Agenda - 11-03-2004-9c - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

1.3 The actual cost breakdown is as follows: Grading landfill surface (strip, screen, replace cover) 12 acres $ 300,000 Excavating and loading landfill material 15,500 cubic yards $ 155,000 Hand removing and loading surface material 500 cubic yards $ 100,000 Transporting material to landfill 1070 trips (tandem I S cu yd load) $ 130,000 Tipping fees 8000 tons @ $42 per ton $ 336,000 Borrow 8000 cu yd @ $9 per cu yd $ 72,000 On-site backf 11/grading/compaction 8000 cu yd @ $5 per cu yd $ 40,000 Seed, mulch 12 acres $ 20,000 Erosion control construction, design, constm ction oversight, all permitting $ 40,000 Miscellaneous contingency mobilization (c~ 25% $ 300,000 Total $1 ,493,000 There aze a number of factors unaccounted in the figures shown above that could significantly increase the total project cost. If the excavated material had to be transported to a landfill more distant that the Orange County landfill, increased transportation costs might be somewhat offset by reductions in tipping fees, but such a circumstance would probably represent a net project cost increase, The most significant impacts on project costs would be related to either dramatic increases or decreases in the quantity of material to be excavated (affecting excavation, borrow, transportation and tipping fee cost elements) or by a regulatory re-categorizing of the type of landfilled material (from MSW to hazardous waste). For example, if Trigon's estimate of 100,000 to 200,000 cubic yards of landfilled material were to prove accurate, the cleanup costs would increase to the $6,5 to $12 million range. Should the NC Division of Solid Waste require that landfilled material and residual soils (those remaining at the bottom and sides of excavated trenches) be tested for hazardous material contamination (chlorobenzene, asolvent used in dyes and textile processing, was detected at levels well above drinking water standards at one of the groundwater/landfill leachate monitoring wells installed by Trigon), costs related to environmental engineering oversight and testing could have a significant impact on overall project cost. In the event that testing does detect the presence of hazardous contaminants at levels requiring remediation, costs associated with excavation, packaging, shipment and disposal of landfilled materials and contaminated could be dramatic, In fact, a cleanup project involving extensive testing and hazardous waste disposal/soils remediation could conceivably double costs cited above (which represent relatively uncomplicated excavation and disposal work elements). Finally, the grading costs above reflect site repair/trench backfill to more or less existing grades and contours and do not include costs associated with additional site grading necessary to modify the site topography to provide for athletic fields or to remediate the relatively high background (naturally occurring) levels of arsenic (10 to 19 parts per million [ppm], EPA remediation goal 4 ppm) detected in the Trigon studies, An evaluation of the cleanup/remediation of the Fairview Park landfill based strictly on cost considerations would suggest that the project would not be feasible under even the most optimistic scenario. Assuming that the project could yield an undeveloped, 42 acre park site, potential costs