Category: Martin Tower

City Health Director position on long-term effects of the Martin Tower Demolition (42)

(42nd in a series on Martin Tower)

Martin Tower demolition May 19
www.martintowerbethlehem.com

Though it felt like it had to be forced out into the open at the public meeting last night on the Martin Tower demolition, here is what we might call a position statement by Bethlehem Health Director Kristen Wenrich (the only Health official present) on the long-term effects of the implosion method of demolition that has concerned many Gadfly followers:

“The Health Department does not regularly get involved with air quality issues . . . but in looking at long-term health outcomes due to dust, you are looking at direction, long-term exposure, and you’re looking at quantity. So that everything I’ve been told and everything I’ve seen, they’ve done everything that they can to minimize [garbled audio]. It’s a short-term event, they’re not expecting any type of long-term exposure, and we’re not expecting [garbled audio] amount of dust. So that’s my opinion from a public health standpoint.”

Gadfly will come back to this issue of long-term effects shortly, but one crucially important thing he was looking for was a statement from a public health official. This seemed to him the one big hole in the City’s otherwise comprehensive planning.

So, more later on this and yesterday’s meetings in general.

Alert! Listen before the 6PM meeting if you can

In haste at 5:15:

Gadfly alert! If you are interested in health concerns relating to the MT implosion. There was a meeting today at 3 for “stakeholders” — people and businesses in close radius to MT. There was almost no awareness in the audience of any health concern. And everything rosy from the developer and demolition people. I ‘m posting here an audio of my questions about “dust” — unfortunately the first part was cut off. If you have health concerns listen beforehand and then come to the meeting. But, in any event, come and ask and ask and ask till you feel you have resolution of the concerns.

 

Possible property damage too (41)

(41st in a series on Martin Tower)

Martin Tower demolition May 19
www.martintowerbethlehem.com

Informational meeting
Thursday, May 9, 6PM
Nitschmann Middle School

Gadfly:

Since you brought up Jacksonville implosion….nobody mentioned this.

Post-implosion repairs could take up to a year, according to Blackstone Building GM

James Dalton

Yes, one of the things in the FAQs Gadfly was reading last night had to do with liability insurance. Many of the FAQs mentioned it.

“I’m no expert on this, but . . . ” (40)

(40th in a series on Martin Tower)

Martin Tower demolition May 19
www.martintowerbethlehem.com

Informational meeting
Thursday, May 9, 6PM
Nitschmann Middle School

“It is amazing to me that so many people are reacting to this implosion
as entertainment or spectacle rather than a health risk.”
Barbara Diamond

Peter Crownfield is officially retired but spends most of his time working with students in his role as internship coordinator for the Alliance for Sustainable Communities–Lehigh Valley

Gadfly:

‘… Is it only dangerous when it is in the air? There is no danger when it is on the ground? Does it eventually just go away, just disappear? Poof. And is it a good thing — in the big picture, I mean — if it blows away from “us” only to fall on someone else somewhere else? And is it ok if it falls on water instead of us? I just don’t know.’ [From Gadfly’s previous post]

I’m no expert on this, but from what I’ve read there are two hazards:

The silica & any asbestos & miscellaneous fine particles are mainly hazardous if you breathe them in, but any dust that falls on the ground can be stirred up by wind or vehicles or physical activity. (Would you want to run or bike or take young children anywhere in the fallout zone?)

Any lead, mold spores, and possible other toxins in the concrete and other building materials are just as hazardous on the ground, even after it rains. (How about your vegetable garden? …the lawn where children & grandchildren play?)

I have to say that the city gives every indication of just ignoring these concerns and not really considering health issues at all, or at least not once the implosion event is done.

Has the city notified people in the entire likely fallout areas or only those who are able to attend this public meeting? (Depending on wind speed & direction this could extend as far as Easton & Pburg to the east.)

Peter

Remember, people who attend the meeting tonight will receive a packet of information.

And at Council the City EMS said they were in process of meeting with people in the “exclusion” area and that a special meeting for them is being held today also.

Random research and reflections on implosions recorded in real time (39)

(39th in a series on Martin Tower)

Martin Tower demolition May 19
www.martintowerbethlehem.com

Informational meeting
Thursday, May 9, 6PM
Nitschmann Middle School

10PM. Do you know where your children are?

Do you know where Gadfly is? About to spend two hours before Rachel comes on burning-the-near-midnight-oil bouncing around on the web.

And he’ll share here his pilgrimage with you just like Ron Yoshida did his. (I’m still in awe, Ron!)

There are many examples on the web of materials cities have prepared for their citizens regarding implosions. We learned at Council last night that Bethlehem will distribute a packet at Thursday’s meeting.

Can’t wait.

Here we go.

1) Commercial Demolition FAQs: Your Biggest Questions Answered

“Explosion / Implosion
The most efficient of all commercial demolition methods is explosion or implosion, but it’s typically only suitable when mechanical demolition and deconstruction aren’t an option. There are public health concerns with this type of demolition, including environmental issues, damage to adjacent structures, flying debris, air quality concerns, noise, and more.”

“When used, this is typically the least expensive commercial demolition method.”

 

“Hometown Demolition aims to be the simplest way to find and hire the right contractor for demolition anywhere in the USA.”

Were the primary options of “mechanical demolition and deconstruction” ruled out in our case? Or was the implosion option chosen because it cost the developer less, even though “there are public health concerns”?

———-

2) IMPORTANT NOTICE — IMPLOSION ALERT — Sunday, January 20, 2019 (Jacksonville, FL.)

“Any residents and business personnel required to be in the exclusion zone (see map below) during the time of the demolition event are directed to stay indoors and shelter in place. Noise/sound pressure levels and lingering dust may pose a safety risk to citizens. All doors, windows and entry ways are to be kept closed and exhaust fans turned off.”

“Can I come out when the blast is over?
The demolition is expected to last no more than five minutes. However, the falling debris is expected to produce a dust cloud that, with wind, can travel outside of the immediate area and last much longer. It is critical for all to remain indoors and shelter in place until access notification is provided via JSO.”

“Am I in danger if I come out prior to notification?
Months of comprehensive work has been conducted to ready the building for implosion, including the remediation and removal of hazardous interior materials. However, to minimize health risks and threats to persons–especially those with breathing and/or respiratory conditions–everyone is advised to remain indoors and shelter in place until notification is provided. In addition, noise and sound pressure levels at and near the site during the blast may pose a threat to hearing, reaffirming the critical need to shelter in place.”

Gadfly was caught by surprise by hearing last night about “exclusion zone” and “restricted zone.” What does that mean? So he went looking. Here’s an example in Jacksonville. Seems a pretty big zone, actually. And people within it are “sheltering in place.” Awesome term. Jacksonville is frank about safety: “Noise/sound pressure levels and lingering dust may pose a safety risk to citizens.” The phrase “critical need” is not soft. And — bottom line — perhaps people are put through this implosion trouble and maybe implosion risk because it may be a cheaper method for the developer?????? Will Bethlehem be frank about safety in its packet?

———–

3) Go back to the web site above in 2) and look at the first commenter:

“That dust cloud is mainly respirable silica with a little Aspergillus and heavy metals mixed in. Notice the guy drilling the holes. By law he has to take a class which teaches him the dangers of silica. Then he has to wear a respirator and a moon suit to prevent exposure to the dust and he has to get annual health checkups. The City wants you believe that magically the implosion some how magically turns this dangerous substance into something innocent and non harmful. There are thousands and thousand of cases of cancer from a one time exposure to the silica dust from the WTC collapse. What makes it even worse is that they aren’t planning on cleaning the roofs of the adjacent buildings so that hazardous material will be blowing around the city for weeks if not months. . . . [possibility of a rain storm] That creates an even bigger problem. What happens when you add water to a bag of concrete? The same thing happens to the concrete dust after and implosion. They use water to clean up the dust. It mixes and washes down the storm drains where guess what? It becomes concrete again and clogs everything up.”

Tsk, nasty CAVE person in Jacksonville. We learned last night that our City has received many resident responses. But why is the comment function on www.martintowerbethlehem.com “disabled,” so 1) there is no public record of what the responses are and 2) so people do not know what others are saying — and, most importantly, 3) so people cannot learn from each other and 4) perhaps organize with each other? Why can’t we see what our fellow citizens are saying?

———-

4) Go back again to #2 where people in the exclusion zone “are directed to stay indoors and shelter in place.”  Now go to www.martintowerbethlehem.com the Bethlehem FAQ and look at #6 where the question is “Should residents stay indoors during the implosion and, if so, for how long?”

First, that question is not answered in the answer. We are not directly told if residents should stay indoors, and, if so, for how long. Not told. Not answered. Second, at the very end of the answer we ARE told that if you are dust-aggravated, you should stay indoors, and thus, by implication, if you are not dust-aggravated, you can be outdoors. Nice. So in Jacksonville, they want you to stay indoors — it’s critical that you do so — but in Bethlehem, it’s ok to be outdoors. Riddle me that, Batman.

