Loading...
COW Minutes 1993 04-01-93 r 1 r NOW IMMOMM.NOW ✓-- �1_]1 i/ .• ' ' • A r_ ' �L��. I Ifs 1 i r / • I T UNITED CITY OF THE VILLAGE OF YORKVILLE ` COMMITTEE MINUTES DATE OF MEETING ATTENDEES LOCATION ELECTED OFFICIALS PUBLICLY ANNOUNCED ❑ YES ❑ NO TIME CONVENED TIME ADJOURNED t -q 3 OTHERS DISCUSSION ( IDENTIFY BY NUMBER) Q lA k t uvl A� L L t A „ _ n 4Q 7, G * �xw .L� rte.,,. 9. Lk&a G ay-4a `cL jio-t OS ul vv - a9P Q41L 5 car c o Q a,Q Q C[. � P-c.c.-�c. .��s ac.Q-o ,c.�� � �.e (�►c-�w,�dl.,o �- 1� ."'�"0 V C � 41,,bi RECOMMENDATIONS ( IDENTIFY BY SAME NUMBER AS ABOVE) ^ UNITED CITY OF THE VILLAGE OF YORKVILLE COlMlITTEE AIIN=ES DATE OF MEETING ATTENDEES LOCATION ELECTED OFFICIALS PUBLICLY ANNOUNCED ❑ YES ❑ NO TIME CONVENED TIME ADJOURNED OTHERS DISCUSSION ( IDENTIFY BY nNUMBER) nn nn 12. Qr, GC U1 4C AVIAu/ &C ` CrACI1 T AZak) K C ," ay � 6k- � o clre �°iu 0,c r�t.e. tclnoc;Q viu- pa-,-L FSea k'n'ta &h `1-0 �✓� �o ��a.� uc, �h% e..�o�y� , rnc�.,cjft_I�.t.Q c% S�-e �-e0u�! 1 -Ao , k�k- 1.a u-m t cu,'� orng-- _,V_p,4 0 zli v A r nwt f r st._*L,& , AJU J p its Lk)9&. 1 t us 4" ,rL U Lie a (n �e,1L�Q�w�i tx ua ego�vk nL tz ,e ua rn. o� COUA ci t 8• tytv,,,. �.,,...Q S a�- (� '.�0 ,e.m- V-I�A-�, t�r� Ire a.� ,�ca�-c�, ,,Vx��.ltQ +a RECOMMENDATIONS ( IDENTIFY BY SAME NUMBER AS ABOVE) P,q Harding Lawson Associates �w A Report Prepared for P City of Yorkville 610 Tower Lane Yorkville,Illinois 60560 ,p i _r EVALUATION OF PROPOSED COMMERCIAL OPERATIONS IN RELATION TO CITY OF YORKVILLE ZONING ORDINANCE PERFORMANCE STANDARDS COUNTRYSIDE CENTER UNIT#4,LOTS 34 HLA Job Number 23791.1 by Jeffrey Wentz Associate Environmental Scientist Harding Lawson Associates Oakbrook Terrace Tower One Tower Lane, Suite 1300 Oakbrook Terrace, Illinois 60181 (708) 571-2162 March 26, 1993 Harding Lawson Associates _J TABLE OF CONTENTS I. INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . - U. EVALUATION OF THE PROPOSED OPERATIONS IN RELATION TO CITY OF YORKVILLE ZONING ORDINANCE PERFORMANCE STANDARDS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . - Carstar Facility . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . - Noiseon Vibration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . - Smoke . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . - �c Matter• . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . FlammableHazards . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . - Glare . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . - MidasMuffler Shop . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . - Noise . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . - Vibration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . - Smoke . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . = Odor . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ToxicMatter . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . - FlammableHazard . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . - Glare . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . III. STATE ENVIRONMENTAL REQUIREMENTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . IV. CONCLUSIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . - �i ---I, i -T 1 c t YORKVII.I123791.1/0325934J.WP/4 «y5. Harding Lawson Associates ` I. INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND In March of 1993, the City of Yorkville contracted with Harding Lawson Associates (HLA)to evaluate the compatibility of the construction of two new automotive repair operations on a parcel of land identified as Countryside Center Unit #4, Lot E-3. HLA evaluated provided facility engineering and material safety data information provided by the prospective tenants for comparison with the performance standards contained in the City of Yorkville's Zoning Ordinance for Manufacturing Districts,M-1. HLA compared this information to the City of Yorkville performance standards for: _ • Noise T� • Vibration I ` • Smoke W. _ I • Odor . ` • Toxic Matter ^t • Fire and Explosive Hazards Solids Liquids and Gases • Glare -I HLA also addressed whether the operation required Illinois state or federal environmental permits. While both proposed facilities provided substantial information on their operations and HLA confirmed information with both the operator of the Carstar facility and their vendors, in several cases HLA had to make rl assumptions about the operations. In this report,HLA has attempted to document instances where we were forced Commercial Operations Evaluation klatch 25,1993 Y0RKVU.1M791.l/03259347.WP/4 pate 1 Harding Lawson Associates { to make assumptions. In that both of these businesses are common commercial operations with which most of the general public has had some exposure, HLA believes that these assumptions are warranted. One of the primary assumptions was that the Carstar facility will actually install and use all of the equipment that they provided engineering or product description