HomeMy WebLinkAboutSWAB minutes 060309 Minutes - Regular Meeting
Solid Waste Advisory Board
June 3, 2009
August 6, 2009
Attendance : Jan Sassaman, Bonnie Norwood, Linda Bowerman, Al Vickers, Remus
Smith, and Steve Yuhasz
Staff: Gayle Wilson, Blair Pollock, Paul Spire, Gwen Harvey and Wanda McCain
Bob Sallach, Olver Inc .
1 . Opening & Welcome Sassaman states that this months meeting will take the form of
a working meeting. There is a lot of information to receive from consultants and staff.
We will not have a public hearing type phase . While the public is welcome to be here,
we will not be taking comments from the floor .
I ' d like to welcome everyone that came out knowing we changed the time about three
weeks ago . The reason for changing the time was to make sure that we had key
people here, particularly our representative from the BOCC and Gayle from staff.
They have a big meeting that they are obligated to go to tomorrow night.
2. Adoption of Minutes from May 7 SWAB meeting Vickers moves to accept.
Norwood 2nd . Passes unanimously
3 . Transfer Station Site Search Update Wilson states that on the meeting of the 19dh the
BOCC discussed whether they wanted to find out more about the Millhouse Rd . site
in advance of determining whether to respond to the Town of Chapel Hill [to the
effect] that, " Yes they would like to know if the Town is offering this property for
serious consideration or not. " The Town indicated at their meeting on May 14d1 that
they weren' t going to go through the discussion unless the Commissioners indicated
that they were interested in pursuing, in some fashion, the Millhouse Road property .
On the meeting on the 19th the BOCC indicated that they would like the consultant,
Olver Inc . , to conduct a preliminary assessment and report back to them on June 161h
and at that time the BOCC would receive that information and determine whether to
formally request the Town of Chapel to decide whether they were in fact going to
make this property available to the county for formal consideration or not. Tonight
you are getting a sneak peek of some of the preliminary evaluation the consultant has
preformed . The SWAB can decide whether it whishes to make any comments back to
the BOCC or not regarding the discussion tonight.
Sallach states that as a part of the initial evaluations this site was considered . The
basis that it was evaluated on at that point in time, what we looked at, was the access
to the site . If you look at Millhouse Rd . , access to this site would have been gained
through some of these properties fronting the railroad . As we look at the site, looked
at the access, the quality of Millhouse Rd . how it' s constructed, this site was not one of
the sites selected as far as the evaluation under the technical and community specific
criteria .
1
Minutes - Regular Meeting
Solid Waste Advisory Board
June 3, 2009
August 6, 2009
It is important to note that what the Town of Chapel Hill proposed really brings this
into a different light. What they have proposed is that access would be gained
through the Operations Center . That significantly changes some of the negative
attributes that this site had . What we see as being proposed is to gain access at this
point. This is their existing access road as part of the Center . It has been approved to
cross this stream to the [existing car] storage area . There is a bridge across the stream .
When you begin to look at this site it totally changes from the perspective of geometry
of how you could operate on that site and how it can be laid out. There would now be
room for queuing, the scale area, and traffic flow . Millhouse has been approved as
part of the development of the Operations Center . In looking at the flow circulation
every thing is in a counter clockwise flow pattern into the transfer station, [ trucks] put
their load on the transfer station floor and go out and leave . Transfer trucks come in
on the lower level to pick up waste .
It is important to note this site and the effectiveness and how it can be used changes
significantly with access . What we have done is take that new access and recognize
that that is just one of the things being considered at this point but to make this site
viable there would have to be access as it' s been proposed . This has been reviewed
with the Town of Chapel Hill as far as viability of access through their operations
center .
When you take in the revised access then this site becomes a site that would have
passed some of the preliminary screening measures that it didn' t in the first place .