———-

5) Brayton Point, MA

The debate over dust. That nasty stuff.

“Dust would be created via every possible demolition method, and here is why implosion is the preferred method:
— The implosion event is scheduled, immediate, and short-lived (around 8 seconds) – all of which afford the opportunity for planning to minimize impacts to the community and onsite workers.
— Mechanical demolition occurs over weeks or months, and dust generation would be expected to occur over a much longer time, making planning to minimize exposure more difficult and less practical.”

Now here’s a rebuttal to #1 above. The claim here looks like implosion is healthier. So whom do we believe? How do we judge?

There are two types of dust – heavy particulates and light particulates.
— Heavy particulate dust is not expected to stray more than 200 feet from the base of the towers and should clear in approximately 5 minutes.
— Based on historic NOAA Climatic Wind Data, lighter dust is expected to clear the site in a matter of minutes traveling southeast over Mount Hope Bay towards Fall River and dissipating before reaching the far shore.

I realize that I don’t know about this dust. Is it only dangerous when it is in the air? There is no danger when it is on the ground? Does it eventually just go away, just disappear? Poof. And is it a good thing — in the big picture, I mean — if it blows away from “us” only to fall on someone else somewhere else? And is it ok if it falls on water instead of us? I just don’t know. Good exam questions for a course in Moral Philosophy.

———-

6) Iowa State University FAQ

Q: Have there been any problems in residential areas where this has been done?
A: Dust is an unpreventable byproduct of all types of demolition. Depending on wind speed and direction on the day of the implosion, the dust may or may not reach your properties.

Now go to the Bethlehem FAQ #6:
A: Dust is an unpreventable byproduct of all types of demolition. . . . Depending on wind speed and direction on the day of the implosion, the dust may or may not reach your properties.

It gradually occurred to me that as I was reading around, jumping from here to there and back online, I was hearing the same language. Here above is an example of what the man before the man became Gadfly would call plagiarism. Verboten. But the bigger problem is the possibility that these FAQs are made up mainly of boiler plate language, which, though it may innocently save time for the City official charged with creating the FAQ document, could also indicate a propensity for City officials to stop thinking for themselves. Plagiarism is a mark of laziness, a lack of original thinking.

———-

Ok, I’ve had it. Rachel is on. I’m sure Trumpworld will be less complex.

I think we’d better get our butts to the meeting tomorrow — er, tonight! With our Gadfly glands well oiled.

Martin Tower demolition discussion at City Council May 7 (38)

(38th in a series on Martin Tower)

Martin Tower demolition May 19
www.martintowerbethlehem.com

Informational meeting
Thursday, May 9, 6PM
Nitschmann Middle School

It’s terrible [The City press release]. (Martin Romeril)

Implosion poses health risks. (Forensic Pathologist Steve Diamond)

There’s a bad public relations problem here. (Gadfly)

The City of Bethlehem has become the City of Developers. (Stephen Antalics, Gadfly #1)

It’s a travesty. (Al Wurth)

The thing that kind of upsets me is this undertone that all these organizations aren’t doing what they are supposed to be doing . . . I think you are going to find out that a large majority, an astronomical amount of people are informed about it and feel completely safe about it and you are going to see a lot of people getting up early in the morning to watch it, and they have no fear of anything that’s going on at the site and they have complete confidence in all the professionals as I do. (Councilman Callahan)

Michael Bloomberg said, “In God we trust, everyone else bring data.” So tell them to bring data. (Councilwoman Paige Van Wirth)

I think that after that Thursday meeting, your questions will be answered. . . . What they [the experts] can’t answer, put their feet to the fire. (Emergency Management Coordinator Robert Novatnack)

I’m prepared to stay here [the Thursday meeting] till 11 o’clock. (Mayor Donchez)

(Gadfly’s video tool failed him, but there’s audio here below, and, he reminds you, a full video will be posted on the City Council web site.)

Tuesday May 7 City Council meeting began, per usual, with public comment — dominated by the Martin Tower demolition.

Marty Romeril (6 mins.)

Questions still unanswered include such things as the exclusion zone (people may have to leave homes? First Gadfly heard that), wind speed considerations, other meteorological conditions, anticipated radius of the dust cloud, coatings on your house, pets, playground equipment, the range and size of the dust particles, Little League, Golf course, monitoring, Monocacy Creek, Burnside, asbestos.

Steve Diamond (4 mins.)

Forensic pathologist perspective. Lung disease from many elements besides asbestos. Process can take many years, and the cause may not be realized. Slow evolution of failing health because of inability to breathe. Implosion poses health risks. The City is overlooking a health hazard. Will samples of air, water, and soil be taken pre- and post-demolition? Protections of hospitals, streams, etc.? Possible financial liability exposure of the City. [

Gadfly (4 mins.)

Contacted by “desperadoes” — people worried about health issues trying to get answers and getting only a runaround. There’s a bad public relations problem here. Where’s our health department? Asks for an independent scientific study on the safety of implosions.

Stephen Antalics (4 mins.)

The City of Bethlehem has become the City of Developers. The most qualified people are not listened to. Whose will is being served here? This whole thing is a travesty in a sense.

Al Wurth (5 mins.)

Astounded. Perplexed. Never dreamed we would blow it up. We’re doing this to ourselves. It’s a travesty.

———-

In the body of the meeting, the Mayor asked Robert Novatnack, Bethlehem Emergency Management Coordinator, to make a brief presentation. He is the point man for the City on the demolition.

Robert Novatnack and City Council (28 mins.)

  • Novatnack: holding meetings with press and stakeholders, lot of work going on that doesn’t hit the newspapers, experts will be here Thursday, as will owners and development people, more meetings with stakeholders tomorrow, will give PowerPoint presentation Thursday and then open the floor for questions. Later in the conversation he would say that there will be a pamphlet/booklet containing all information (the Mayor said 500 copies will be printed), that the Department of Health will not be at the Thursday meeting (though the Mayor said if they aren’t, he would ask our City department to be there).
  • Councilwoman Van Wirt (min. 3:10): asked for assurance that questions previously raised were given to the DEP and others to answer even before the meeting, and pressed for distribution of answers beforehand so that they could be digested by the public. The City didn’t seem to quite get what PVW was after, and she pushed, calling attention to the arbitrary time frame. The bottom line City response to PVW seemed tentative. There’s a valid role here for the Department of Health.
  • Councilman Callahan (min. 9:57): sounding in Gadfly’s mind — and based on past experience — defensive against implication that the City and the developer were not doing all they should, asked for naming of all organizations involved in the planning, getting the answers he wanted except that the State Department of Health will not be there (a crucial absence given the health concern that is our issue!), and — for the record, as if he were a defense attorney — got the City to say they have complete confidence in the demolition company.
  • Councilman Reynolds (min. 12:45): made clear that it isn’t that anybody doesn’t trust the City and Mr. Novatnack but that this is a new thing and there are necessary questions, so it’s a matter of how we deliver information to people who don’t have experience with it.
  • Councilman Colon (min. 16:19): extended appreciation to the City for what’s done so far and for the Thursday meeting and reminded people that unlike 911 this is a controlled demolition and that all the pre-planning steps to clean the building have made it safe.
  • Councilman Callahan again (min. 18:40): upset at undertone that City and developers and all the organizations aren’t doing what they are supposed to be doing, you will find that a large majority, an astronomical amount of people are informed about it and feel completely safe about it and you are going to see a lot of people getting up early in the morning to watch it and they have no fear of anything that’s going on at the site and they have complete confidence in all the professionals as I do.
  • Mayor Donchez (min. 20:30): gave a shout-out to Senator Boscola and Gov Wolf’s office for help getting the meeting organized.
  • Councilwoman Van Wirt again (min. 21:31): clear that this is not about trust in the City or the City representative but about the process, quoting Michael Bloomberg, “In God we trust, everyone else bring data.” So tell them to bring data.
  • Council President Waldron (min. 22:37): only thing awry is communication coming back to the public, lot of questions right now, Thursday a great opportunity to clear them up, asked about format and agenda. Emphasizing need for ample time for questions.
  • Novatnack again (min. 23:26): expressing great positivity about activities so far and the meeting on Thursday.
  • Mayor Donchez again (min. 26:26): explained comprehensive information packets that will be available and his willingness to stay late so questions will be answered.

Some resources for thinking about the Martin Tower demolition (37)

(37th in a series on Martin Tower)

Martin Tower demolition May 19
www.martintowerbethlehem.com

Informational meeting
Thursday, May 9, 6PM
Nitschmann Middle School

“It is amazing to me that so many people are reacting to this implosion
as entertainment or spectacle rather than a health risk.”
Barbara Diamond

Gadfly tip o’ the hat and wave o’ the wings for the following thought-provokers to Steve Diamond, Nalyn Marcus, Marty Romeril, and Peter Crownfield.

Gadfly is not taking time right now to comment in detail on the information here, just getting some things “out there” providing some resources for you to consider.

———-

Steven Diamond, “Citizens’ health must be protected during Martin Tower implosion.” Morning Call, May 8, 2019.

