Orange County NC Website
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015 Laserfiche. All rights reserved.
Commissioner Brawn made reference to the Solid Waste Ordinance and said that her <br />understanding was that the ordinance was to be developed to deal with burning in the County <br />because the counties did not have the ability to do this. Municipalities do have that authority and <br />regularly monitor and oversee burning or do not allow it at all. She said that several issues have <br />come up about the joint planning area. She thought that the municipalities would be enforcing the <br />burning policies within the joint planning. <br />County Attorney Geoffrey Gledhill said that there were two pieces to the puzzle. The first <br />piece is the Solid Waste Ordinance. He said that the Solid Waste enabling legislation allows the <br />County to regulate burning vegetation that is discarded at development sites as solid waste. The <br />way the ordinance should be implemented is that the County adapts it and then encourages the <br />municipalities to adopt a resolution that allows that ordinance to be in effect in the entirety of <br />Orange County. The Solid Waste staff would enforce that ordinance. The other piece of the <br />puzzle is enabling legislation to allow Orange County, in its planning jurisdiction, to place <br />conditions on development approvals by saying that every development the County approves is <br />conditioned on no burning of vegetation or solid waste. This is a very important part of the <br />implementation of the ordinance because it will cause the development community to plan on how <br />to deal with the waste (mulch it, stockpile it for landscaping, hire someone to haul it, etc.). <br />Regarding the jurisdictional question, the County's planning jurisdiction includes the two transition <br />areas (Chapel Hill and Carrboro). This enabling legislation will allow Carrboro in the Carrboro <br />transition area and Chapel Hill in the Chapel Hill transition area to regulate permits. He said that <br />the hope was that the planning and building inspection staff would be the eyes and ears for the <br />County in enforcing the ordinance. <br />Several other questions were answered satisfactorily by Geoffrey Gledhill and Harmony <br />Whalen. <br />John Link said that the staff would move forward quickly to come back to the Board with a <br />timetable with which to adopt the Solid Waste Ordinance. After that step, the public and the <br />developers could be educated that burning of vegetation would need to cease at a certain time. <br />Chair Carey said that at the same time the timetable is brought back, the staff could ask <br />Chapel Hill and Carrboro to confirm their intent, if any, to implement and enforce the permit part of <br />the ordinance in their jurisdiction. <br />Rod Visser made reference to the issue of a C&D facility and said that based on the <br />approval by the state of the vertical expansion of the existing C&D landfill, they are estimating that <br />there is adequate capacity to last through June 2002. In terms of a time frame for getting a <br />replacement facility in place, they will need a year in terms of permitting processes. He said that <br />some decisions needed to be made in the next couple of months about this facility. <br />Chair Carey said that there was 18 months left an the life of the current C&D site. He <br />asked if all of it could be done on the same site if the expanded functions were pursued. Rod <br />Visser said that there were some limitations. He said that it would all depend on what facilities <br />were sited. <br />Director of Solid Waste Gayle Wilson said that there were three or four different <br />considerations for sites. He said that fairly soon the administrative offices would have to be <br />relocated from where they are on UNC property. He said that once the current C&D landfill <br />reached capacity, it would be a dome and there would not be any room for anything on top. The <br />biggest decision is whether or not to continue C&D disposal. <br />Blair Pollock said that the ability to da anything on the existing C&D site was really limited <br />by the future closure and the very small working space. <br />Gayle Wilson said that the Solid Waste staff was envisioning trying to develop a concrete <br />pad for a dumping area and a loading dock to push the waste into either tractor trailers or roll off <br />containers and prepared for market. He said that the infrastructure would not be mobile and <br />should be considered permanent. <br />Commissioner Jacobs said that the Board should recognize that the thrust of the C&D <br />Recycling Task Force report and the Solid Waste Ordinance was that the County was going to <br />continue handling C&D waste. <br />