bed were approved on December 29, 1908. On June 28, 1912, plans for converting the Dortmund tanks into Imhoff tanks and for completing the sprinkling filter were approved. The disposal plant was originally designed to care for a population of 5,000 and a per capita rate of sewage contribution of 100 gallons per day.
Inspections of the disposal plant of this institution made by representatives of this Department this year showed that the population tributary to the disposal plant had already exceeded 5,000 persons and that the per capita rate of sewage contribution is over 120 gallons per day, an excess of about 20 per cent of the original estimate on which the design was based, so that portions of the plant were overtaxed. We were also advised by representatives of the institution that it was contemplated to increase the population by about 1,000 in the near future. It was, therefore, strongly recommended that provisions be made for enlarging portions of the plant and for providing for the sterilization of the effluent.
The plans now submitted show that it is proposed to increase the settling capacity of the disposal plant by the construction of an additional settling tank; to increase the size of the sprinkling filter and to install a new chlorination plant. The proposed settling tank will have a capacity equal to the capacity of one of the existing tanks, thereby increasing the settling capacity of the plant 50 per cent. The combined settling capacity of the tanks will be equal to approximately 55,500 gallons and will give a detention period of about 2.2 hours under present conditions and a detention period of approximately 134 hours for ultimate conditions, assuming a future population of 6,000 and a per capita rate of sewage contribution of 120 gallons.
The sprinkling filter is to be increased in size 331 per cent and will have an area when enlarged of .33 acres. It will, therefore, provide for an average rate of operation of 1,800,000 gallons per acre per day when serving a population of 6,000 on the basis of a per capita flow of 100 gallons per day. The depth of the new portion of the filter and the arrangement of the distributing and collecting system is to be the same as the present filter.
The chlorination plant provided for by the plans is to be equipped with a chlorine apparatus of the manually operated direct feed type. The chlorine is to be applied to the sprinkling filter effluent as it enters the final set
ing tank. Although the specifications specify the amount of chlorine that the chlorine device shall be capable of applying per hour, no statement is made as to the amount of chlorine to be used. Not less than 5 parts of chlorine gas per million parts of sewage treated should be applied uniformly to the sprinkling filter effluent at all times.
The plans also provide for removing a section of the by-pass around the final settling tank. This will necessitate the operation of the final settling tank at all times. It was found on previous inspections by this Department that the final settling tank was not in operation and that no provisions were made for the disposal of sludge from this tank. The final settling tank should be cleaned and placed in operation and a sludge bed should be provided to care for the sludge from this tank. The plans, however, do not provide for a sludge bed to care for the sludge from the final settling tank and it is not planned to install a sludge bed under the present contract. It is understood, however, that the construction of such sludge bed will be arranged for by the institution authorities.
In conclusion, I would state that it is found from our careful examination of the plans that the proposed modifications and additions, if properly carried out, should satisfactorily care for the sewage from a population as high as 6,000 persons, and that the plant if maintained with care and efficiency should produce an effluent that may safely be discharged into the Nissaquogue river without objection.
I would, therefore, recommend that the plans be approved on the conditions that not less than 5 parts of chlorine per million parts of sewage treated shall be applied uniformly to the effluent from the sprinkling filter at all times.