Exh 9k.. 7
9
June 26, 2000
City Manager Report
June 21,2000
Questions Raised about Buccaneer Wastewater Plant: Several questions were raised at the
last Commission meeting about noise and odor control at the Buccaneer Wastewater Treatment
Plant as follows:
1. Is the odor from the plant caused by inadequate oxygenation in the SBR process?
No. The odor problems are being caused by the concentration of hydrogen
sulfide gases in the master wet well, which is the initial point where wastewater
flows into the Buccaneer Wastewater Plant. The new equipment that was approved
by the Commission at the last meeting will be located at the influent wet well.
2. Is the City paying twice for the odor control equipment? No. The city's engineer
designed an odor control system as part of the initial plant design in January of 1998. This
equipment was incorporated into the bid specifications as an add alternate. The contractor
bid $53,000. to furnish and install the equipment. There was a significant possibility that
the new process being installed at the Wastewater Plant would help to eliminate the odor
and staff recommended that the City not fund the additive alternate when the bid was
' initially awarded. Now the new process is operational and it is obvious there continues to
be an odor problem. The City's engineer obtained proposals directly from the odor
control manufactures. With City crews installing the equipment rather than the contractor,
the final price for this is $24,900. which is half under the original bid alternate price.
Additionally, the odor control manufacturer is including five years of replacement media
at no additional charge. Consequently, the City paid the engineer to design the system
once and we are getting the system installed at a cost of less than half of the original bid
price.
3. Could the engineer have utilized a different type of pump in the original design which
would not have resulted in a noise problem? The different type of pumps that were
described would have cost $22,000. to $33,000. more than what the City paid for the
existing pumps. Because the different types of pumps would have been larger, they would
have also cost more to operate on a continuing basis. Because of cost, most SBR type
Wastewater Plants utilize the same type of pump that we have. Additionally, the different
pumps are not significantly quieter in operation and most likely would have required
additional noise mitigation steps. In short, the City could have paid considerably more
and still had the same problem.
4. Should the City's engineers be required to pay for the additional enclosures to solve the
noise problem? The engineers specified blowers which they felt would met the noise
requirements because they had standard silencers and many other SBR type Wastewater
Plants with similar blowers do not have significant noise problems. In the Buccaneer
~~ 9
June 26, 2000
Plant, the proximity of the blowers to the steel tanks intensifies the noise in the direction
of Ms. Aukins' home (who complained at the last Commission meeting). Since the noise
problem has become apparent the engineer has assisted the City in checking noise levels,
designing solutions and obtaining pricing from venders. The engineer has not charged the
City for these efforts. While it may be debatable as to whether or not the. engineer should
-have anticipated the noise problem at our Wastewater Plant, if they had designed the
enclosures originally, we would have paid the cost as part of the original contract verses
paying it now. In other words, the cost to solve the noise problem would have been the
same for the City and the downside of doing it now is the inconvenience to neighbors. It
is not appropriate to expect the engineers to pay for the enclosures.
Zoning Ordinance On-Line: Per the request made by the City Commission at the joint meeting
between the Commission and the Community Board, staff has been able to make a copy of the
proposed zoning revisions available through the City's Web Site to anyone with Internet access.
Simply click on the "current city notices" button on the City's home page and scroll down to
"Proposed Revision of the City's Ordinance".
Merry-Go-Round: A suggestion was made at the last meeting for the City to install amerry-go-
round at Bull Park. See the attached memo from Timmy Johnson with attachments.
CITY OF
~t,~acztic ~'eac~ - jT~ivzida
June 19, 2000
To: Jim Hanson, City Manager
:From: Timmy Johnson, Recreation Director :~
Re: Merry-Go-Rounds
9
June 26, 2000
800 SEMINOLE ROAD
ATLANTIC BEACH, FLORIDA 32233-5445
TELEPHONE (904) 247-5800
FAX (904) 247-5805
SUNCOM 852-5800
At your request, attached is some information concerning merry-go-rounds from the Handbook
for Public Playground Safety (Consumer Product Safety Commission). The article talks about
providing supervision for pre-school aged children, it gives some specifications for merry-go-
rounds, and providing some. means to limit the speed.
In my opinion, merry-go-rounds are one of the most unsafe piece of equipment in parks. Because
lack of supervision, risk of injury and the amount of maintenance required I would not
recommend placing this equipment in the City's Parks. To support my recommendation, I
received the past five (5) year's injury report from the Consumer Product Safcty Commission.
Because this report is seventeen (17) pages, I only attached one page and as you can see a number
of injuries have occurred on various parts of the body. Also, attached is a letter I received from
Dr. Allan Sander (University of North Florida), concerning merry-go-round safety and liability.
Should you have any questions please call me.
,_ ~ ~ ~ 9
. , _ June 26, 2000
I2.2 Merry-Go-Rounds exceed 2.0 inches (see Fgure 15). No components of the
_ • .. apparatus, including handgrips. should extend beyond
Merry-go-rounds are the most common type of rotating the perimeter of the platform. The underside of the
equipment found on public playgrounds. Children perimeter of the platform should be no less than 9 inch-
usually sit or stand on the platform while other children es above the level of the protective surfacing.
or adults push the merry-go-round to make it rotate.