  • I am a forensic pathologist. I recently performed an autopsy on a person who frequented the 911 World Trade Center location in New York City. He simply walked by the disaster site a few days a week. Now 15 years later, the person died of lung disease and is part of the 911 lawsuit settlement.
  • Lung disease may occur secondary to different aerosols of particulates. It does not have to be related to asbestos. A hyperimmune response may cause interstitial fibrosis of the lung, which causes decreased oxygenation of the blood. The fibrosis in the lung and decreased oxygen of the blood strains the heart and may cause congestive heart disease. Sadly, this process may take many years, and those effected may not realize the cause and effect of the exposure.
  • It is the mission of the city of Bethlehem to protect its citizens and ensure a safe environment. We must have assurances that the implosion of Martin Tower will be done in a competent and safe manner. What will be done to protect the hospitals, medical offices, businesses, schools, parks and residential homes?
  • “Best practices” for imploding a building have been published. The implosion should adhere to those parameters.

———-

COMMUNITY INFORMATION: STORMS HALL AND KNAPP HALL DEMOLITION Iowa State University 2005

especially:

F.A.Q.
General Community Notice of Implosion (pdf)
6-28 Letter to Residence of Safety Zone (pdf)

                                                                                      ———–

Buildings are composed of many construction materials made of large quantities of chemical substances and additives bonded together for years. Consequently, the issue occurs when uprooting an existing building. The conventional methods of annihilating an existing building induce hazardous substance into the environment that is threatening human health due to the presence of chemical substance in the dust of the pulverized building. Therefore, the main purpose of this paper is to conceptually synthesize the traditional methods of demolition buildings and the chemical substances presence in the pulverized building dust, as well as their effect to the human health and the environment in order to proffer for an alternative solution. The outcome of the studies reveals that dust emanation from demolished buildings definitely pollutes the environment and affects human health. Hence, deconstruction is proffer as an alternative method. Also, this study sensitize scholars to focus more on inventing green construction materials, green demolition methods, and green junkyard for the pulverized building debris.
Problematic issues surrounding public health protection in affected areas that could extend 10 or 20 km downwind from an implosion site suggest that implosions
should be prohibited in metropolitan areas.
Conclusion: Geometric and arithmetic mean of exposure was higher than threshold limit value for silica dust in all demolition sites. The risk of silicosis mortality for many demolition workers was higher than 1/ 1,000 (unacceptable level of risk). Estimating the lifetime lung cancer mortality showed a higher risk of mortality from lung cancer in building demolition workers.
Scientists found that the concentration of airborne dust particles in the immediate area jumped substantially in the minutes after the implosion – as much as 3,000 times higher than just before the charges went off. About 7 1/2 blocks away, the concentration increased about 20 times when the plume of dust reached the area.
But within 15 to 20 minutes, the concentration of airborne dust had returned to pre-implosion levels, according to the report. Indoor monitors detected no significant change in dust particles.
“The Implosion of the Calgary General Hospital: Ambient Air Quality Issues”
Public advisories to mitigate personal exposure and indoor migration of the implosion dust cloud constituents should extend to 10 or 20 km around an implosion site.
“Spectators Discouraged from Watching Building Demolitions”
They found that immediately after the implosion, concentrations of airborne dust particles were as much as 3,000 times higher than they had been prior to the demolition. As expected, sites nearest to the implosion had a more dramatic and earlier peak when compared to sites further away. Even at the furthest site, seven and one-half blocks from the implosion, there was a 20-fold increase in particulate matter. The good news, according to the researchers, is that the peaks were very short-lived, lasting only 15-20 minutes. No measurable effect was found upwind of the implosion, nor in the indoor sample sites. The researchers suggest that remaining upwind of a building demolition and staying indoors offers protection from high outdoor concentrations of dust particles.

The Dirt on Atmospheric Dust
It might seem small, but atmospheric dust is a big deal. Consisting (mostly) of tiny pieces of metal oxides, clays and carbonates, dust is the single largest component of the aerosols in Earth’s atmosphere, and it likely has a significant impact on the Earth’s climate, as it effects a wide range of phenomena, including from temperatures in the Atlantic Ocean to the rate of snowmelt in the southwestern U.S.

City provides FAQs on Martin Tower Demolition (36)

(36th in a series on Martin Tower)

Martin Tower demolition May 19
www.martintowerbethlehem.com

Informational meeting
Thursday, May 9, 6PM
Nitschmann Middle School

“It is amazing to me that so many people are reacting to this implosion
as entertainment or spectacle rather than a health risk.”
Barbara Diamond

As of this writing — 3:10PM, this announcement seems only to be on the City web page not the above-linked page devoted to the MT demolition

As the demolition of Martin Tower draws closer, the City of Bethlehem has comprised a list of Frequently Asked Questions regarding the demolition and precautions.

1) What is the process of demolition by explosives/implosion? The basic premise of explosives demolition is to isolate the key structural supporting elements of the structure (in this case, structural steel columns) and eliminate them sequentially with explosive charges so the weight and construction of the structure can be dynamically controlled with differential velocity to insure that the resultant debris falls in a predetermined area.

2) What regulations are in place to secure public safety? The explosives and demolition industry have regulations in place at local, state and federal levels to ensure Public Safety. Adherence to the regulations is overseen by, and has been coordinated through, the following by the project team: ATF, FAA, Pennsylvania DEP, Bethlehem Police Department, Bethlehem Fire Department, Bethlehem Office of the Fire Marshal, Emergency Medical Services, Bethlehem Emergency Management, Lehigh County Emergency Management, Northampton County Emergency Management, Northampton County 911 Center, Bethlehem Service Center and Lehigh Valley International Airport.

3) What has been done to prepare for the demolition – environmental remediation? (Asbestos removal complete?) All interior demolition was completed. All controlled and hazardous materials (including asbestos) were removed from the building, as required by law, prior to the final demolition permit being issued. Completion of interior demolition (i.e. walls, ceiling, carpeting, doors, etc.) prior implosion results in less dust being created during the implosion activities.

4) Will air quality be monitored before, during and after demolition? Yes. An independent 3rd party firm is conducting particulate and asbestos air quality monitoring before, during and after, the implosion activities.

5) What measures will be taken for dust control? Multiple water sprayers and misting devices will be utilized prior to and during the implosion activities.

6) Are there any precautions residents should take related to dust? Should residents stay indoors during the implosion and if so, for how long? Dust is an unpreventable byproduct of all types of demolition. With a wrecking ball or high-reach excavator, the building is slowly broken up, releasing dust over a lengthy period of time. With implosion, the same overall quantity of dust is released in a matter of seconds, and may linger in the general area for 4 to 6 minutes before crews begin cleanup of streets and sidewalks. Depending on wind speed and direction on the day of the implosion, the dust may or may not reach your properties. As a precautionary measure, we recommend that you see that all windows, doors and air intakes, are closed and to cover any other openings that might allow dust to enter your apartment, house or building. We also recommend that you turn off all exhaust fans before or at the time of the implosion as these might draw air in to your building through cracks in walls and windows. If you find dust uncomfortable or irritating, or if you have any respiratory conditions that would be aggravated by dust, please stay indoors during the demolition.

7) What is the anticipated size of the debris field? The building will incline slightly to the southeast, then fall straight down. Most of the debris from the implosion will come to rest within the footprint of the existing building, or slightly out of the footprint to southeast (toward the center of the 53 acre property).

8) How will the restricted area be cleared and secured? Bethlehem Police Department will clear the area prior to implosion activities, using various methods including foot patrols, motorcycle patrol and marked control units. Lehigh County Emergency Management will be utilizing drone with infrared capabilities to survey the restricted area.

9) Can I fly my drone? No. A temporary flight restriction with a one-half mile radius and 2,500 foot ceiling, has been granted by the FAA on May 19th from 6 to 8 a.m. During the temporary flight restriction, no aircraft (including drones) will be permitted within the restricted area.

10) What is the possibility of utility service interruption (water, gas, electric)? There is no anticipated interruption of utility service. However, as a precaution, representatives from the City Water Department, UGI and PPL, will be on site before, during and after the implosion activities.

11) What is the time frame for the implosion activities? • 5:00 am Bethlehem Police will close Eighth Avenue from Union Boulevard to Bradford Street. • 5:00 am Bethlehem Police will close Eaton Avenue from Elizabeth Avenue to Ralston Road. • 5:00 am Bethlehem Police will close Route 378 North and South Exit Ramps at Eighth Avenue. • 6:00 am the Exclusion Zone surrounding the site will be closed to the public. Details on the limits of the exclusion zone will provided at a later date. • 6:30 am Bethlehem Police will begin closing Route 378 from Catasauqua Road to the Main Street Ramp. • 7:00 am approximately, as safety and preparations permit, Martin Tower will be demolished by implosion. • 7:10 am assessment will be made by members of the project team to determine any clean-up activities prior to opening any roadways. Any unaffected roadways will be reopened after inspection by Bethlehem Police Department. • It is estimated that by mid-morning all public right of ways will be open and the exclusion zone lifted.