What we have done is re -looked at this site and compared it to the ten sites that were
evaluated under the technical evaluation criteria . We will basically take it to an
eleven site evaluation. This will be added to it and we will ordinally rank each of the
sites with respect to the technical criteria . We ' ve also evaluated this site with respect
to community-specific criteria . When the results are finalized, you will be able to
compare this site with the ten sites under consideration. You will be able to compare
this with the Howell site and I think it is a baseline also to compare it to the Eubanks
Rd . site that was developed .
Are there any questions about the layout and how we arrived at this point?
I ' d like to go through just looking at this site, point out some of its attributes and some
of the siting elements that need to be considered . There are streams throughout the
site . Stream buffers will have to be maintained . We have an interstate buffer of 100 fte
that has to be maintained, a railroad buffer and a minimum 50 ft. property buffer .
There is buffering all around this site . There is a somewhat compatible use at the
Town Operations Center with heavy trucks coming and going.
2
Minutes - Regular Meeting
Solid Waste Advisory Board
June 3, 2009
August 6, 2009
Recognize that the stream boundary (running through the site) is the approximate
boundary line for the rural buffer . This development is in the rural buffer . This site,
while it is a part of the 60-acre parcel of property that the Town owns, is in the rural
buffer . The questions that would need to be resolved as part of developing this site,
would there be any special use requirements, permits that would be required from the
Town of Chapel Hill in that we are using a road that is already in place, the bridge is
across the stream, but there is a component of this that is in Chapel Hill' s jurisdiction
which is the small roadway section.
Norwood asks because it is in the rural buffer they cannot extend sewer out there .
Sallach replies that is the interpretation as far as extension of service . We would
suggest that this is an extension of service . It is very close to the existing water and
sewer service (to the Town Operations Center) . If you were to extend service to this it
is a parcel of property that is bounded, you are not going to be able to take it and
continue service if you provided water and sewer capabilities at this site . There is also
the question of public necessity that would come into play .
Wilson replies to Al Vickers' [question inaudible] in regards to extending the service,
the interlocal agreement that established the rural buffer does have a mechanism by
which there can be granted exceptions and typically Carrboro , Chapel Hill, and
Orange County would have to reach consensus on that. It would have to be declared
a public necessity and an essential public facility .
Norwood states that you mentioned that there is an existing road . Is the road that is
there dirt?
Sallach states that it is paved to the portion of the bridge . There would have to be
some improvement to that road such as curb and gutter . This is their storage and lay
down area so they currently have truck traffic crossing that bridge .
Vickers asks if there is a railroad track all the way through there .
Sallach replies yes . There is a physical buffer there . From a buffering standpoint and
a location standpoint, it affords some very positive aspects as far as a location is
concerned . The future centroid [of waste generation] is located over the UPS
building . From the standpoint of compatibility with traffic flow I think that this site
needs to be looked at from the perspective of we are not impacting Millhouse Rd . in
this particular section [meaning the area north and west of the stop sign and
intersection with the railroad tracks] , because all the traffic would come off this
intersection .
3
Minutes - Regular Meeting
Solid Waste Advisory Board
June 3 , 2009
August 6, 2009
Bowerman states when looking at this I notice how parallel to Millhouse it all is . Is it
possible to bring it around the other direction on the other side of the parking lot, so
that there is less truck driving really close to the people who live there ?
Sallach states that there is a bridge there that has an angle you could follow the tree
line, [but a concern is] maintaining added queuing distance in front of the scales . It is
something that could be looked at. The one thing that I think that would be difficult
to do is to push it further this way [east] given the 100 ft buffer that is required at that
point.
Guild asks if the scales could be placed at the top of the storage area instead of the
bottom .
Sallach states that what we would like to do is have the scales so that the inbound
provides no crossing of traffic . Inbound is in the right hand lane outbound is also the
same way you come out so by the time you look at the collection vehicles coming in
and you look at the transfer trailer tractors the issue we would have would be the
tractor trailer traffic and weighing those and getting them back . There is about a 20 ft
differential between this level and this level . We will be at building grade to get into
this station on the high side here . You almost have to pick a point before you begin
the grade separation and put the scales in .
Pollock asks if the elevation would work to the advantage of having the loading area
below the transfer floor with that 20 ft. slope .
