Browse
Search
SWAB minutes 033109
OrangeCountyNC
>
Advisory Boards and Commissions - Active
>
Solid Waste Advisory Group
>
Minutes
>
2009
>
SWAB minutes 033109
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/14/2019 4:39:31 PM
Creation date
1/14/2019 4:38:39 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
BOCC
Meeting Type
Regular Meeting
Document Type
Advisory Bd. Minutes
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
18
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
Minutes - Special Meeting <br /> Solid Waste Advisory Board <br /> March 31 , 2009 <br /> Approved May 7, 2009 <br /> Norwood states that trucks would have to be re- geared to go more than 40 mph, do <br /> you know how expensive that is per truck? <br /> Hauser states that the vendors were asked about that and they said unless the trucks <br /> are really old they go 40mph because they have governors on them which keeps the <br /> drivers from speeding and it is not expensive to change the trucks to go faster . <br /> Bowerman asks when looking at the increased collection cost and put it at $ 0 . 75 <br /> ton/ mile are you looking at mileage or mileage plus the increased time that takes . <br /> What are you looking at? <br /> Hauser states that we used an average rate of $0 . 75 ton/ mile assumed six ton trucks <br /> which is $4 . 50 per six ton truck . We used some standard rates . If you use a vendor <br /> truck, they have trucks that are designed so that they only need one operator . It is an <br /> estimated assumption . We didn ' t ignore it. There is a cost. Is it 75 cents, 50 cents ? It <br /> is a fairly standard rate per mile . <br /> Bowerman states that that doesn' t take into account the extra time they spend driving <br /> that far . Is there an hour added on that also ? <br /> Hauser states that this is what the vendors use in their rating . Presumably it is [an] <br /> all-inclusive cost - equipment, maintenance, and people . <br /> Sassaman states that your analysis seems to focus on county; I don' t see how what <br /> you are saying fits into the infrastructure of the towns and their operations . What is <br /> your concept of what Chapel Hill ' s solid waste operations does ? <br /> Hauser states that it is our understanding that under the interlocal agreement the <br /> towns are responsible for collection and the county is responsible for disposal, which <br /> means that the county needs to find a place for the towns to dump their trash . <br /> Sassaman states that simply stated before, Chapel Hill expects that there will be a <br /> place to dispose of its trash here in the county . That is what is in the interlocal <br /> agreement. <br /> Hauser states that we don' t have to debate the interlocal agreement. It was designed <br /> for operating a landfill . It also says if the costs are going up more than 10 % the Towns <br /> need to be notified . There are many constructs in the interlocal agreement. <br /> Sassaman states that I don' t see from your paradigm how that is going to flow . <br /> Hauser states that what our paradigm says is instead of putting a waste transfer <br /> station in rural Orange County or Eubanks Rd . that it would be operated by a vendor <br /> 4 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.