As reported earlier, Gadfly has learned that reps from the Air Quality Program, Northeast Regional Office, and the Bureau of District Mining Operations will be present Thursday.

“Not funny any more” (35)

(35th in a series on Martin Tower)

Martin Tower demolition May 19
www.martintowerbethlehem.com

Informational meeting
Thursday, May 9, 6PM
Nitschmann Middle School

“It is amazing to me that so many people are reacting to this implosion
as entertainment or spectacle rather than a health risk.”
Barbara Diamond

John Marquette is a retired librarian/archivist, author, historian, and a resident of Bethlehem. His current project is focused on the restoration of the interior of the Archibald Johnston Mansion in Housenick Park. 

Gadfly:

There’s been no comment from the medical practice of Bethlehem Eye Associates, where I had my cataract procedure exams and follow ups performed. Again, right cross the street from the tower. How will they ensure the building is sealed against the particulates? And how about the St. Luke’s cardiovascular building across the street, or the neonatal practice? I’ve joked about the tower complex being Bethlehem’s “Little Chernobyl,” but that when the property was in a state of advanced abandonment, not covered in mixed-component post-demolition particulate matter. Not funny anymore.

John

Gadfly has learned that reps from the Air Quality Program, Northeast Regional Office, and the Bureau of District Mining Operations will be present Thursday.

Gadfly reminds followers that email links to the Mayor and City Council are on the sidebar for easy access. If it is not obvious, the reason Gadfly has been including this footer is to suggest that if you have public health and safety concerns and concerns about tardy City communication (follow-up information was promised mid-April), that you communicate those concerns directly and powerfully to your public officials.

“My office building and property are literally at Ground Zero” (34)

(34th in a series on Martin Tower)

Martin Tower demolition May 19
www.martintowerbethlehem.com

Informational meeting
Thursday, May 9, 6PM
Nitschmann Middle School

“It is amazing to me that so many people are reacting to this implosion
as entertainment or spectacle rather than a health risk.”
Barbara Diamond

Dr. Nalyn Marcus has operated Marcus Family Chiropractic in Bethlehem since 1991, since 2007 on Eaton Ave., almost directly across the street from the front entrance to the Martin Tower site.

So many questions have been left ignored or unanswered since I began searching for satisfactory preparation answers to prepare and understand the possible ramifications to imploding the Martin Tower. I was told I had good questions but that I was “ahead of the curve.” Please. Our local authorities really were not educated about all of this and definitely not ready to fully protect our community from what is to come as a result of this and the environmental impact left virtually unmentioned. Asbestos out? Yes, “within reason.”

I’ve called everywhere, from EPA, DEP, implosion consultant, City Hall, Dept of Health (who said I was the first call they’d received). It’s been suggested that all will be well and to think of the particulate dust as if it were pollen, to just to keep my doors and windows shut. Are they kidding? My office building and property are literally at Ground Zero: a mere 680 feet from the front door of Martin Tower, with nothing between me and it. This is not biodegradable pollen; this is inorganic waste and will be in the air, coating all in its path, to become runoff in the water, and underfoot. I plan to be at every possible meeting to gather information until I am satisfied that I, my staff, and patients are safe, both now and in the future. Until I am satisfied. This is not just about May 19th: this is about the air quality every day after that. The water, the air, the vegetable gardens, the children, the seniors. The birds in my garden. My lungs. Our lungs! I don’t want a commemorative T-shirt; I want to know that I’m going to breathe healthy air after the implosion, that my business will not suffer with concerned patients avoiding the demolition area. That the air quality in my building will not suffer and be contaminated. I’ve been searching for these answers for weeks. And now, finally, 10 days before the implosion, we’re getting a public meeting. I’m sorry, but that’s very late in the game for our community businesses and families to prepare aptly for an event of this magnitude. No matter what their experience is in the field of demolition, we should have been granted the opportunity for early dissemination of information for clarity and preparation.

This is a big deal. We can’t just rollover as a 21-story building is slated to be pulverized and just trust we’ll all breathe the next day as if nothing big happened. How do we take this all in stride? There’s nothing in the close radius that won’t be coated with unhealthy Tower particulate. We need answers and assurances, and we’re gonna wish we had them weeks ago.

Lord knows I tried.

Nalyn

Gadfly reminds followers that email links to the Mayor and City Council are on the sidebar for easy access. If it is not obvious, the reason Gadfly has been including this footer is to suggest that if you have public health and safety concerns and concerns about tardy City communication (follow-up information was promised mid-April), that you communicate those concerns directly and powerfully to your public officials.

May 9 might be the time to hit the pause button (33)

(33rd in a series on Martin Tower)

Martin Tower demolition May 19
www.martintowerbethlehem.com

Informational meeting
Thursday, May 9, 6PM
Nitschmann Middle School

“It is amazing to me that so many people are reacting to this implosion
as entertainment or spectacle rather than a health risk.”
Barbara Diamond

John Marquette is a retired librarian/archivist, author, historian, and a resident of Bethlehem. His current project is focused on the restoration of the interior of the Archibald Johnston Mansion in Housenick Park. 

Gadfly:

As I review the questions collected by you and the comments amplifying and supporting them — and there are many — I’m starting to wonder what is predicating the Herrick/Ronca rush to demolish Martin Tower and replace it with unimaginative cookiecutter apartments and office buildings.

It’s becoming clearer to me that back office work has long abandoned Manhattan, departing for Long Island City (Citibank), Jersey City, Hoboken, and other five-mile-radius-of-Grand-Central locations. All of those areas are subject to severe climate events, and the infrastructure serving NYC environs is failing without plans or funds to renovate or rehabilitate.

This leaves Pennsylvania in a very good position with our robust telecommunications infrastructure (easing telecommuting), a declining but not failing highway system servicing the distribution centers (mostly at night), great bus service to New York, an elevation of at least 300 feet above sea level, and ample room for more housing stock  — especially affordable luxury housing when compared with NJ/NY market prices.

Herrick and Ronca want in quickly, and to heck with how the 50-plus acres of the plateau over the Monocacy looks from the street or from the air. The Planning Commission rightly recognized their lack of imagination and “suggested” revisions. I fear we’re not going to see much variation from the original sketch plans.

Everybody wants to build. The current owner of the Boyd sees far more profit in building housing than in showing movies or hosting collegiate theater. A former mayor and a local developer, fresh from topping off a southside building with some bonus square footage, are eager to put more than 50 units on a downtown hillside overlooking the creek. And of course there’s the Armory project.

There is no question in my mind that Bethlehem is a far more walkable, desirable, and cosmopolitan city than Allentown. It has far more available space for expansion than Easton. It’s no surprise that developers want to seize opportunities — and quickly — to maximize profits on attractive apartments in a regional market starved for housing inventory.

This is neither the time nor the place to discuss affordable rental housing versus market-rate apartments. This is the time when we ask our elected officials to help us understand why a community more than 275 years old, now a city barely 102 years old needs to be so fiercely aggressive about infill construction with too little attention to planning.

Bethlehem is the Portland, Oregon, of 40 years ago. I say that with pride in what we’ve become and how desirable it is for millennials these days. I do not want us to become the Portland of 2019. If slowing development down means disassembling Martin Tower instead of “go-booming” it and getting sketch plans which integrate planned construction into the landscape, the May 9 meeting is one place we can call for a pause.

I’m thinking about going away the weekend of the 19th and swapping my heat pump filters several times in the succeeding days.

John

Gadfly reminds followers that email links to the Mayor and City Council are on the sidebar for easy access. If it is not obvious, the reason Gadfly has been including this footer is to suggest that if you have public health and safety concerns and concerns about tardy City communication (follow-up information was promised mid-April), that you communicate those concerns directly and powerfully to your public officials.

Letter to the City: health concerns associated with the Martin Tower demolition (32)

(32nd in a series on Martin Tower)

Informational meeting
Thursday, May 9, 6PM
Nitschmann Middle School

Robert Novatnack                                                                      May 6, 2019
Emergency Management Coordinator
City of Bethlehem

Subject: Martin Tower Demolition

Bob:

Many of us are quite concerned about the possible health consequences of the Martin Tower demolition planned for May 19.

Here attached is a list of questions I compiled from followers of the Bethlehem Gadfly blog. We are hoping that the presentations at the meeting May 9 will provide answers to these questions.

We would appreciate prior public notice about the format of the meeting, such as who will be presenting, who others will be “up front,” what the structure will be, and what the plans are for audience participation.

Our questions are in a logical and chronological order under nine headings, which may, in fact, serve as a sensible way of focusing and structuring the meeting.

Ample time for audience participation is crucial, and we suggest a time for direct questions and answers, not just the one-sided communication that characterizes participation at City Council meetings.

