Orange County NC Website
Browse       Search
to the shape of the site . It had to be divided into two areas , the smaller triangle shaped closer to <br /> the road and the larger center one to maximize the use of the property as an C &D disposal <br /> facility . It would be quicker to develop and more cost efficient to develop the smaller space first <br /> as we are under time constraints . <br /> Rafalow asked how the estimated life of the two sites was determined . <br /> Wilson replied that it was based on the amounts of tonnage now with a one percent increase <br /> annually in the quantity . Taking into consideration an extensive C &D recycling program would <br /> increase the life of the site : Other variables such as when the economy is good more building is <br /> done generating more waste take effect . . <br /> Kohorn asked if the northern leg that drains directly into the Little River would be left as is and if <br /> it was hardwood forest . Wilson replied it was a mixture , mostly forested . Kohorn asked if there <br /> was a guarantee it would be left as is . Wilson replied that could be given by the BOCC . He <br /> noted there is no disposal potential for the "panhandle" . <br /> Pratt questioned the feasibility of another access road . Wilson noted other property would have <br /> to be acquired . <br /> Rafalow asked what happens if a new C &D site is not built . Wilson responded that a survey had <br /> been conducted of users of the landfill about this issue . The survey showed people figure out <br /> where the next legal site is and they take items there , or illegal dumping throughout the rural and <br /> urban areas , more burning of materials could occur, and on site burial of materials . As it is easy <br /> to properly dispose of C &D material in the county there is not much illegal dumping . If they can <br /> , not easily dispose of it properly there will probably require additional enforcement measures to <br /> begin . Another issue would be increase in building costs to citizens if they have to drive long <br /> distances and pay employees to dispose of materials out of the county . <br /> Price asked about the percentage of recyclable waste materials in the C & D verses the Municipal <br /> Waste and how much that might change with technology changes . Wilson replied that <br /> technology was not the driving factor for C & D recycling . Original markets is the driving force . <br /> He estimated that a higher percentage of the C &D is recyclable than the Municipal Waste <br /> materials . As a large portion of the waste - stream is rock, brick, concrete and there is no market <br /> for that around here <br /> Pratt asked if this site would be excavated and filled and covered with piling up of brick and rock <br /> to be recovered in the future if needed . Wilson noted that only items brought in separate could <br /> be worthwhile . If we had to sort it a value would be spent that could never be recovered . Also <br /> we save and stock pile brick as time allows . <br /> Kohorn thanked Wilson for coming to the meeting and asked the members if they were interested <br /> in taking a position on the issue of the proposed site . <br /> Rafalow stated that at a minimum the CFE should be encouraging joint planning with Durham as <br /> they are trying to preserve the Little River area and the landfill is in the middle of that area. The <br /> Last updated 09/29/99 6 <br />