Sallach states that you have to look at the topo of the site . I think the whole thing,
even with the 20 ft. elevation, we 've got some relief on the site that allows us to drop
the total projection of the transfer station down to where you may be looking at a one
level rather than a two level .
Vickers states going back to the railroad tracks, it' s elevated, wouldn' t that provide
somewhat of a sound barrier ?
Sallach replies yes .
Wilson states that in response to the question of swinging around the other way, it
might be possible that if the Board wishes to pursue the site, we could consult with
the County Planning department to determine whether there are ways to have
waivers or exceptions to that 100 ft. buffer and bump it up toward the interstate some .
That wouldn' t bother the interstate . Even 50 ft. could help the residents .
4
Minutes - Regular Meeting
Solid Waste Advisory Board
June 3, 2009
August 6, 2009
Sallach agrees . Another thing that probably needs to be pointed out in this area there
is a stream buffer that for a certain segment of the stream we have to maintain . So we
would run into the stream buffer on this
Norwood states, to play the neighborhood advocate, my suggestion for noise since the
biggest noise we contend with is the insane backing up the truck beep - beep [backup
alarm] . We don ' t really hear the trucks, we do hear the gears shifting some but mostly
what we hear is the ' beep -beep ' . My suggestion would be if it is possible to the
properties that are adjoining the railroad tracks is to get close to one of those houses
and have one of the garbage trucks up in there going ' beep beep ' to see what you can
hear . I also think, even though I like the idea of re -routing that knowing how the
gears are in the semis the more shifting they have to do you have that noise but
straight in they could stay in one or two gears which would eliminate a lot of racket.
Sallach states that one thing that we think will help that a little is that this [transfer
station] will be totally enclosed . When they start backing up it will be inside that
building .
Sassaman mentions that the noise from the transfer site could be compared to that
from the freeway trucks . The higher frequency noises from backup alarms are not
trapped as well by foliage .
Wilson states that we would be glad to run that test Bonnie is talking about however
we suggest we wait until the BOCC is serious about considering this site before we
rattle too many people out in that area .
Spire states that there are backup beepers going there at the Public Works facility
every time they back out of the barn .
Pollock states that this may be a little premature, but I assume the Town would have
had a fair amount of impact and traffic study and so on when they built those two
rather significantly-sized facilities . Do we have some available data?
Sallach replies yes, there is available data on the traffic study that was conducted for
the site . They did a Phase I [ environmental] assessment for the property . When I say
for the property I think it was more localized for the area that was developed . For this
[undeveloped] portion of the property there isn ' t that much available . In looking at
the data that was available we tried looking at the issues of wetlands, endangered
species and those types of things . At this point from the data that we ' ve looked at we
haven ' t found anything that is a red flag. If the Commissioners choose to go forward
with this site there would have to be some additional study just to confirm that.
5
Minutes - Regular Meeting
Solid Waste Advisory Board
June 3, 2009
August 6, 2009
Norwood states that on the traffic study, each individual project is only concerned
about their individual traffic, which I understand . There is huge development across
the street from the Mellott property [on Eubanks at Millhouse] and because there is no
other way out other than to come down Eubanks if you want to get to 1-40 there is a
50 home [subdivision] which will generate a minimum 200 more vehicles coming
through, the Green Tract is opened up when all that developing is done and empties
out on to Eubanks those trucks are going to seem rather insignificant, but they are
really going to cause problems . Everything out there is going to cause problems . No
one is connecting all the dots .
Sallach states that that is something to take into consideration . Millhouse would have
to be looked at by the DOT in terms of its classification as far as its arterial is
concerned .
Sassaman asks if the net increase with traffic associated with site has been looked at.
Sallach states that we are very, very small with 60 collection vehicles . I think I would
want to caveat that a little . I think you want to leave the flexibility here to this site
would have the ability to make it a double bay facility at some point or add recycling
capabilities so your traffic counts could be a little higher than what we have said
compared to, say, the Howell property .
