Browse
Search
Minutes - 19920917
OrangeCountyNC
>
Board of County Commissioners
>
Minutes - Approved
>
1990's
>
1992
>
Minutes - 19920917
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
4/6/2010 11:24:26 AM
Creation date
4/6/2010 11:24:23 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
BOCC
Date
9/17/1992
Meeting Type
Special Meeting
Document Type
Minutes
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
11
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
for a landfill. Leonard Joyce noted that for the four sites under <br />ration at this time he has the actual acreage that will be needed for <br />ill. He reported the following information: <br />SITE AMEBAS TOTAL ACREAGE USABLE ACREAGE FILL AREA <br />2 1,068 818 506 300-450 acres <br />9 1,113 824 598 100-200 acres <br />it 827 1,643 1,134 350-450 acres <br />17 475 853 514 150-250 acres <br />In answer to a question from Commissioner Insko on the number of years <br />a landfill of this size could be used, Mr. Joyce stated that, making a <br />relative comparison without knowing anything about the subsurface conditions <br />but purely because of the size of acreage, site OC11 would last slightly <br />longer than site OC17. <br />QUESTION: (Two similar questions) (1) Taking into account our present <br />landfill rate of acreage use, new federal regulations, and mandated state <br />reduction goals, why wouldn't less than 200 acres of land be sufficient for <br />the next 20 years? (2) The next landfill will likely be much smaller than the <br />total area of the sites now under consideration. What are the factors <br />(buffers, for example) that make the landfill sites as large as they are? Can <br />we cite smaller landfill site sizes and begin talking in those terms? <br />ANSWER: Mr. Joyce stated that throughout this process, the logic has been <br />to go from a general size down to a more specific size based on the process <br />they have been following. The acreage quoted was based on work as it <br />progressed. It is important to understand and remember that, at this point <br />in the process, engineers have not been on any of the sites and know nothing <br />about the subsurface conditions. His advice to the committee throughout this <br />process is that it is more prudent at this point to start with a larger area <br />and work toward a smaller area. There will be information they will discover <br />as the process continues that will reduce these sizes. Some of the <br />possibilities that may reduce the acreage include (1) knowing the physical <br />features and limitations these may impose - groundwater elevations, depth of <br />soil, depth to rock, wetlands, and drainage ways, (2) when developing a <br />landfill site, understanding how many soil resources (quantity and <br />characteristics) are present on that particular site for the entire life of <br />that site. He emphasized that within these sizes identified, there likely <br />will be areas that may not be able to be used for development or may need to <br />be used for borrow areas which will further reduce the amount of development <br />area and impact the life of that particular site. When the final decision on <br />a particular site is made, the issues will be the impact of that site to the <br />neighbors, noise, dust, odors and traffic problems. If there is a site that <br />is large enough and there is some room to apply some additional buffers to <br />compensate for some of these concerns, the neighbors can be easier to work <br />with. Another issue is that.. once a tract of land is identified, that all <br />owners of the property may not want to sell. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.