Ed Gallagher
ejg1@lehigh.edu
The Bethlehem Gadfly
https://thebethlehemgadfly.com/

cc: Mayor Donchez, City Council President Waldron

———-

QUESTIONS FOR THE MAY 9 MEETING ON THE MARTIN TOWER DEMOLITION

Preliminary Planning:

  • What options besides implosion are available for demolition?
  • Why (according to the newspaper) is implosion used only 1% of the time?
  • What factors (time, cost, efficiency, geography, etc.) made implosion the best option for MT?
  • Where did potential health hazards factor in to the decision? Is it fair to say that other options would provide less of a health hazard?
  • Was the City involved in the planning decision? If so, name those City officials involved. If so, what role did the City play in the decision? If so, did the City have a veto power?
  • Was there any disagreement about the decision to use implosion among any of those consulted in the planning decision? If so, who and for what reason?
  • Is it too late to choose another option for demolition?

The Regulatory Process:

  • What Federal and State laws, regulations, and guidelines govern implosions?
  • What Federal and State approvals had to be obtained? What offices, where located, and who were the principal government agents consulted and responsible for approvals?
  • What City laws, regulations, and guidelines govern implosions?
  • What City approvals had to be obtained? What City offices were consulted and were responsible for the approvals? Who were the key figures in the approval process?
  • What information had to be submitted to the City in order to obtain approval?
  • Were there any disagreements or concerns voiced by City officials during the approval process? If so, who and for what reason?
  • What Federal, State, and City laws, regulations, and guidelines specifically relate to health concerns? Where in the regulations are health concerns addressed?
  • Did the City do its own background check on Controlled Demolition, Inc.? Did the City solicit references? If not, why not? If so, were there any concerns or, more importantly, “red flags”? What was the last job similar in nature and scope to Bethlehem? Who was responsible for the vetting of CD?
  • Did City officials meet with the developer and/or CD during the approval process? Elaborate.
  • Did City officials research prior implosions by CD for health protocols and health consequences? Did CD provide testing data post-demolition in previous cases?
  • Are there any City officials with prior expertise or experiences in implosions?
  • What in the history of demolition in Bethlehem, imploded or otherwise, was pertinent to consideration of MT?
  • What pertinent independent general studies of the health consequences of implosions were studied by the City?

Possible contamination:

  • Is there any asbestos on site? What tests have been done? Where are the results available? Is there independent verification of what asbestos is onsite? If there is asbestos, what will be done to control it?
  • Are there other contaminants onsite? What are their health effects?
  • What will the fallout, the “dust” that the implosion raises contain?
  • Will the developer remove and safely dispose of any building components containing lead and other known contaminants before demolition?
  • Has a fallout zone been determined? Where will the fallout be most intense? How far will the fallout spread?
  • Will there be tests to determine the range and intensity of the fallout? If so, who will do them? Will there be independent tests? Where and when will the test results be available?
  • Will there be tests of indoor air quality?
  • What health effects can we expect from “normal” fallout? What is a worst-case scenario? Are there long-term studies of fallout health consequences after implosions?
  • What will be the effect on the Monocacy Creek? Won’t the water cannons used to suppress the dust wash contamination into the Creek?

Preparation of the townspeople:

  • Should people be worried about health consequences? If so, what should they do to avoid or to mitigate those consequences?
  • Should people with certain health conditions take certain precautions or avoid the area for a period of time?
  • Do you recommend face masks?
  • Has the city made arrangements to ensure that community residents within the fallout zone are provided with high-efficiency particulate air (HEPA) vacuums and “tack mats,” which remove dust from shoes as individuals enter the home?
  • Should homes be sealed up?
  • Will dust lay on cars, outdoor furniture, and so forth, and, if so, should anything be done?
  • Should people be told to avoid lawn mowers, blowers, etc., for a time – things that stir up the dust?
  • Should people be kept off the Little League fields, off the Golf course, out of Burnside, from shopping at Lowe’s, and so forth, for the day?
  • Should people be advised to restrict any kind of activity or to avoid any locations?
  • Has the city made arrangements to ensure that residents, community organizations, faith-based organiza­tions, and city agencies are fully informed about the potential health hazards from dust from the demolition and who to contact if they believe they have been exposed?
  • Has the city made arrangements to ensure training of community block monitors to assist residents with questions and home safety measures?

Demolition day operation:

  • Who is in charge of the operation that day? Who is calling the shots? Does the City have any say in the operation? What officials will be on site?
  • What factors will determine that the demolition is “a go”?
  • What factors would determine a delay or a cancellation of the demolition?
  • What could go wrong? What could seriously go wrong? What is a worst-case scenario?
  • Is wind speed and direction a factor in whether to go or not? Is there such a thing as a desirable and undesirable speed or direction? Or is it “anything goes”?

Post-demolition testing:

  • Will there be tests to determine the range and intensity of the fallout? If so, who will do them? Will there be independent tests? Where and when will the test results be available?
  • In addition to air-quality tests, will there be seismic monitoring, to determine possible impact on building foundations and so forth?
  • Has the city made arrangements for independent testing of the streets and sidewalks surrounding demolished properties to measure the impact of demolition and debris removal on the local environment, and to repeat such tests when clearing the site has been completed?

Post-demolition clean-up:

  • Has the city made arrangements to ensure that all sidewalks, streets, and parking lots in the fallout zone are swept immediately after the demolition and again when debris has been removed?
  • Has the city made arrangements to ensure the developer will cover all dust & debris on the demolition site so it will not be carried off by wind or rain AND require it all to be completely removed as rapidly as possible?
  • Has the city made arrangements to ensure that two inches of topsoil are removed and replaced on all exposed ground within the fallout area?
  • Has the city made made arrangements to ensure the developer has established procedures for safe removal of all debris from demolished buildings, including use of hoses to suppress dust and covering trucks?
  • Do we have to wait for rain to be totally safe?
  • Will it be safe to use the Little League fields, play golf, visit Burnside, use compost, and etc.?

Cost to taxpayers:

  • Who is paying for all the city time and personnel involved here?

Long-term view:

  • People will eventually live, work, visit at the MT site. What safeguards will be put in place to protect their health?
  • Are we learning anything in this process about such things as City-citizen communication and the efficacy of our various laws, regulations, and guidelines that we would want to change as a result of this MT experience?

Draft questions for the May 9 meeting on the Martin Tower demolition (31)

(31st in a series on Martin Tower)

Martin Tower demolition May 19
www.martintowerbethlehem.com

Informational meeting
Thursday, May 9, 6PM
Nitschmann Middle School

“It is amazing to me that so many people are reacting to this implosion
as entertainment or spectacle rather than a health risk.”
Barbara Diamond

Here’s Gadfly’s quick shot at walking through the MT process in chronological order and thinking about the kinds of questions about public health concerns we should hope to have answered at the May 9 meeting.

Ha! looks like a deposition, doesn’t it!

He has incorporated suggestions from a half-dozen followers (some copied from implosion protocols elsewhere), and there’s bound to be some repetition.

Let’s consider this a “draft.”

Now that you’ve seen it, please make suggestions.

If you don’t see your question or concern covered here or covered adequately here, let Gadfly know.

Gadfly would hope to publish some “final” version revised on the basis of further follower ideas around mid-day Monday so that City officials might have time to consider answering our questions at or even before the Thursday meeting.

Preliminary Planning:

  • What options besides implosion are available for demolition?
  • Why (according to the newspaper) is implosion used only 1% of the time?
  • What factors (time, cost, efficiency, geography, etc.) made implosion the best option for MT?
  • Where did potential health hazards factor in to the decision? Is it fair to say that other options would provide less of a health hazard?
  • Was the City involved in the planning decision? If so, name those City officials involved. If so, what role did the City play in the decision? If so, did the City have a veto power?
  • Was there any disagreement about the decision to use implosion among any of those consulted in the planning decision? If so, who and for what reason?
  • Is it too late to choose another option for demolition?

The Regulatory Process:

  • What Federal and State laws, regulations, and guidelines govern implosions?
  • What Federal and State approvals had to be obtained? What offices, where located, and who were the principal government agents consulted and responsible for approvals?
  • What City laws, regulations, and guidelines govern implosions?
  • What City approvals had to be obtained? What City offices were consulted and were responsible for the approvals? Who were the key figures in the approval process?
  • What information had to be submitted to the City in order to obtain approval?
  • Were there any disagreements or concerns voiced by City officials during the approval process? If so, who and for what reason?
  • What Federal, State, and City laws, regulations, and guidelines specifically relate to health concerns? Where in the regulations are health concerns addressed?
  • Did the City do its own background check on Controlled Demolition, Inc.? Did the City solicit references? If not, why not? If so, were there any concerns or, more importantly, “red flags”? What was their last job similar in nature and scope to Bethlehem? Who was responsible for the vetting of CD?
  • Did City officials meet with the developer and/or CD during the approval process? Elaborate.
  • Did City officials research prior implosions by CD for health protocols and health consequences? Did CD provide testing data post-demolition in previous cases?
  • Are there any City officials with prior expertise or experiences in implosions? On what did they depend for their judgments?
  • What in the history of demolition in Bethlehem, imploded or otherwise, was pertinent to consideration of MT?
  • What pertinent independent general studies of the health consequences of implosions were studied by the City?