Sassaman asks when you are looking at traffic you are taking into account that some
of the traffic would already exist because that' s where the trucks sleep . That is two
trips per truck less .
Sallach states that that is a good point. This is the home for all the Chapel Hill
collection vehicles .
Norwood states that, coming at this from a different angle, it is really good that you
are on the other side of the railroad tracks, then we don' t have to wait for the trucks to
get bounced on them waiting for a train . The fact is that they are semis and they have
multiple gears and they are going to be pulling out onto Eubanks Rd; we already
follow the UPS trucks and they drive like nuts, but the semis don' t have a choice, they
have to go through those gears very slow . We have the UPS trucks flying; we have
the street buses that can only fly so far, and then we have these big, slow semis by the
time they get going 30 MPH they are sitting at the light. So now we have all the UPS
trucks, a semi, and a couple street buses by then traffic is backed up to the Mellot
building; we can' t leave .
Wilson states that what you are saying is true but I still think that the additional traffic
caused by the transfer station is going to be a drop in the bucket compared to all that.
ill be 12 maybe 13 tractor trailer trucks spread out through a
On a heavy day there w
6
Minutes - Regular Meeting
Solid Waste Advisory Board
June 3, 2009
August 6, 2009
nine hour period, so that may be fairly minor . There are tractor trucks there already the landfill owns two, there is fuel deliveries to the landfill or the Chapel Hill
operations center, deliveries of other equipment, Duke Forest has their carbon dioxide
tanker truck come in two or three times a week . All the Orange County and Chapel
Hill collection vehicles are already coming there . The increase is not sixty but closer to
half that. People who live near there may feel one more truck is too many, but from a
traffic study standpoint, the increase is negligible .
Vickers states that Eubanks Rd . is going to be an issue for the County and the State .
We all know that it needs to be improved . It was a gravel road about nine years ago
and now it' s getting traffic .
Sallach states that when one evaluates the Millhouse site using the same technical
evaluation criteria against which all the other sites have been evaluated, we feel the
Millhouse site will rank very high . We feel that it does meet all the criteria that were
established, as far as a technical design and could meet the current and future needs
of a waste transfer station
As you look at the community specific criteria, while there is the buffer there is still a
number of adjacent neighborhoods . There is a school, a soccer field, and a park so
looking at the community specific criteria, those are impacts that though, while I think
this site is isolated, you do have proximity to more uses of land than the NC
[Highway] 54 sites . The criteria are heavily weighted in favor of mitigating those
types of impacts . We would expect that this site will not rank as high from the
community specific standpoint as the sites on [NC Highway] 54 in the way the criteria
are structured .
Vickers asks what school is out there .
Sallach replies [Emerson] Waldorf.
Bowerman states that there are three dots for historical sites, does anyone know what
they are .
Wilson states that the dot by the pond is the old historical mill site . The dot closer to
Eubanks Rd . is the old Nunn homestead .
Pollock states that the third dot is part of that farmstead and the original core
buildings [at Spence ' s Farm] that date to the early 1800s .
Norwood states that you say this wouldn' t rank very high, can you give a rank .
7
Minutes - Regular Meeting
Solid Waste Advisory Board
June 3, 2009
August 6, 2009
Sallach states that we are not to the point of being ready to finalize it. It would be
somewhat comparable or a little better than Eubanks Rd . when you factor in all the
community specifics .
What I want to present is that you will have a site that is very highly ranked from a
technical standpoint, then you will have a site [on Millhouse] in the middle of these
eleven sites of the community-specific criteria when we are finished with this . It is
important to recognize what the drivers of those community specifics are . Through
any evaluation you will see a higher ranking if it' s further away from less populated
areas .
Norwood states that it seems, and I hate to say it, that this site because of its proximity
to the highway, how short of a distance a semi has to go to get there plus the fact that
the trucks and the garbage is already there, financially this would get a high rating .
Sallach states that it is fair to say that if you look and compare the direct and off route
haul cost from the transfer evaluation there is some significant economic
considerations with this site versus the location of site 56 .