materials for. Also,HLA has assumed that,being new facilities with the latest equipment, both facilities will be operated with commonly accepted best management practices. Commercial Operations Evaluation Match 25,1993 YORKVII.U23791.1/0325934J.WP/4 Page 2 ,t Harding Lawson Associates H. EVALUATION OF THE PROPOSED OPERATIONS IN RELATION TO CITY OF YORKVILLE ZONING ORDINANCE PERFORMANCE STANDARDS Carstar Facility Noise It is not anticipated that there will be any operations producing a significant amount of noise. Some metal hammering operations will be performed on a sporadic basis. In addition,the facility is to be constructed of hollow concrete block which provides significant attenuation of noise. Therefore,noise levels in excess of 60 Db are not anticipated 30 feet to 40 feet outside the facility. Vibration The Carstar Facility provided no information regarding vibration. However, none of the proposed equipment is anticipated to cause any vibration in excess of the performance standards. Smoke While the information provided did not specify the method of space heating, HLA has assumed that the facility will be heated either by natural gas or electricity. Based on that assumption, nothing in the facility plans appear to be a source of smoke. However, auto repair facilities generate quantities of dust,generally from auto body sanding. The Carstar facility provided information on two dust collection systems that operates on each of the sander/grinder units. Such units are considered state-of-the-art for dust control and either appear to be capable of controlling any excessive dust i } problems. It should be noted that such vacuum dust control devices could be considered air pollution control j Commercial Operations Evaluation March 25,1993 YORKVD IJ23791.1/0325934I.WP/4 Page 3 T Harding Lawson Associates f i devices, and so may require an Illinois Environmental Protection Agency air pollution control permit. The facility should complete and submit a construction permit application prior to any construction activities. Odor The Carstar facility provided no information on odor. There appears to be nothing in the Carstar operation that would lead to formation of odors due to bacterial decomposition. The use of paints and solvents have the potential to create odors that some individuals may find objectionable. However, Carstar is proposing to install several components which would serve to mitigate such odors. The Carstar operation proposes the use of an enclosed painting and solvent storage area. Their priming and preparation area (the prep area) will feature a recirculating ventilation system equipped with an activated carbon filtration unit. Also, they proposed to conduct base coat, top coat, and clear coat painting in an enclosed bay equipped with glass-wool and sub-grate water bed filters for particulate entrapment. Toxic Matter There are several potentially toxic materials contained in the various chemical products used in an auto repair facility, and the Carstar facility provided Material Safety Data Sheets (MSDS) for the primers, sealers, thinners and solvents, and paints they will be using in their shop. All of these are commonly used in auto body repair and are not usually stored in such quantities as to pose an undue hazard to the community by direct exposure. The exposure pathway of greatest concern is through emissions to the atmosphere. The Carstar facility provided information on an activated carbon filtration systems manufactured by MPS/SCTI -that they will use for their priming and preparation area. The information provided for the SCTI unit ` indicated that there would be no VOC (volatile organic compound) emissions and that the filtered air would be recirculated to the shop and not exhausted to the atmosphere. Such carbon filtration units are common air pollution l ` control devices in many industrial processes,and they work quite well. While given the information provided,HLA ,1 cannot definitively say that emissions from the prep operation will not exceed 2.5 percent of the TLV at the lot line, 1 `l Commercial Operations Evaluation Mash 25, 1993 YORKVEUJ23791.1/0325934J.WP/4 page 4 Harding Lawson Associates it would appear that the concentrations in the shop would have to be much higher than the TLV for it to exceed 2.5 percent at the lot line. The SCTI documentation stipulated that when the activated carbon was saturated,it was to be regenerated through desorption. Desorption involves reheating the saturated carbon to vaporize and release the trapped solvents. Usually, this is done either in conjunction with other controls to recover the solvents or the saturated carbon filters 1 are returned to a commercial recovery operation for desorption. In the absence of other controls, any solvents desorbed on site would be released to the atmosphere. Through conversations with the vendor regarding the •d proposed operation, HLA learned that the