Orange County NC Website
Browse       Search
Minutes - Regular Meeting <br /> Solid Waste Advisory Board <br /> August 2, 2007 <br /> Approved September 6, 2007 <br /> 3 . Transfer Station Development Wilson states that currently a detailed permitting <br /> timeline is being developed . Permitting will be through the Town of Chapel Hill . It <br /> will begin with a request for zoning change from a landfill to a transfer station. The <br /> permitting process should take about eighteen months to two years . A local <br /> contact/ development coordinator is being sought out to help our consultant, Olver <br /> Inc . , through Chapel Hill ' s process . <br /> Also, with the location of the transfer station the current solid waste convenience <br /> center was going to be moved . There are new rules that govern the set backs from <br /> streams which would take the site [new convenience center] away . The Town of <br /> Chapel Hill could issue a variance or waiver . If they choose not to there will not be a <br /> convenience center there and we may need to purchase new property for it. There is <br /> other property in the area, but it is expensive . <br /> Grunwald asks if the stream could be moved . <br /> Wilson replies no . <br /> A detailed discussion ensued of various roadzvay configurations that might go through landfill <br /> property, both the Greene and Neville tracts, to bring traffic from nezv development in the <br /> Rogers Road area to Eubanks Road . There are some potential conflicts zvith these routes for <br /> nezv roads and zvhere the relocated Eubanks Road convenience center might be located (on the <br /> south side of the landfill tract) . <br /> Wilson further notes that in addition, our subconsultant, RRSI, Jim Frey, has proposed <br /> an alternate way of developing the transfer station site that includes other operations <br /> like recycling processing . He has made a rough master plan of how to get more of <br /> these functions on the site . It shows that there can be a transfer station, a MRF beside <br /> it, and the convenience center . It would allow the mulch and yard waste operation to <br /> stay, but the maintenance building would have to be relocated . What is gained in <br /> their scenario is a MRF . The MRF and transfer station don' t become part of the same <br /> structure but operate next to each other . While this seems workable, there are other <br /> reasons not to pursue this related to our relationship with the surrounding <br /> community . <br /> Vickers refers to the theoretical site plan and asks if the convenience center could be <br /> moved down to this new proposed site and leave this space for the MRF . <br /> Wilson replies that if there is never going to be a MRF that key space can' t be left <br /> empty and I have to build a maintenance building somewhere else, but there are <br /> political considerations of what to put on that site . It is further complicated by the fact <br /> that the site is in both the Towri s and County' s jurisdictions . I can' t risk the <br /> 2 <br />