In addition, children often get on and off the merry- Children should be provided with a secure means of
go-round while it is i motion. holding or. ~~'here handgrips are provided, they should
• conform co the general recommendations for hand-
Merry-go-rounds may o~esent a physical hazard to gripping components in Section 10.2.1.
preschool-age children who have. little or no control
over such produces o~,ce they are in motion. Therefore.
children in this age group should a1t~~ays be supervised
when using merry-go-rounc's l=oilowinn are recommen-
dations for merry-go-rounds:
The rotating platform should i~~ continuous and approxi-
matelycircular. The difference benveen the minimum
and maximum radii of anon-circular platform should not
There should not be any accessible shearing or crushing
mechanisms in the undercarriage of the equipment. The
rotating platform of a merry-go-round should not have
any sharp e~~es. The surface of the platform should be
continuous ~.l~ith no openings between the axis and the
peripher}~ that pen~tit a rod having a diameter of 5/i6
inch to pen.e.rate completely through the surface.
A means s~:~~~~ld be provided to limit the peripheral
speed of -o;atior: to a maximum of 13 ft/sec.
lvierry-go-re;:r.d platforms should not be provided with
an oscillate^.~ ;~•~ anu down) motion.
C
A = Axis of Rotation
A5 = 1~hinimum Rodius
AC = Maximunt RadiVs
8
The d~kerence oetk•een dimensions AC
aril A$ should net exec-n~ 2.0 inches.
Figure 15. Minimum and f~4aximum Radii of
Plon-Circular Merry-Go-Round Platform
~ N6RRY•66-R OUND - CALENDAR YEAt t995r iRRU APRI! 2004 i1:23 TueNday, June 2Q~ 2000 12
NAiIOMAtr ELECTR ONIC IY~'URY SURYE[LLRgCE SYSTEM {YEISS)
- U.S. CON SURER PRODUCT SAFEIT CONRISSION
~ ~ NATIONAL INJURY INFORNAiIDN CLEARiN8H0USE
a- ;Pt00UCT 3219 OTHER PLAYGROUND EQUI PAENT
'R DATE AflE SEX D[AO BDTPRT OIS LOC FjA OCC PR02 3RD CDNNEYT
~j'81i906 040 N STISP KNEL 1 0 D 2 0000 •. 0 KNEE $PRAIp - TRIED TO JUNP 'DYER A MERRY-flO-ROUND
61'tt0912' 010 F STISP ANKLE 1- 'O 0 2 0000 0 FELL OF-F NERRY 00 ROUND" INJURLMO LT ANKLE/sPRAi• ANGLE
x'80917 070 # CTjA• TOE 1 8 '• D 2 DODO 0 1D YEAR' DLD #ALE AT SCHOOL RIT TOE ON MERRY-60-ROUND OX: COMTUSIO
N LEFT NI6 TOE
'80917 -0OS N LACR HEAD 1 8 0 2 0000 D LAC. HEAD, fElt OFF MERRY QO ROUMO.
~aD920 AZS # 3T/SP UjTRK 1 9 0 2 0000 0 -PT IBIS PLAYINIi ON R #ERRT DO ROUND YLTN DAUGNTEk AND L6ARk0 DYER.
'1 DX: TYORACIC MUSCLE STRAIN SPASM,
M'90923 008 F LACR READ 1 >i 0 2 OOOi~ D ++LACERATION BCAIP++FELL OFF A Rf RRT-GO-RDUiiD AT SCHOOL.
'80926 003 # FRACT wRISi 1' •5 0 2 OOOO D PT INJ. TO RT ItRE li ELBOY 1tNI16 At PARK ON NERRY GO tOUYD.
Dill Flt Rt ULMA.
'0161.2 003 F FRACT L/LEO 1 9 D 2 0000 0 - RUNNING SE'IDH NERRT-40-ROUND AT PARY AND PELL DX: T111IA/lIBUL
E
X81012 01D F LACK HEAD I 5 0' 2 0000 . 0 ++LACERAi
IOH SCALP++PLJlYIHG IN TIE PARK, SLIPPED AND NIT NER NERD
AGAINST iNE MERRY-GO-ROUND BAR.
'Ij1012 006 F PUNCT LJARN 4 0 0 2 GOOD 0 PUNCTURE LT FOREARN-HURT ON A MERRY-GO-ROUND
'81020 010
' F STlSP EIBOY t 0 0 2 0000 0 ELBOY STRAIN - FELL OFF A NERRY-60-ROUND
'81020 'DOS N FRAtT LjLEG t D 0' Z 0000 0 FELL OfF BERRY-GO-ROURD DK. TIBIA FX
'81021 006 # FRACT llARM 4 S 0 2 OOOD 0 FELL OFF NERRY QO RDUND AT PARK
DX fX RT HUNERUS
'81023 009 F TRACT UlTRK 1 9 Q 2 0000 0 9 YEAR OLD PU9NED UP AeAINET A RERRT-GO-ROUYD.D%: RIB FRACTURE.