facility plans to return the saturated filters to a commercial facility equipped to conduct controlled desorption. The Carstar operator provided information on the SAICO paint booth as well,which documented that the proposed facility would not recirculate the air from the paint booth into the shop,but would instead exhaust it to the atmosphere. Test data were reported for the SAICO unit,based on tests conducted in Spam,but using American health and safety standards. Following is the percentage of the TLV for each of the substances as measured in the paint booth: Substance Percentage of TLV Toluene 4.0 N-butyl acetate 3.4 Benzene ethyl 0.5 Xylene 2.1 N-butane 0.8 Methyl isobutyl ketone 2.3 Lead 2.0 Chrome 10.0 Commercial Operations Evaluation March 25,1993 YORKVHIJ23791.1/03259341.WP/4 past 5 I Harding Lawson Associates ' This test concluded that the SAICO paint operation did not violate applicable standards of any potentially hazardous material within the booth. Five of the eight substances had measured concentrations within the booth itself that were less than the zoning ordinance performance standard applicable at the district boundary. Therefore, it would be unlikely that the painting operation would result in concentrations in the atmosphere of any of these ' substances that would exceed 2.5 percent of the TLV at the lot line after passing through several filtration units and being dispersed into the air at a rate of approximately 10,500 cubic feet of air per minute. 1 Flammable Hazards _ This facility will contain a full automotive paint shop. The solvents used in painting operations are volatile and flammable. The Carstar facility proposes to apply these paints/solvents in the controlled atmosphere of a paint booth. Based on review of the facility floorplan and the specifications for the custom designed automotive paint booth to be used, HLA made the following conclusions: • The booth was designed by the manufacturer SAICO to comply with the specifications established by the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) in Code 33 "Spray Application Using Flammable and Combustible Materials'. • Tests performed by the independent testing laboratory ETL indicate that the booth meets the t NFPA Code 33 specifications as well as those established for the gas heater. The booth is designed with spring-loaded doors which are interlocked with the paint guns. The guns will not allow paint application unless the doors are closed. • The booth also contains a photohelic gauge which monitors air flow/pressure at all times. When the interior pressure is to low, for any reason, the paint guns are inoperable. _I Commercial Operations Evaluation March 25, 1993 YORKVILL/23791.1/03259347.WP/4 Page 6 1 Harding Lawson Associates 0 Tests performed on the active carbon filtration system utilized to absorb organics from the air which is recirculated through the booth indicate that the maximum concentration of flammable vapors in the both is 11% of the Lower Explosive Limit(LEL). The lower explosive limit is the minimum concentration of vapors which can be ignited by an ignition source. A concentration of 20% of the LEL is considered a safe limit of operation. Therefore, the booth operates at concentrations well within the safe limit. • The only other potential for fire from this operation is from welding if stray sparks are allowed _ in the area of flammable materials. The plans provided indicate that painting and flammable materials will be stored in enclosed areas to eliminate this hazard. Glare The Carstar facility provided no information on glare or facility lighting, so HLA has no basis for determining whether the facility will meet the City zoning ordinance performance standard. That determination can best be made through testing of the facility as built. Midas Muller Shop Noise The Midas shop is proposed to be situated about 40 feet west of the eastern lot line with an office building. This building is located well inside the common border. Midas provided noise measurements made at similar Midas facilities which indicate that noise levels 35 feet outside the open overhead door could reach a maximum of 72.8 Db. However, only a parking area is located in front of the overhead door. The eastern lot line runs along the side of the shop which no doors or openings. Due to the directional nature of sound travel, it is unlikely that 60 Db would be exceeded at the lot line. In addition,there are no receptors located at the lot line. The closest occupied Commercial Operations Evaluation 25,1993 tion PaYa T YORKV ILL/43791.1/0325934J.WP/4 I Harding Lawson Associates facilities are the Hatcher Office and Medical building,located approximately 300 feet to the west of the facility and the Hillside Health Care Center located approximately 340 feet to the southwest of the facility. In addition, it is common practice to operate with the overhead doors closed. While the doors