Browse
Search
Agenda - 06-05-1997 - 1
OrangeCountyNC
>
Board of County Commissioners
>
BOCC Agendas
>
1990's
>
1997
>
Agenda - 06-05-1997
>
Agenda - 06-05-1997 - 1
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/29/2013 10:20:35 AM
Creation date
7/29/2013 10:20:30 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
BOCC
Date
6/5/1997
Meeting Type
Special Meeting
Document Type
Agenda
Agenda Item
1
Document Relationships
Minutes - 19970605
(Linked From)
Path:
\Board of County Commissioners\Minutes - Approved\1990's\1997
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
34
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
5 <br /> Solid Waste Plan Framework for Orange County, North Carolina <br /> The waste reduction plan framework for mixed solid waste includes: <br /> Waste prevention: [The first three items below can be considered by the Landfill Owners <br /> Group. The last two --mandatory recycling and volume-based solid waste costs - could be <br /> enacted by the individual local governments only.] <br /> 1. Public education: increases in the amount, type and targeted audiences. <br /> 2. Differential landfill fees: We have these in place now for yard waste, clean wood <br /> waste and corrugated cardboard. Higher or lower fees could be applied to other materials to <br /> encourage their diversion from the landfill in favor of some type of separation. <br /> 3. Non-economic incentives : This includes all the other strategies for influencing waste <br /> reduction such as the solid waste plans now required for new, non-residential construction in <br /> Chapel Hill. <br /> 4. Mandatory recycling, Also known as collection bans individual governments could <br /> apply a variety of bans in each sector-- residential, commercial or apartments. Some <br /> enforcement would be necessary for success. <br /> 5. Volume-based fees: Also known as pay-per-throw, treats solid waste as a utility. <br /> Under this approach, local governments would set up a system of user fees under which residents <br /> and businesses would pay for varying amounts of garbage collected. A proper fee structure with <br /> good enforcement has proven to reduce waste in many other communities. <br /> Collection: <br /> The Owners Group has recommended weekly universal recycling collection in incorporated areas <br /> for residential, commercial and apartments and also for commercial recycling in unincorporated <br /> areas. For the unincorporated areas, the Owners Group recommends continuation of biweekly <br /> curbside recycling in the relatively densely settled subdivisions, combined with the system of <br /> sanitation sites such as now exist for solid waste and recycling collection. Currently, there is no <br /> universal commercial recycling. That would be the biggest single new collection expense; it <br /> would also have the greatest potential for increasing recycling. <br /> Solid waste collection and management would continue to be under local government control. It <br /> is possible that large increases in recycling may reduce the need for solid waste collection so the <br /> local governments may save on collection costs as the rate of waste generation goes down. <br /> Processing: <br /> If the amount and types of recyclables is increased significantly to reach the overall 61% <br /> reduction goal by 2006, then Orange County would need a processing facility to sort out the <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.