Demolitionforum.com Forums  

Register Now! Demolition Tool Store - Demolition Gallery - Classifieds - Advertising Info - Forum Guidelines

Welcome to Demolition Forum, the only Online Source for Demolition News and Discussion.

You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access. By joining our free community you will have access to reading the latest in Industry News, Read and learn from the experts, Upload your own demolition photos to your photo album, read and learn from the experts, and many other special features.

Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today!

If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.


Go Back   Demolitionforum.com Forums > DEMOLITION TOPICS > Industry News

Industry News Updated Every Weekday! Read and share the latest in demolition news from around the world. Where you can read industry press releases or add your own.


Why not Register? or Log in to remove these ads
Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #1 (permalink)  
Old 12-07-2006, 07:33 AM
James's Avatar
Administrator
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Kent, WA.
Posts: 4,294
Send a message via AIM to James Send a message via MSN to James
Default State air regulators fight BYU dorm demolition plan

Plans to demolish outdated Brigham Young University dormitories are causing a dust-up.

The university, which wants to implode two of the Deseret Towers residence buildings, heads to the state Air Quality Board today to request a variance from regulations that limit dust.

Its request pits the Provo-based university against air-quality staff who say the implosion would send a thick cloud of powdered rubble into the air - a cloud dense enough to exceed state standards. The request also puts the Air Quality Board in the uneasy spot of being asked to grant an exception to the university that it generally denies to businesses and other institutions.

BYU spokeswoman Carri Jenkins said the university wants to begin demolition as soon as students go on Christmas break Dec. 22, and clean up the site by their return on Jan. 8. Using specially mixed explosives to collapse a building in on itself costs about the same as using a wrecking ball, but it would mean less disruption, she said.

"It was determined this would be the most efficient way to demolish these buildings," Jenkins said.

Both seven-floor buildings, casualties of the switch to apartment-style housing, have been empty all fall. Each holds 264 students.

The Division of Air Quality has discussed the plan with BYU at several meetings, said Robert W. Ford, manager of the state air division's hazardous air pollutants section. Staff analysis suggests implosion will mean too much dust at the site and off the university boundaries.

"From our perspective, we cannot support the variance based on the information that as been submitted so far," he said.

Meanwhile, an environmental group, the Wasatch Clean Air Coalition, has voiced concern that lead from old paint and asbestos from old insulation, flooring and ceiling tiles might drift into surrounding neighborhoods.

“It becomes powdered and it goes out in the dust that's emitted," said the group's policy coordinator, Kathy VanDame. "It goes into the soil. Children can play in it. People can breathe it in."
__________________
Still just visiting? Come say Hello!
We have some open advertising spots available
Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links

Why not Register? or Log in to remove these ads
  #2 (permalink)  
Old 12-07-2006, 09:06 AM
NukeWorker's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 845
Default

It looks like the plan got kiboshed.

http://www.heraldextra.com/content/view/202332/

It might be a job for "Myth Busters" to see which method generates the most dust.
Reply With Quote
  #3 (permalink)  
Old 12-07-2006, 06:17 PM
NukeWorker's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 845
Default

This is going to be problematical for the next 5 implosions that are scheduled in Salt Lake City.
Reply With Quote
  #4 (permalink)  
Old 12-08-2006, 06:59 AM
NukeWorker's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 845
Default

Make that the next 4 implosions.

http://www.desnews.com/dn/view/0,1249,650213482,00.html
Reply With Quote
  #5 (permalink)  
Old 12-13-2006, 10:07 AM
NukeWorker's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 845
Default

Why did they want to shoot these buildings in the first place? It took 1 excavator 2 days to demolish 1 building. How can they make the statement that implosion is more "cost efficient"?
Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links

Why not Register? or Log in to remove these ads
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On
Forum Jump


Forum Sponsors



Partners
Dexpan Silent Demo
Diamond Tools SuperCenter
High Reach Demo
Scrap Metal Prices
EnviroBidNet
Heavy Equipment Forums
Lawn Cafe
Phillyblast
Excavator Trader
Home Theater Forum

Advertising Partner


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 05:48 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.2.0
© 2005-2008 DemolitionForum - All Rights Reserved