1. Can the Midland plant function without the pipeline extension that is proposed to go from South Avenue to Newell Street? YES. The reasons: Since the county plans to activate the Midland plant this month, the county knows it can run the plant without the pipeline. The proposed pipeline extension wouldn't be ready for at least two years. Currently, the Tallman, the Bellevue and the Midland trunk sewer lines feed the plant. Moreover, the Colvin/Skytop, the Ainsley/Matson, the Brighton and the Salina trunk lines feed the Midland Ave. trunk sewer. There will be plenty of sewage for the plant. Freeing up capacity at the plant by abating some upstream CSOs in other ways (see item 2) allows the plant send more sewage to the METROpolitan Wastewater Treatment Plant for full treatment, i.e., disinfection with UV, removing ammonia and nutrients. Moreover, having more capacity reduces the number of annual chlorinated discharges to Onondaga Creek. The first 1000 ft. of the pipeline was put in under Midland Phase II. If the remaining 7700 feet weren't built, the first 1000 ft wouldn't be wasted. This portion of the pipeline could easily pick up the Kennedy St. trunk CSO (CSO 044) at the corner of South Ave and West Castle. The end of the 1000 ft. pipe is approximately 100 ft away from this corner. The Kennedy St. trunk CSO has a modeled one-year storm discharge of approximately .89 mg. The capacity of the 1000' pipe is .44 mg (1000 x 6ft x 3.14 squared = 59158 cf x 7.48 gal/cf = .44 mg). This 1000 ft of pipe would effectively connect the Kennedy trunk sewer to the underground storage (2.5 mg) at the Midland plant. Also, there are some green infrastructure (GI) possibilities because the Kennedy trunk sewer is impacted by runoff/springs from Oakwood cemetery. This "clean" water can be sequester and kept out of the trunk line. 2. Is it cheaper to abate the upstream CSOs in other ways than building this 7700-ft pipeline extension? YES. The county is currently planning to spend at least $57 million (M) on this pipeline extension. Who knows what the final price will be. In 2002, the county's consulting engineers estimated that the entire pipeline would be about $22 M. There is currently $35 M left in the second bond that brought Onondaga County's authorized spending for the Midland project to $122 M. A lot of abatement can happen with that $35 M. Here are some ideas: Keep Newell St. RTF running rather than decommissioning it as planned. Help the city to fund the stormwater project along Valley Drive. This project would keep stormwater out of the county's Main Interceptor Sewer (MIS) creating more capacity in the MIS. This capacity would automatically abate some CSOs upstream because some of the upstream overflows are MIS overflows. How much abatement would happen would have to be modeled/measured. Evaluate whether you need a tank off the Skytop/Colvin trunk to store temporarily its combined sewage or evaluate whether the added capacity at the Midland plant from not building the pipeline extension and removing stormwater from Skytop/Colvin trunk from GI projects might be enough to abate its CSO (077). The Brighton Ave. trunk sewer has a fairly small one-year CSO (.15 mg). Adding stormwater best management practices (BMP) along with some green infrastructure should be all that is needed to abate this trunk sewer. Sewer separate, at least, part of the sewer district emptying into Elmhurst trunk sewer. The sewers in the Elmhurst sewer district along Glenwood Avenue are really undersized. In 2001 the city and county talked about separating the Glenwood area. It never happened because the city-county relationship broke down around the contentious Midland Ave sewage plant project. The steep South Ave hill brings stormwater off Onondaga Hill. This stormwater fills up the South Ave trunkline. GI possibilities exist on Onondaga Hill. Sewer separate the small district attached to CSO 045. The county was going to sewer separate this district. The pipeline map shows that this CSO is to be picked up by the pipeline extension. Besides separating this district, it is also possible that its small CSO might be abated by the added capacity in the MIS from doing the Valley Drive project or through some GI projects. The tiny district next to Kirk Park connected to CSO 067 could be separated or again GI projects could keep the storm water out of the sewer abating the CSO without even sewer separation. 3. Does the pipeline make it more difficult to revitalize Onondaga Creek? YES. The first 1000 ft have three large vents, ranging from 5.6 to 7 ft high. There will be more of these vents (probably 4 to 6 more according to a WEP Dept. employee) along the 7700-ft pipeline. The pipeline also forms a barrier wall as it runs next to the creek. Moreover, in places this pipeline could compromise the creek bank. 4. Is it discriminatory to build the Midland Pipeline when there is another alternative that is cheaper, environmentally progressive and not as disruptive? Very definitely, YES. To date, the Southside has shouldered much of "capturing" burden mandated in the Amended Consent Judgment. Southside residents have been evicted from their homes, residents have had their property condemned and many Southsiders have been inconvenienced by the construction. The Southside neighborhood of Oxford-Blaine may end up being the only neighborhood that receives a sewage plant. If the Downtown project is slated to be re-engineered and Harbor Brook projects are currently "on hold," something similar must happen for the Southside. It is time to treat the Southside like other city sectors by rethinking how to abate the Southside's upstream CSOs.
2. Is it cheaper to abate the upstream CSOs in other ways than building this 7700-ft pipeline extension?
3. Does the pipeline make it more difficult to revitalize Onondaga Creek?
4. Is it discriminatory to build the Midland Pipeline when there is another alternative that is cheaper, environmentally progressive and not as disruptive?
All trademarks are registered property of their respective owners. The author of this page claims no responsibility for typos, errors, omissions, or statements that any other party may dislike.