'$T026 008 F CtjAR LJARN 4 8 0 2 0000 0 PT ON MERRY GO ROURD AT SCHOOL ANO iIAS fiPUN OFF LAHOING ON ARM 9X
CONY ARN `
'81027 OOt # LACK FACE i 9 O Z GOOD 0 FELL OFF MERRY Gfl ROUMO AT PL ATGROiJND AND CVT CHIN
'8102a 007 # I-O-I MEAD 1 8 0 Z DODO 0 fEl1 OFF MER!!Y-QO-ROUND ANO NIt HEAD. OOESNrT RENEMBER 1IHAT
HAPPENED. KNOT TO HEAD. HEADACHE. DX; MILD HEAD INJURY
'81102 003 N tACR FACE 1 8 0 2 0000 .0 -3 Y10 N Cj0 LAC. TO FOREHEAD- FELL OFF NERRY- 60 ROUND- DY; FOREH
EAD LAC.
'81102 t22 M LACR HEAD 1 8 0 2 000D 0 22'YR 'MALE kACERATED SCALP iIHER FELL OFF #ERRY 60 ROUND AT DAYCAR
E. -
'81104. 009 F LACK FACE 1 Q 0 2 0000 0 LACERATION 3CN TD OCC2PUT, fEtl OFF NERRT-60-ROUND At SCHOOL
.'811T4 005 F FRACT UlLEO i 4 D Z 0000 D FX DISTAL NETAPNY8IS R FEMUR INJUR#D OY THE HANDLEBAR PART
V Of A NERRY 0O ROUND THIS PN
Uj'$1119 D03 M IACR FACE i 9 ~ 0 2 0000. 0 f CH[N LACERATION. CNILO .FELL OFF THE MERRY-60-ROUND'.
'81123 010 F CTjAH LJLEG 1 5 Q t 0000 0 10YOF AiiDitY CARE'ARD FE11 oY iNE KERRY GO ROUND. CONTUSION LEG.
a-'81POt D34 F OTRER TOE 9 0 Q 2 GOOD 0 LT flREAT TCE: PAIN YB[LE PUSNINR NERRT-DO-ROUND. D%; LEFT AOAiNST
C.} NEDICAI ADYICfs
'81206 003 F FRACT F[N0R 1 0 0 Z 0000 0 `~LEf1 FINGER FRACTURE+ INJURED FINDER ON #ERRT-60-ROUND
'8121:9 010 M LJ4CR HEAD 1 0 0 2 0000 0 - LACERATED-SCALP - FELL OM THE MERRY-GO-ROUND. DX. OCCIPITAL
SCALP LACERATION - SUPERFiC2AL.
'90120 " 003 F LACR FACE t 9 0 2 ' D0$Q Q 3 YR FEMALE LACERATED FORE#EAD ON NERRY GO ROUND..
'90130 009 F . 1-D-1' HEAO 1 8 0' 2 0000 0 PT FEII OFF MERRY^60-AOUgD. CHI
'90203; 006 F LACR ' FCN6R 1 `9 ,0. 2 ' OOOQ 0 LAGERA7[O# FIN&ER
~ CUi ON MERRY-&0-ROUND AT SCHOOL
'40214 ` `002 F LAC R` '` NOUTN 1•. 9~ ~0 ` Z` 0000 - 0 .
',''TRIPPED AND' FELL' `ON #ERRY-CO-ROUND AT PARK, CUT NOUTR O!I POLE
N?
.-~ -
--y '
C
CI
~D
N
N
C
O
O
E 9
UNIVERSITY OF
NORTH 4567 St. Johns Bluff Road, South June 26, 2000
~ (~~T Jacksonville, Florida 32224-2645
`' 1 l~lJ~l~~ (904) 646-2610 • Fax (904) 646-1025
COLLEGE OF EDUCATION AND HUMAN SERVICES
Division of Curriculum and Instruction
Frederick H. Schultz Hall
8/27/97
Mr. Tim Johnson
Director of Parks & Recreation
Atlantic Beach, FL 32233
Dear Mr. Johnson:
As a career professional in directing children's physical
activity experiences in physical education and recreation, I
am writing to urgE Atlantic Beach officials to focus on
safety concerns for the play area plans in Bull Memorial
Park.
The Jacksonville Times Union newspaper article of 8/27/97
mentioned that see-saws, a merry-go-round, and spring toys
were being considered for the play area. My telephone
conversation with you confirmed that the article was
correct. Moreover, I commend your actions as I learned ghat
you had previously advised against these items.
Community officials obviously meant well in their desires
for the play area; however, they may not realize the
increased liability as a result of these play area items.
Information from the United States Consumer Protection
Agency and national playground experts strongly advise
against any playground apparatus that moves (excluding safe
swing sets). Injury potential significantly increases when
such apparatus of a moving nature is provided for children.
I know that you support developmentally appropriate and safe
playgrounc} apparatus according to national guidelines and
hope you will communicate my concerns to community officials
on my behalf .
Thank you.
Sincerely,
Dr. Allan N. Sander
Coordinator of Physical Education
University of North Florida
l~yual Opyuru~nrn; fi~junlAcrd.:c;,i/firmuti~ e A, r;ru~ Arcritu: i~~r