Records

Records - Dec. 24, 2012

December 22, 2012
Records listings from the Dec. 24, 2012, issue of IBJ.
More

Records - Dec. 17, 2012

December 15, 2012
Records listings from the Dec. 17, 2012, issue of IBJ.
More

Records - Dec. 10, 2012

December 8, 2012
Records listings from the Dec. 10, 2012, issue of IBJ.
More

Records - Dec. 3, 2012

December 1, 2012
Records listings from the Dec. 3, 2012, issue of IBJ.
More

Records - Nov. 26, 2012

November 24, 2012
Records listings from the Nov. 26, 2012, issue of IBJ.
More

Records - Nov. 19, 2012

November 17, 2012
Records listings from the Nov. 19, 2012, issue of IBJ.
More

Records - Nov. 12, 2012

November 10, 2012
Records listings from the Nov. 12, 2012, issue of IBJ.
More

Records - Nov. 5, 2012

November 3, 2012
Records listings from the Nov. 5, 2012, issue of IBJ.
More

Records - Oct. 29, 2012

October 27, 2012
 IBJ Staff
Records listings from the Oct. 29, 2012, issue of IBJ.
More

Records - Oct. 22, 2012

October 20, 2012
 IBJ Staff
Records listings from the Oct. 22, 2012, issue of IBJ.
More

Records - Oct. 15, 2012

October 13, 2012
 IBJ Staff
Records listings from the Oct. 15, 2012, issue of IBJ.
More

Records - Oct. 8, 2012

October 6, 2012
 IBJ Staff
Records listings from the Oct. 8, 2012, issue of IBJ.
More

Records - Oct. 1, 2012

September 29, 2012
Records listings from the Oct. 1, 2012, issue of IBJ.
More

Records - Sept. 24, 2012

September 22, 2012
Records listings from the Sept. 24, 2012, issue of IBJ.
More

Records - Sept. 17, 2012

September 15, 2012
Records listings from the Sept. 17, 2012, issue of IBJ.
More

Records - Sept. 10, 2012

September 8, 2012
Records listings from the Sept. 10, 2012, issue of IBJ.
More

Records - Sept. 3, 2012

September 1, 2012
Records listings from the Sept. 3, 2012, issue of IBJ.
More

Records - Aug. 27, 2012

August 25, 2012
Records listings from the Aug. 27, 2012, issue of IBJ.
More

Records - Aug. 20, 2012

August 18, 2012
 IBJ Staff
Records listings from the Aug. 20, 2012, issue of IBJ.
More

Records - Aug. 13, 2012

August 11, 2012
Records listings from the Aug. 13, 2012, issue of IBJ.
More

Records - Aug. 6, 2012

August 4, 2012
Records listings from the Aug. 6, 2012, issue of IBJ.
More

Records - July 30, 2012

July 28, 2012
Records listings from the July 30, 2012, issue of IBJ.
More

Records - July 23, 2012

July 21, 2012
Records listings from the July 23, 2012, issue of IBJ.
More

Records - July 16, 2012

July 14, 2012
Records listings from the July 16, 2012, issue of IBJ.
More

Records - July 9, 2012

July 7, 2012
Records listings from the July 9, 2012, issue of IBJ.
More
Page  << 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 >> pager
Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ on Facebook:
Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ's Tweets on these topics:
 
Subscribe to IBJ
  1. John, unfortunately CTRWD wants to put the tank(s) right next to a nature preserve and at the southern entrance to Carmel off of Keystone. Not exactly the kind of message you want to send to residents and visitors (come see our tanks as you enter our city and we build stuff in nature preserves...

  2. 85 feet for an ambitious project? I could shoot ej*culate farther than that.

  3. I tried, can't take it anymore. Untill Katz is replaced I can't listen anymore.

  4. Perhaps, but they've had a very active program to reduce rainwater/sump pump inflows for a number of years. But you are correct that controlling these peak flows will require spending more money - surge tanks, lines or removing storm water inflow at the source.

  5. All sewage goes to the Carmel treatment plant on the White River at 96th St. Rainfall should not affect sewage flows, but somehow it does - and the increased rate is more than the plant can handle a few times each year. One big source is typically homeowners who have their sump pumps connect into the sanitary sewer line rather than to the storm sewer line or yard. So we (Carmel and Clay Twp) need someway to hold the excess flow for a few days until the plant can process this material. Carmel wants the surge tank located at the treatment plant but than means an expensive underground line has to be installed through residential areas while CTRWD wants the surge tank located further 'upstream' from the treatment plant which costs less. Either solution works from an environmental control perspective. The less expensive solution means some people would likely have an unsightly tank near them. Carmel wants the more expensive solution - surprise!

ADVERTISEMENT