My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
03/03/1992 Meeting Minutes
Document-Host
>
City North Olmsted
>
Minutes
>
1992
>
03/03/1992 Meeting Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/15/2014 4:03:58 PM
Creation date
1/9/2014 5:41:17 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
North Olmsted Legislation
Legislation Date
3/3/1992
Year
1992
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
23
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).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
`~T1:ST FARK-FORES'T' RIDGE CIVIC ASSOCIATION QUESTIONS AND CONIIKENTS RE: CROCY.ER-STEARNS <br />3~ If work falls behind schedule, will construction continue around-the-clock to <br />ensure the construction deadline is not exceeded and state mandated penalties <br />imposed? Will you guarantee that this will not happen? <br />4. ON DECIBEL LEVELS: A+~ the December 4, 1991 meeting, ChuGc Thomas stated that the <br />current ambient noise level in the backyards of houses on the west side of Hampton <br />Dr. is about 47 db. This level is estimated to increase by about 10 to i5db with <br />the Crocker-Stearns extension in place. These levels are expressed in db on the <br />A Scale which is a measured value but does not take into account the annoyance <br />weighting (NOY) at different frequencies, or the number of events measured. <br />Although a calculated value, the relative noise levels expressed as Effective <br />Perceived Noise Level (EPIJL) in Effective Perceived Noise - db (EPNdb) make a <br />more valid comparision. <br />Please have your acousticians calculate the following noise plots in EPNdb <br />for us using the estimated number of events (13,000 autos, trucks/per day)to use <br />the Crocker-Stearns extension: <br />a. Current levels <br />b. Estimated levels with no berm sound barriers. <br />c. Estimated levels with sound barriers (dirt mounds and trees, folliage,etc.) <br />TYiese three noise contour plots overlayed on the area map will give us the <br />comparisons requested. <br />5. Were your decibel levels measured when leaves were on or off the trees? <br />CONSTRUCTION <br />6. Do materials used in construction of this road take into consideration road <br />surface noise? <br />~. Will heavy construction equipment, vehicles and other equipment be confined to <br />the road area? Storage? <br />8. What recourse do we have and whom do we contact if ODOT specifications pertaining <br />to construction pm~cedures and pollution control are not being followed? <br />9. Will the construction plans and construction workers take measures to see to it <br />that no trees are removed unnecessarily? Hcw? <br />.;, <br />10. Will residents have access to same of the landfill resulting from excavation of <br />the roadway? <br />11. What will happen to the timber that is removed: Wraere does it go? Who gets it? <br />12. How and with whom can we have further input concerning mounding early in the <br />construction excavation period? <br />LIABILITY/RESPONSIBILITY/LEGAL <br />13- See also No. 8. above. <br />14. BI~FISTING: If damage to property, houses and swimming pools, occurs who will be <br />held liable and what recourse do residents have for handling this problem? <br />15. If we wish to have a limited access hightray instead of this through~~ray, what <br />procedure would be necessary to offect this change? With whom would we deal. <br />Page 4 of 6 <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.