are only opened to bring in new vehicles, this will sometimes occur while other vehicles are being repaired. Vibration The Midas facility provided no information regarding vibration. However,none of the proposed equipment is anticipated to cause any vibration in excess of the performance standards. f Smoke Again, as the information provided did not specify the method of space heating,HLA has assumed that the facility will be heated either by natural gas or electricity. Based on that assumption, nothing in the facility plans appear to be a source of smoke,other than some small amounts of fugitive particulate matter associate with welding or torch cutting operations. Odor Midas provided no information on odor. There appears to be nothing in the Midas operation that would lead to formation of odors due to bacterial decomposition. Such repair shops do use solvents which can have odors, the use of a Safety Kleen enclosed system solvent parts washer and a WasteEvac system for extracting various automobile fluids from cars and pumping them into a safe, contained storage system should minimize any potential odor problems. Toxic Matter Where are several potentially toxic materials contained in the various chemical products used in an auto repair facility, asbestos is the one the public most often associates with a muffler and brake repair shop. While Commercial Operations Evaluation Marsh 25, 1993 YORKVII.U23791.1/0325934J.WP/4 page a Harding Lawson Associates asbestos is no longer used in automobile brakes, some older cars may have brake pads or linings that contain asbestos. Midas provided the results of monitoring studies that demonstrated that worker exposure was generally less than one percent of the Threshold Limit Value established by the American Congress of Governmental Industrial Hygienists embodied in the zoning ordinance performance standards. If worker exposure is generally less than one percent of the TLV within the confines of the shop,it will certainly be much less in the open at the district boundary. Midas also provided Material Safety Data Sheets(MSDS)for the materials and fluids they recommend that their shops use. No exposure nor monitoring data was supplied, so HLA cannot definitively document concentrations of various materials at the district boundary as proposed in the zoning ordinance. Again, that determination can best be made through testing of the facility as built. However, many of these materials are confined within the vehicles (e.g., brake fluid), or are applied with shop cloth(e.g., clean up solvents), and they are all common products in commerce. Given common experience with the number of repair facilities in the country, as well as the use of UL listed self-closing oil waste cans for disposing of oily shop rags, a Safety Kleen enclosed system solvent parts washer, and a WasteEvac system for extracting fluids from cars and pumping them into a safe, contained storage system, the chances of exposure to even 2.5 percent of the TLV at the district boundary is believed to be remote. Flammable Hazard The automotive repair operations performed at Midas will include mechanical repairs, engine tuning and welding. Every Midas shop is installed with a continuous monitoring system for combustible gas. The combustible gases utilized in welding operations include acetylene and propane. The monitoring system is outfitted with both a visual and an audible alarm which will indicate a buildup of gases at a safe but unnecessary level. In addition, all the shops maintain both dry chemical and carbon dioxide fire extinguishers for solvent and electrical fires, respectively. Other fire safety measures include use of UL listed self-closing oil waste cans for disposing of oily Commercial Operations Evaluation March 25, 1993 YORKVUIJ23791.1/03259341.WP/4 page 9 Harding Lawson Associates shop rags, the use of a Safety Kleen enclosed system solvent parts washer, and use of a WasteEvac system for extracting various automobile fluids from cars and pumping them into a safe, contained storage system. Glare Midas provided no information on glare or facility lighting,so HLA has no basis for determining whether the facility will meet the City zoning ordinance performance standard. That determination can best be made through testing of the facility as built. Commercial Operations Evaluation March 25. 