Possible contaminants:

  • Is there any asbestos on site? What tests have been done? Where are the results available? Is there independent verification of what asbestos is onsite? If there is asbestos, what will be done to control it?
  • Are there other contaminants onsite? What are they, and what are their health effects?
  • What will the fallout, the “dust” that the implosion raises contain?
  • Will the developer remove and safely dispose of any building components containing lead and other known contaminants before demolition?
  • Has a fallout zone been determined? Where will the fallout be most intense? How far will the fallout spread?
  • Will there be tests to determine the range and intensity of the fallout? If so, who will do them? Will there be independent tests? Where and when will the test results be available?
  • Will there be tests of indoor air quality?
  • What health effects can we expect from “normal” fallout? What is a worst-case scenario? Are there long-term independent studies of fallout health consequences after implosions?

Preparation of the townspeople:

  • Should people be worried about health consequences? If so, what should they do to avoid or to mitigate those consequences?
  • Should people with certain health conditions take certain precautions or avoid the area for a period of time?
  • Do you recommend face masks?
  • Has the city made arrangements to ensure that community residents within the fallout zone are provided with high-efficiency particulate air (HEPA) vacuums and “tack mats,” which remove dust from shoes as individuals enter the home?
  • Should homes be sealed up?
  • Will dust lay on cars, outdoor furniture, and so forth, and, if so, should anything be done?
  • Should people be told to avoid lawn mowers, blowers, etc., for a time – things that stir up the dust?
  • Should people be kept off the Little League fields, off the Golf course, out of Burnside, from shopping at Lowe’s, and so forth, for the day?
  • Should people be advised to restrict any kind of activity or to avoid any locations?
  • Has the city made arrangements to ensure that residents, community organizations, faith-based organiza­tions, and city agencies are fully informed about the potential health hazards from dust from the demolition and who to contact if they believe they have been exposed?
  • Has the city made arrangements to ensure training of community block monitors to assist residents with questions and home safety measures?

Demolition day operation:

  • Who is in charge of the operation that day? Who is calling the shots? Does the City have any say in the operation? What officials will be on site?
  • What factors will determine that the demolition is “a go”?
  • What factors would determine a delay or a cancellation of the demolition?
  • What could go wrong? What could seriously go wrong? What is a worst-case scenario?
  • Is wind speed and direction a factor in whether to go or not? Is there such a thing as a desirable and undesirable speed or direction? Or is it “anything goes”?

Post-demolition testing:

  • Will there be tests to determine the range and intensity of the fallout? If so, who will do them? Will there be independent tests? Where and when will the test results be available?
  • In addition to air-quality tests, will there be seismic monitoring, to determine possible impact on building foundations and so forth?
  • Has the city made arrangements for independent testing of the streets and sidewalks surrounding demolished property to measure the impact of demolition and debris removal on the local environment, and to repeat such tests when clearing the site has been completed?

Post-demolition clean-up:

  • Has the city made arrangements to ensure that all sidewalks, streets, and parking lots in the fallout zone are swept immediately after the demolition and again when debris has been removed?
  • Has the city made arrangements to ensure the developer will cover all dust & debris on the demolition site so it will not be carried off by wind or rain AND require it all to be completely removed as rapidly as possible?
  • Has the city made arrangements to ensure that two inches of topsoil are removed and replaced on all exposed ground within the fallout area?
  • Has the city made arrangements to ensure the developer has established procedures for safe removal of all debris from demolished buildings, including use of hoses to suppress dust and covering trucks?
  • Do we have to wait for rain to be totally safe?
  • Will it be safe to use the Little League fields, play golf, visit Burnside, use compost, and etc.?

Long-term view:

  • People will eventually live, work, visit at the MT site. What safeguards will be put in place to protect their health?
  • Are we learning anything in this process about such things as City-citizen communication and the efficacy of our various laws, regulations, and guidelines that we would want to change as a result of this MT experience?

Gadfly reminds followers that email links to the Mayor and City Council are on the sidebar for easy access. If it is not obvious, the reason Gadfly has been including this footer is to suggest that if you have public health and safety concerns and concerns about tardy City communication (follow-up information was promised mid-April), that you communicate those concerns directly and powerfully to your public officials.

Censoring the sensing? (30)

(30th in a series on Martin Tower)
Reprinted from Facebook with permission:
Johanna Brams A Lehigh student I know is involved with doing a study on what will be in this fallout. The city and other local government officials are blocking his attempts to mount his sensing equipment. What are they afraid of?

Controlled Demolition Inc: “Here’s the company that’s going to bring down Martin Tower” (28)

(28th in a series on Martin Tower)

Martin Tower demolition May 19
www.martintowerbethlehem.com

Informational meeting
Thursday, May 9, 6PM
Nitschmann Middle School

“It is amazing to me that so many people are reacting to this implosion
as entertainment or spectacle rather than a health risk.”
Barbara Diamond

“They’re big. They know what they’re doing,” said Robert Novatnack, Bethlehem’s emergency management director. “We’re confident they’ll do it right.”

“They’re the gold standard with a history that goes back to 1947,” said Duane Wagner, a representative of the developers.

Nicole Radzievich, “Here’s the company that’s going to bring down Martin Tower.” Morning Call, April 23, 2019.

  • It made the Riviera, a legendary Las Vegas casino of the Rat Pack era, and Pittsburgh’s Three Rivers Stadium disappear in mere seconds. It’s toppled four, 3,000-ton blast furnaces at U.S. Steel in Youngstown, Ohio, and choreographed a tricky implosion of the remnants of the Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building, the target of the 1995 Oklahoma City bombing.
  • “They’re big. They know what they’re doing,” said Robert Novatnack, Bethlehem’s emergency management director. “We’re confident they’ll do it right.”
  • The owners sought a specialized firm with a national reputation to demolish the 332-foot-tall, cruciform building that once served as the world headquarters of Bethlehem Steel. “They’re the gold standard with a history that goes back to 1947,” said Duane Wagner, a representative of the developers.
  • Controlled Demolition bills itself as imploding tall structures with such precision the building falls within its own footprint.
  • Their portfolio includes buildings in dense urban areas as well as remote locations.
  • Its explosions have been featured in Hollywood, including “Batman: The Dark Knight,” “Lethal Weapon 3,” “Demolition Man” and “Child’s Play.”
  • Less than 1% of all demolition are implosions, according to the association.
  • Much of the interior character of the once opulent offices has been gutted over the last two years as contractors stripped the walls to the beams in order to get remove asbestos in preparation for demolition.

Gadfly reminds followers that email links to the Mayor and City Council are on the sidebar for easy access.

An example of “Responsible Demolition Protocols” (27)

(27th in a series on Martin Tower)

Martin Tower demolition May 19
www.martintowerbethlehem.com

Informational meeting
Thursday, May 9, 6PM
Nitschmann Middle School

“It is amazing to me that so many people are reacting to this implosion
as entertainment or spectacle rather than a health risk.”
Barbara Diamond

 Peter Crownfield is officially retired but spends most of his time working with students in his role as internship coordinator for the Alliance for Sustainable Communities–Lehigh Valley.

Here’s another excerpt from the Annie E. Casey Foundation Report:

“Key Takeaway — Any building redevelopment should not expose residents to physical health hazards. Clear, detailed demolition protocols offer a concise guide for policymakers interested in improving demolition safety.”

and see the following “Responsible Demolition Protocols.”

EBDI Responsible Demolition Protocols

I’ve highlighted several that seem particularly relevant, and I’d like to note that all of this should be considered part of the demolition process, all costs of which should be paid by the developer.

Peter

Gadfly reminds followers that email links to the Mayor and City Council are on the sidebar for easy access.

Informed (and informing) approach to demolition in Baltimore (26)

(26th in a series on Martin Tower)

Martin Tower demolition May 19
www.martintowerbethlehem.com

Informational meeting
Thursday, May 9, 6PM
Nitschmann Middle School

“It is amazing to me that so many people are reacting to this implosion
as entertainment or spectacle rather than a health risk.”
Barbara Diamond

 Peter Crownfield is officially retired but spends most of his time working with students in his role as internship coordinator for the Alliance for Sustainable Communities–Lehigh Valley.

One more thought, Gadfly. In Baltimore, they learned from a project sponsored by the Annie E. Casey Foundation. One of many important points in their report was an emphasis on engaging the community in developing the plans:

“Project leaders convened an independent panel of outside experts to assess the
demolition protocols in consultation with community residents, advocate for needed
changes, and review test results.… the panel met several times with
community members to answer questions related to demolition safety, discuss
demolition protocols, review test results and relay community concerns to the
project’s sponsors.”

Bethlehem could learn a lot from informed approaches like this.

[Peter previously posted that he thinks Baltimore is one of the cities that banned this type of demolition.]

Peter

Gadfly reminds followers that email links to the Mayor and City Council are on the sidebar for easy access.

