Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutReport of Engineer Oct 1979VILLAGE OF CAYUGA HEIGRTS REPORT OF ENGINEER - October 1979 w SEWAGE TREATMENT PLANT The sludge tank truck used for the removal of the sludge from the plant brokdt a drive shaft. The towing and repairs will exceed $1200. It is still advantageous economically to remove sludge in the wet state. Because the State will not allow the distribution of wet sludge on fields after December 15 and for the succeeding winter months ne otiation w r the digging of a lagoon on a farmer's � property in c we c n dump wet sludge. Until that time we are permitted to distribute the sludge to the Zields. The idea would be for the farmer to build the lagoon and maintain it and that the Village would pay a set amount per load or per month for the right to dump into the lagoon. In this way the Village would avoid liability if something should happen to the retaining banks of the lagoon. The estimated cost will be in the neighborhood of $3000 which would be less than one or two months' cost of drying sludge and removing it in the dry state. A State Inspector from the DEC in Albany made a visit to our Sewer Plant and took samples of our effluent for laboratory analysis. The report was excellent, 98% of the BOD requirement is being removed by our process. The DEC has contacted Gary Gleason and suggested that they would help him in writing to the Federal Agencies to acquire a variance from their requirements for a lower Ph than we now have. If this variance is granted, it would mean we could continue in the use of lime in our tertiary treatment; we, therefore, would not have to switch to the use of alum in our tertiary treatment which would increase our cost. KING PROPERTY DRAINAGE Mr. King has apparently agreed to a railroad tie drainage sluice. Mr. Schoenfeld has agreed to share equally the cost with the Village with the understanding that any future maintenance of the installation would be borne by Mr. King or any future owners of the property. This also would be a requirement of the Village. This agreement should be put in writing along with 8 temporary easement from Mr. King for the Village to go in on his property to excavate and install the rail- road tie sluice. If this procedure is authorized by the Board, I would recommend that the attorney draw up the agreement papers and easement for signature of the three parties involved. f VILLAGE BARN An overhead door was removed in the personnel section of the Village storage build- ings as it was no longer used for vehicle entrance into the building and considera- ble energy could be saved by replacing it with a standard 3 x T ft. door and studding up the remaining opening and insulating it. ✓ CAMBRIDGE PLACE The Cost of paving Cambridge Place, including the Village labor and equipment, came to $14,350. This amount was billed to Mr. Schoenfeld. ,s; REPORT OF ENGINEER - October 19T9 page 2 LEAVES Dctensive .repair work has been done on the leaf vacuum truck. A new transmission was required. The work crew is now ready to remove the anticipated deluge of leaves. REPORT OF THE ZONING OFFICER - October 19T9 The Zoning Board of Appeals met on Monday, October 8th, to hear the request for a variance from Mr. Francis Davis at 812 Hanshaw Road. The variance requested was a variance to a variance he had received to replace a garage that was built too close to the property line but had been in existence prior to the zoning ordinances. The variance was granted. The Zoning Officer has been approached by two different people as to what in re- quired in the installation of a car wash operation at the Corners Community Center. The Board of Trustees special approval is a requirement for installatiou of such a business operation in the Village commercial area. The Zoning Board of Appeals met on September 26 to render an interpretation of the zoning ordinances Section VIII - OPEN PORCHES AND CARPORTS and Section IX - FENCES AND WALLS. It was the Zoning Board of Appeals' opinion that the ordinance did not require the inclusion of unroofed porches in determining the percentage of building coverage, regardless of the height of the porch above the grade or the size of the porch and that a deck was the same as an unroofed porch. I do not feel that this is the intent of the zoning ordinance and that correction of the zoning ordinance should be written for proper advertisement and adoption so that the zoning ordi- nance properly reflects the desire of the Board in this area. During the month of September there were 2 zoning permits issued for additions and alterations for a total of $6,500 and 1 zoning permit for new construction for a total of $86,165.