1993 YORKVILL/23791.1/0325934J.WP/4 Pace 10 Harding Lawson Associates M. STATE ENVIRONMENTAL REQUIREMENTS The State of Illinois and the U.S.Environmental Protection Agency have permitting and other requirements applicable to various sources of potential pollutant discharges -covering air,hazardous waste,and water. Regarding potentially hazardous waste, both the Carstar and Midas facilities would be small commercial generators, requiring no permits. Neither facilities would be direct dischargers of wastewater to navigable waterways, so they would not require National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System(NPDES)permits. We assume that the only discharges would be sanitary wastes, which would not require permitting either-just a hook-up fee. However, the Carstar facility provided information on one system for their painting operation- the SAICO- which may add volatile organic material to the facility's discharge water. Depending on the levels involved, this could require a pretreatment permit from the local sewer authority. The Midas facility would not be considered a source of any air pollutant that would require a permit. Illinois exempts painting operations that use less than 5,000 gallons of paint and thinner annually from air permits for their volatile organic material emissions. This exemption holds even if they have an activated carbon filtration ( unit, which, as an air pollution control device would normally have to be permitted. I However,the IEPA did state that since the Carstar facility is expected generate quantities of dust from auto body sanding, the dust collection system for which they provided information could be considered an air pollution control device and so may require an Illinois Environmental Protection Agency(IEPA)air pollution control permit. It was unclear to the State whether the exemption for the small painting operation would apply to the particulate control device as well. Therefore, the IEPA recommended that the facility complete and submit a construction . permit application prior to any construction activities so that the IEPA could make a final determination as to whether a permit would be required. Commercial Operations Evaluation March 25,1993 YORKVELL123791.1/0325934J.WP/4 Pale 11 Harding Lawson Associates IV. CONCLUSIONS Based on the information provided, if the Midas facility is conscientiously operated, we believe that it is very unlikely that it will violate City of Yorkville zoning ordinance performance standards. Based on the information provided, it appears that the Carstar facility will have state-of-the-art equipment to control any nuisance emissions from their operation, including odors and potentially hazardous volatile organic emissions. HLA is particularly confident that the controls on the priming and preparation area should eliminate any potential concerns with odor or hazardous airborne emissions. As long as such priming and preparation is confined to the prep area, there should be no problem with that phase of the operation and it should not violate the applicable performance standards. The facility is proposing advanced controls on the painting operation as well. The proposed spray booth is completely enclosed and.exhausts to the atmosphere through a series of filters. In auto painting operations, collection of larger particulates, particularly through a water-bed filter, appears to eliminate or reduce odor problems,as the odor causing(and potentially hazardous)volatile constituents condense on the paint droplets which are, in turn, trapped by the filter units. An informal survey HLA conducted of auto painting operations indicated that they had experienced no odor complaints-even operations in densely populated areas of Chicago -as long as the painting was confined to the spray booth and the filters were maintained regularly. Based on the test data provided by the Carstar facility,measured concentrations of most of the potentially hazardous substances were lower within the paint booth itself than the zoning ordinance performance standard applicable at the lot line. Given the additional filtering and the exhaust velocity from the paint booth,none of the potentially hazardous substances measured are expected to exceed the performance standard at the lot line. Neither of the two proposed facilities are expected to produce any emissions or effluents in any quantities that would approach those that would trigger state or federal environmental permitting requirements. Commercial Operations Evaluation March 25,1993 YORKVILL/23791.1/0325934J.WP/4 Page 12 Harding Lawson Associates DISTRIBUTION EVALUATION OF PROPOSED COMMERCIAL OPERATIONS IN RELATION TO CITY OF YORKVILLE ZONING ORDINANCE PERFORMANCE STANDARDS COUNTRYSIDE CENTER UNIT#4,LOTS 34 March 26, 1993 Couv No. - 2 copies City of Yorkville 1,2 610 Tower Lane Yorkville,Illinois 60560 Attention: Mr. Donald E. Peck, Engineer/Manager 3 copies Harding Lawson Associates QUALITY CONTROL REVIEWER Name Title Y0RKVU1M791.1,W2MQ.WP/4 -13 I Handing Lawson Associates DISTRIBUTION EVALUATION OF PROPOSED COMMERCIAL OPERATIONS IN RELATION TO CITY OF YORKVILLE ZONING ORDINANCE PERFORMANCE STANDARDS COUNTRYSIDE CENTER UNIT#4,LOTS 34 March 26, 1993 Copp No. 2 copies City of Yorkville 1,2 610 Tower Lane Yorkville,Illinois 60560 Attention: Mr. Donald E. Peck, Engineer/Manager 3 copies Harding Lawson Associates 3,4,5 QUALITY CONTROL REVIEWER Suresh M. Relwani Associate Environmental Engineer 1 YORKV n1.PM?91.1 M3?5M.W P/4 .13 I