“If they want to call us CAVE people, let’s redefine it to mean *Care* About Virtually Everything (& Everyone)” (25)

(25th in a series on Martin Tower)

Martin Tower demolition May 19
www.martintowerbethlehem.com

Informational meeting
Thursday, May 9, 6PM
Nitschmann Middle School

Peter Crownfield is officially retired but spends most of his time working with students in his role as internship coordinator for the Alliance for Sustainable Communities–Lehigh Valley.

Gadfly:

The accepted ways of doing things (and assuming that elected officials & government agencies are protecting the health & welfare of the public) have produced global warming & climate change as well as emerging public health crises resulting from environmental contamination with chemicals and products that cause disease, cancer, and endocrine disruption that can take up to 2 generations to manifest.

The suggestion that the [Martin Tower] demolition experts have experience and know what to do is alarming. It should be obvious to any thinking person that continuing along the path of “business as usual” is folly.

If they want to call us CAVE people, let’s redefine it to mean *Care* About Virtually Everything (& Everyone).

Peter

Gadfly reminds followers that email links to the Mayor and City Council are on the sidebar for easy access.

“I want to know about the compost center” (24)

(24th in a series on Martin Tower)

Martin Tower demolition May 19
www.martintowerbethlehem.com

Local citizen of West Bethlehem, Sarah Andrew.

Gadfly-

I do not know the better way to get comments to you — email you or comment on the blog post? Anyway, I want to know about the compost center. A worker there told me his boss said they are working that day, which seems crazy.

Also I get all of my mulch and compost from there, but won’t it be (even more) toxic afterwards and possibly not safe for us to use to grow food? Or touch?

I’m now convinced it’s not best practice to take my small children to watch from Nitschmann.

Sarah

Gadfly reminds followers that email links to the Mayor and City Council are on the sidebar for easy access.

“It is amazing to me that so many people are reacting to this implosion as entertainment or spectacle rather than a health risk.” (23)

(23rd in a series on Martin Tower)

Martin Tower demolition May 19
www.martintowerbethlehem.com

“It is amazing to me that so many people are reacting to this implosion
as entertainment or spectacle rather than a health risk.”
Barbara Diamond

Barbara Diamond enjoys retirement as Lehigh University Director of Foundation Relations by engaging in various activities and organizations hopefully for the betterment of the community. Her particular interests at the moment are preventing gun violence, local government ethics reform, and Bethlehem Democratic Committee work.

Gadfly,

Thank you very much for raising awareness about the potential health risks posed by the implosion. Many thanks to Marty for doing the research.

Steve and I have been trying to learn more about what measures the city is taking to protect the public from any remaining asbestos plus other noxious agents like mold, lead paint, and building materials that will be aerosolized during demolition. The more we looked into this, the more we are concerned by the lack of public information and possibly the lack of adequate safety measures.

We attended the planning commission meeting on 4/11 where Steve asked for some information but was told by the chair that no questions would be entertained about anything except the plan. He advised that the city had created a website to answer such questions. When we went to the website martintowerbethlehem.com, we did not find specific information about what measures are being taken — just vague assurance that they were — such as enforcing a safe distance.

I called the state Health Dept Wednesday 4/17 and was referred to the DEP and eventually to the regional county air quality division of the DEP. They are coordinating the demolition. I spoke with Matt Bardzilouskas (570.826.5440). He told me he had just started his position earlier that week. I believe he is district supervisor in the air quality division. He told me that during a walk through Martin Tower that day, 4/17, a small amount of asbestos was found.

In response to my question, he said that the DEP will not certify that there is no public health risk from asbestos from the demolition of the building and doesn’t know if anyone would. He was not aware of the EPA or DEP being present at demolition and doubts they will monitor air quality (WFMZ reported that PA DEP would be present and monitor on the day. http://www.wfmz.com/news/lehigh-valley/dep-will-monitor-air-quality-concerns-at-martin-tower-implosion/1065121598). I asked if there was any plan to monitor air quality following the implosion, and he said no. There are no regulations requiring that. It is up to the responsible parties (developers and the demolition company they hire) to do that but not mandatory. I find this troubling. The only measure he knew of at that time was to put up chain link on each floor inside and line with fabric.

I spoke with Matt again on Friday 4/19. He told me that at the meeting the day before, which included the demo contractors, EMS, and others, they have some preliminary plans to suppress dust with watersprays (similar to snowmaking equipment) and water cannons that can be elevated. He believes the demo company is planning to monitor air quality before, during, and after, but he was not firm on that. Also not sure if the data will be public. I asked him who would be on site with authority to delay or postpone demo in case of high winds (which is a “best practice”; he said the contractor decides and, Matt said, the only reason the contractor will delay is if someone is in the blast zone (he said this with certainty). He said that he doesn’t know about any discussion of what to do in case of high winds (there were sidebar meetings that he was not part of).

Of concern, he mentioned that they have never dealt with an implosion of this magnitude (his area is air quality and dust suppression). He said there is no requirement for a permit that would be based on meeting air quality measures; the demo company just has to be making a reasonable effort. I asked him if he would leave town that day if he lived here, but he said he wouldn’t get into his personal conduct.

I am glad the city has arranged a public hearing, but it is late. The city has not done a good job informing people about this situation. They shut down the comments aspect of their site. I think they should be providing the public with more information about how they are adhering to best practices for demolition of an asbestos-laden building. I have a feeling that there is more risk to the public than people realize and maybe more can be done [for safety] than is being considered — for example having an independent entity monitor air quality or having someone there who could postpone the implosion in case of high winds. I hope you might help with getting this information to the public and maybe encourage the adherence to best practices.

Given the close proximity of baseball playing fields, the Rose Garden Park, Nitschmann school grounds, Municipal golf course, and other public spaces, I would like to know the health risks to people of contaminated dust that can settle and be kicked up. Will the city, DEP or some other agency monitor the soil after the implosion?

Barbara

Gadfly reminds followers that email links to the Mayor and City Council are on the sidebar for easy access.

Meeting on MT demolition May 9 (22)

(22nd in a series on Martin Tower)

Martin Tower demolition May 19
www.martintowerbethlehem.com

From the City: May 3, 2019                       12:51 PM

There will be a public informational meeting, hosted by the Martin Tower property owners, representatives from the demolition company Controlled Demo Inc., along with other governmental agencies, regarding the May 19th demolition of Martin Tower on May 9, 2019 at 6 p.m., at Nitschmann Middle School. City of Bethlehem Public Safety representatives will be in attendance. *This meeting is intended for the general public.*

Gadfly strongly suggests that those concerned with public health and safety from the demolition should prepare for the meeting, should just not blindly accept any “expert” opinion provided by the official representatives at the meeting.

And that official representation is a bit vague. Will the state be there? Our City Health Bureau? Is the representation vague because this was a hastily arranged meeting because Martin Romeril was burning up the phone waves this morning? I think we need to know the line-up well in advance of May 9. And if we see a gap, we need a chance to plug it.

I think Martin would agree that he did not do systematic in-depth research about the effects of implosion, but his offer of these two items might be a starting point about things to consider:

1) A 2003 article “Spectators Discouraged from Watching Building Demolitions” about “one of the first studies of its kind [to fill] a research gap and respond to community concerns about the impact of such events on community air quality.”

  • The researchers studied the quality of air within a four-block radius immediately after the August 19, 2000, implosion of a 22-story building in east Baltimore, Md. Samples were taken at seven indoor locations and four outdoor sites. They found that immediately after the implosion, concentrations of airborne dust particles were as much as 3,000 times higher than they had been prior to the demolition. As expected, sites nearest to the implosion had a more dramatic and earlier peak when compared to sites further away. Even at the furthest site, seven and one-half blocks from the implosion, there was a 20-fold increase in particulate matter. The good news, according to the researchers, is that the peaks were very short-lived, lasting only 15-20 minutes. No measurable effect was found upwind of the implosion, nor in the indoor sample sites. The researchers suggest that remaining upwind of a building demolition and staying indoors offers protection from high outdoor concentrations of dust particles.
  • The spectator hazard can be avoided easily and completely by simply staying at home and watching the event on television. The fix is not so easy for the surrounding community. Our results suggest that staying indoors with the doors and windows closed will offer some protection.

2) A 2005 article on an 1998 implosion “The Implosion of the Calgary General Hospital:
Ambient Air Quality Issues” :

  • The ability of an implosion to effectively aerosolize building materials indicates that all lead painted surfaces and nonfriable and friable asbestos-containing materials should be removed from a building during the preparatory work. The
    implosion dust cloud affected ambient air quality up to 20 kilometers downwind and suggests that public advisory zones around implosion sites should be extended. The necessity for large advisory zones in densely populated areas will be a challenge for the effective public communication of the health risks, mitigation, and cleanup strategies. We suggest that implosions should be prohibited in densely populated areas.
  • Public advisories to mitigate personal exposure and indoor migration of the implosion dust cloud constituents should extend to 10 or 20 km around an implosion site.
  • Air sampling conducted after the implosion indicated there were several stationary short-term air quality issues. As well, the implosion-created dust cloud traveled much further than expected, out to 20 km, and, thus, needs to be considered when
    communicating preventive measures to the public. Furthermore, all sources of hazardous materials, such as Pb-based paints and nonfriable asbestos, should be identified and removed before the implosion so that the airborne release of
    these hazards is prevented. Problematic issues surrounding public health protection in affected areas that could extend 10 or 20 km downwind from an implosion site suggest that implosions should be prohibited in metropolitan areas.

