Browse
Search
SWAB minutes 060309
OrangeCountyNC
>
Advisory Boards and Commissions - Active
>
Solid Waste Advisory Group
>
Minutes
>
2009
>
SWAB minutes 060309
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/14/2019 4:41:51 PM
Creation date
1/14/2019 4:40:59 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.
/
19
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 - Regular Meeting <br /> Solid Waste Advisory Board <br /> June 3, 2009 <br /> August 6, 2009 <br /> Sallach agrees . Another thing that probably needs to be pointed out in this area there <br /> is a stream buffer that for a certain segment of the stream we have to maintain . So we <br /> would run into the stream buffer on this <br /> Norwood states, to play the neighborhood advocate, my suggestion for noise since the <br /> biggest noise we contend with is the insane backing up the truck beep - beep [backup <br /> alarm] . We don ' t really hear the trucks, we do hear the gears shifting some but mostly <br /> what we hear is the ' beep -beep ' . My suggestion would be if it is possible to the <br /> properties that are adjoining the railroad tracks is to get close to one of those houses <br /> and have one of the garbage trucks up in there going ' beep beep ' to see what you can <br /> hear . I also think, even though I like the idea of re -routing that knowing how the <br /> gears are in the semis the more shifting they have to do you have that noise but <br /> straight in they could stay in one or two gears which would eliminate a lot of racket. <br /> Sallach states that one thing that we think will help that a little is that this [transfer <br /> station] will be totally enclosed . When they start backing up it will be inside that <br /> building . <br /> Sassaman mentions that the noise from the transfer site could be compared to that <br /> from the freeway trucks . The higher frequency noises from backup alarms are not <br /> trapped as well by foliage . <br /> Wilson states that we would be glad to run that test Bonnie is talking about however <br /> we suggest we wait until the BOCC is serious about considering this site before we <br /> rattle too many people out in that area . <br /> Spire states that there are backup beepers going there at the Public Works facility <br /> every time they back out of the barn . <br /> Pollock states that this may be a little premature, but I assume the Town would have <br /> had a fair amount of impact and traffic study and so on when they built those two <br /> rather significantly-sized facilities . Do we have some available data? <br /> Sallach replies yes, there is available data on the traffic study that was conducted for <br /> the site . They did a Phase I [ environmental] assessment for the property . When I say <br /> for the property I think it was more localized for the area that was developed . For this <br /> [undeveloped] portion of the property there isn ' t that much available . In looking at <br /> the data that was available we tried looking at the issues of wetlands, endangered <br /> species and those types of things . At this point from the data that we ' ve looked at we <br /> haven ' t found anything that is a red flag. If the Commissioners choose to go forward <br /> with this site there would have to be some additional study just to confirm that. <br /> 5 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.