Residents urged the Lebanon City Council on 27 October 2026 to reconsider proposed locations for a new wastewater treatment plant, arguing that residential areas and neighborhoods should not be included in the site selection. The debate centered on four candidate sites and a resolution to remove one of them from consideration, which was withdrawn from the meeting agenda. Lebanon Democrat
Residents challenge four candidate sites
During public comment at the 20 October council meeting, residents asked why some candidate locations remained under consideration despite being zoned residential or located near residential neighborhoods. Lebanon Democrat
The sites identified in the report were Site 7 near Oriole Drive and Horn Springs Road; Site 13, the Rockwood property on Hartmann Drive; Site 13a, which adds residential property to meet minimum acreage requirements; and Site 22 on Maple Hill Road. Site 13 is approximately 2,000 feet north of the current wastewater plant. Lebanon Democrat
Resident Wendy Betzold said the current sewer-system location should be the top choice because a system could be integrated into the existing water plant with no additional footprint. “Even if it costs more, if it’s a possibility, that is what should be what it is decided on,” she said. Lebanon Democrat
Other speakers proposed more compact technology that could allow use of the current treatment-plant site on Hartmann Drive and the Rockwood property without expansion into residential areas. Lebanon Democrat
Council resolution withdrawn and planned for resubmission
Ward 1 Councilor Joey Carmack had introduced a resolution to remove Site 22 from consideration, but retracted it from the meeting agenda. He said he planned to resubmit a resolution that would also cover the non-Rockwood portion of Site 13; both locations are in Ward 1. Lebanon Democrat
The report did not give a final selection date, plant capacity, estimated cost or construction schedule. It also did not state whether the council adopted any site exclusion at the meeting, leaving the location decision unresolved as the proposed resubmission proceeds. Lebanon Democrat
Specification read
The project’s scale was not reported: the source provided no design flow in cubic metres per day, population equivalent or service-area loading, so no defensible capacity conversion can be made. Lebanon Democrat
The decision bears directly on site selection and treatment-train configuration. A municipal wastewater plant of this type would generally need preliminary screening, primary clarification, biological treatment and tertiary treatment or disinfection; applicable flow and effluent requirements are needed before selecting among A2O, MBBR, SBR, MBR or other biological processes. DAF may be relevant where solids or phosphorus management must be tightened, while ZLD would require additional energy, pretreatment and solids-management inputs. Municipal wastewater equipment can be evaluated against the selected process once the City confirms hydraulic loading, permit limits and land constraints. Industries We Serve
For operators evaluating a compact plant for a constrained urban site, the reported focus on minimizing footprint means that treatment capacity, footprint, chemical deliveries, solids removal and integration with existing infrastructure should be checked together. If your plant looks like a compact municipal installation with unresolved hydraulic loading, no reported influent BOD or COD data, land constraints and neighborhood scrutiny, this means the technical shortlist should be developed only after those operating inputs are confirmed. The source also reports residents’ concerns about chemical deliveries and the integration of a system into the existing water-plant location, making logistics and site compatibility central screening criteria rather than afterthoughts. Lebanon Democrat
Related treatment-process background is available in the comparison of DAF vs Clarifier for Pulp & Paper Wastewater in Pine Bluff (2026) and the overview of DAF vs. Clarifier for Pulp & Paper Wastewater: 2026 Guide.
FAQ
What capacity and flow basis will the Lebanon sewer plant need?
The report does not state design flow, average or peak wastewater loading, population equivalent, or existing-plant performance data. Those inputs are necessary to convert service needs into cubic metres per day and size preliminary screening, primary clarification, biological treatment, and tertiary or disinfection equipment. The source identifies the candidate sites and the unresolved siting debate, but provides no basis for calculating a plant capacity. Lebanon Democrat
How much will the project cost, and how long will delivery take?
Neither cost nor delivery timing was reported. The council had not selected a final location, and the source provides no capital estimate, procurement schedule, construction duration, bid date or delivery schedule. A buyer or municipal evaluator would therefore need a selected site, confirmed treatment requirements, design basis and procurement calendar before supplier pricing or lead-time comparisons would be meaningful. Lebanon Democrat
What should be compared when selecting equipment for a compact urban site?
The comparison should cover the confirmed design flow, required treatment performance, physical footprint and integration with existing infrastructure. Residents also raised concerns about truck access for treatment chemicals and the handling of sludge, making logistics part of the technical evaluation. The source did not report a preferred technology, equipment award or vendor selection. Lebanon Democrat
Has the council removed any candidate sewer-plant site?
No final site exclusion was reported. Councilor Joey Carmack withdrew his resolution concerning Site 22 from the meeting agenda and said he planned to resubmit it to cover the non-Rockwood portion of Site 13. The candidate-site debate therefore remained open when the article was published on 27 October 2026. Lebanon Democrat