For illustrative purposes, Martin provided maps showing city area in radii of 1, 10, 20 kms (.6, 6, 12 miles) of MT. Find your home. Find your loved ones’ homes.

Martin Tower ONE KM dust radius map

Martin Tower TEN KM dust radius map

Martin Tower TWENTY KM dust radius map

Now, these studies may be severely dated. In 1-2 decades no doubt the technology of removing asbestos has significantly improved. In 1-2 decades no doubt more studies have been done on the impact of implosion demolitions.

As Martin said, “maybe there is no danger at all.”

The lack of communication seems the prime problem.

It feels late in the game to be staging such a meeting. The City web site promised a follow-up “mid-April.”

But we need to know what questions to ask, what procedures for safety are being used, what studies they are based on, and we need to do some of our own research.

The Gadfly blog could be a clearing house for questions and information. Then someone might volunteer to organize. Let us know what you are thinking. Let us know what you find. Let us know what we should read.

It might also be well to prepare a worse-case outcome of the meeting. Suppose the collective “we” are not pleased by what we hear May 9? How would we seek an injunction to halt the demolition? Any advice on that from Gadfly followers?

Gadfly reminds followers that email links to the Mayor and City Council are on the sidebar for easy access.

Council cares about MT implosion, waiting for meeting with the Administration (21)

(21st in a series on Martin Tower)

Martin Tower demolition May 19
www.martintowerbethlehem.com

 Olga Negrón is a Bethlehem Councilwoman.

Gadfly:

I really appreciated all the research that Martin Romeril has done on MT implosion and share it with some of us but I’m shocked that he stated members of city council don’t care! I know that at least Dr. Van Wirt and I have been talking about it and asking the administration many questions we have especially after receiving Marty’s research. I have already said “The Sky is falling” but as an elected official, I can’t just start running around screaming “the sky is falling” (yes I remember the cartoons!). I see my role as seeking answers from the administration and get answers not just for my own knowledge but to better inform our constituents. We are appalled by the way the administration is dealing with this issues not just with the public but with members of council and we (members of council) are still waiting to know when are we meeting to “talk about it.” We were told we would know by May 2, today is May 3rd! At this point Gadfly, like you, I’m going from looking for the best spot to watch the historical moment to I’m sealing my house and changing my flight to Puerto Rico to May 18 instead of May 22! But just because I’m not screaming out loud the sky is falling, doesn’t mean I don’t care!

Olga

Gadfly reminds followers that email links to the Mayor and City Council are on the sidebar for easy access.

DEP is the joke (20)

(20th in a series on Martin Tower)

Martin Tower demolition May 19
www.martintowerbethlehem.com

Peter Crownfield is officially retired but spends most of his time working with students in his role as internship coordinator for the Alliance for Sustainable Communities–Lehigh Valley.

Gadfly:

Why does the City remain silent on these important questions?

At a minimum, this is a failure of transparency; at worst, it raises a question of whether residents’ health & wellbeing will be protected from ingredients known or likely to be in the dust cloud, including lead (from paint), mold spores, fine plastic particles, and the unknown ingredients in the concrete used in the original building. Even small deficiencies in the asbestos removal process would add another set of risks.

City officials take an oath to uphold the Constitution of PA, which includes a provision that ‘The people have a right to clean air, pure water, …’.

Bethlehem has not seen fit to require floor-by-floor demolition as many cities do, and it apparently relies on the DEP to protect the health of people. Anyone who has any experience with DEP knows that is a joke.

Peter

Gadfly reminds followers that email links to the Mayor and City Council are on the sidebar for easy access.

The fallout from Martin Tower (19)

(19th in a series on Martin Tower)

Martin Tower demolition May 19
www.martintowerbethlehem.com

Ha! Not political fallout. Though there surely has been enough of that, we might all agree.

So, no, not that — demolition fallout May 19.

Bad dust.

Danger to health.

Now Gadfly — who lives less than a mile away — has joked about this twice here on the blog.

What he calls “charnel humor.”  “Charnel” — good SAT word.

At the Environmental Advisory Council meeting last night Martin Romeril reminded him that he shouldn’t be joking.

Steve Diamond tried to ask about health and safety matters related to the demolition at the April 11 Planning Commission meeting on the proposed MT site design, but he was quickly advised by the Chair that the PC was not the time nor the place for such discussion.

Last night Martin pointed out with some urgency that residents were not getting good information. Listen here to his concise formulation of his commonsense concern (taking just 4-5 mins.), sharing some potentially troubling information about his contact with City officials and about the range of implosion fallout from a quick online search.

  • “My concern is for the spread of dust from a potential dustcloud.”
  • “I have shared this with a member of City Council, but I’ve been informed that City Council doesn’t care, and the City has assured us that they are taking care of everything.”
  •  “[The City EMS director] said no one from the state has talked with him about dust mitigation or anything to do with the implosion, and he’s not aware that the City actually has a plan to deal with that.”
  • “[Martin] created a map of a 1km radius [.6mi] which is always where the heaviest dust falls.”
  • “[Martin cited a study showing] a 1km radius of heavy dust, and traces of stuff up to 10 and 20kms away.”
  • “[After citing several specific examples of legitimate concerns, Martin recognized that] maybe there is no danger at all from the asbestos . . . but I’m concerned that people who are not making a lot of money of this decision are not asking questions or providing useful information to the public.”

Gadfly lives within the heavy dust zone. Hundreds, maybe thousands of others do also.

Discussion at the meeting included trust that there must be a plan, trust that state regulations must be followed, trust that the City must be doing all that it should for health and safety.

Trust.

Here’s what the City says on the specially designed informational web site linked at the top of the page: “All necessary provisions to ensure the safety, health and welfare, of the public are being taken for this large undertaking. ”

Trust.

The last message on that City web site was April 2 — a month ago — and really focused mainly on viewing and traffic details.

Steve and Martin have Gadfly wondering if — far from finding a good spot to view the implosion — he should stay away for the day, or two days, or seal the house.

Martin is no Chicken-Little claiming the sky is falling.  He’s just asking the absolutely right questions.

No joke.

Martin Tower and the Styles of Public Participation (18)

(18th in a series on Martin Tower)

Martin Tower demolition May 19
www.martintowerbethlehem.com

Lot going on. And Gadfly has let several topics fall behind. Martin Tower one of them.

He has a kind of wrap-up post on this current phase of the MT doings in mind, but first he wants to use the public response to the proposed MT plan for a different purpose.

The Gadfly project slogan is “Good conversation builds community.”

About a month ago in a private email a Gadfly follower called him “the Pied Piper of civic engagement.”

Now that was striking. A powerful branding. But kind of embarrassing and disconcerting too.

He tried to laugh it off. Then forget it. Wouldn’t work.

Might as well own it.

No question Gadfly before he was Gadfly fell in love with the sound of your voices in the public comment spaces at City Council meetings.

And wanted to capture them.

And — here goes — draw even more people to speak/write out.

Pied Pipering.

Somewhere the professor who reinvented himself as Gadfly learned that the Aztec word for teacher was “one who makes you put on a face.”

He would say that the goal of his classes was to make you put on a face. To speak/write your own individual thoughts in your own individual way and thereby to feel empowered and thereby to feel individual — and thereby to have a “face” recognized and respected by others.

Gadfly wants everybody to post here. Gadfly wants everybody to speak at Council. (President Waldron just fainted.)

But some people say they can’t be like you, Gadfly, without realizing that the professor who reinvented himself as Gadfly is painfully shy and would wall himself in his office the hour before class mustering courage. Listen to the modest proposal audio he posted a short while ago, and you can hear his voice crack part way through as the mustered courage wanes.

Everyone can do it. In his or her own way.

And I want to make that point by contrasting the polar opposite styles of Diane Szabo Backus and Brian Hillard during public comment at the April 16 City Council meeting, available on video here:

Brian (begin min. 13:10) is soft-spoken, calm, sober, focused, rational, cerebral, speaking a polished piece of writing.*** Beautiful.

Diane (begin min. 5:30) is “a little nervous,” reading from what look like handwritten scratched notes on a tear-off pad any of us might doodle on at the kitchen table, emotional, so emotional that her body has to move, her arms wave, her fists pump, her fingers point, her knees buckle and dance, she turns to the left, she turns to the right, she ups the Council president’s response to a question she shouldn’t have asked, she confronts the Mayor. Beautiful.

Great complementary styles.

Head and heart.

We need them both and all the shades in-between.

When will you put on your face?

*** Be sure to read Brian’s essay. It’s very good: Hillard – Martin Tower Development Proposal