Sassaman states that it seems to me that this site from an operational standpoint,
operational being all those functional things of proximity to the waste centroid and
long-haul transport routes, and rail, should be superior . Also from an environmental
standpoint, it should have a lot of benefits, because of the issue of the lower carbon
footprint. The one questionable area is some of those community specific issues of
proximity to populations, schools, and competing traffic needs .
How easy is it to quantify those demographics of the whole social economic arena?
Have you tried to do it?
Sallach states that that is part of the evaluation now in terms of looking at the impacts
to residences . We are looking at 500 and 1000 ft. zones, school, churches and that type
of thing . When you look at all the sites, the one thing we do see there will be a
grouping of sites in general there will be 2 or 3 sites that are superior and then there
will be a grouping of 4 or 5 sites that basically, while you go through and assign
numbers in accordance with the ranking weighting criteria, for all intents and
purposes they are all equal .
Vickers asks what do you consider the site, the whole triangle [of land north of the
Town Operations Center] . How much is the county going to buy?
Sallach states that one of the things that is on the table is that question and whether to
lease or buy .
8
Minutes - Regular Meeting
Solid Waste Advisory Board
June 3, 2009
August 6, 2009
Wilson states that the County manager indicated at a previous meeting from her
perspective a possible preference for a lease situation rather than an acquisition.
There has been no negotiation with the Town so we don' t know what they will
demand nor has the BOCC spoken on the issue . I would suspect that the site will be
from the bridge at the buffer of that stream including the rest of the triangle because
the site buffers and stream buffers would encumber the transfer station.
Sassaman asks assuming that what would be the acreage .
Sallach states that it' s about 18 acres . There really haven ' t been any discussions about
what would transpire .
Pollock asks regarding all the blue stream lines, the reason being Millhouse takes a
sharp bend from north going back east it shows a stream crossing under the road but
in fact I don' t know if it is piped underneath that meadow . That is not a perennial
stream . I don ' t know what defines the ' blue line' . It' s wet occasionally .
Sallach states that in terms of looking at these on site the county has looked at these
and these are steams and would require stream buffers . That' s been confirmed to us .
This mapping is from the GIS system .
Pollock asks if the current GIS drives the stream buffer requirements .
Sallach replies that it does and then we confirm that in this particular case the on-site
streams are correct. The County has to determine that.
As you look at this site our evaluation is this is a very good site worthy of further
consideration in comparison with the 56 site . Some of our recommendation is based
on its location. The economics we see from the transfer and hauling evaluations, we
think there are ways 'n the design and layout to mitigate the environmental impacts,
so when you look at the combination of technical strengths, mitigation of some of the
environmental aspects of it, this site could be developed to meet the criteria that the
Commissioners have laid out.
Sassaman asks in the original screening did you look at any other sites that were ruled
out because they were county-owned or the wrong size or anything . I understand
there is a county-owned site above my finger (pointing at the map on west side of
Millhouse at where it takes a dogleg left over the RR tracks) . If that is true, being
adjacent to the landfill that might have some operational amenities .
Wilson states that there is a good deal of land that is owned in that vicinity [indicates
on the map the areas around the Millhouse / Millhouse intersection at stop sign and
RR tracks] . Town of Chapel Hill has bought the property between the Town
9
Minutes - Regular Meeting
Solid Waste Advisory Board .
June 3, 2009
August 6, 2009
Operations Center and Bus Garage . The properties extend across Millhouse Road .
The county owns the Blackwood property that will be turned into a park . The County
owns another potential big block of potential future park land about 150 or 160 acres
with a private ten acre in-holding . Mrs . Blackwood made it known that she did not
want her property used for solid waste purposes . Dr . Paydufar owns some ten acres
and the County bought that from him . It abuts the landfill; as a practical matter, if
anyone wanted to look at it, along with the Town properties, it could be looked at for
a transfer station if anyone were interested . It is about the same distance from local
utilities . All this is also in the rural buffer, so from a regulatory standpoint, they' re the
same .
Sassaman states that it seems that the area adjacent to the landfill has an acceptable
topography and form factor for a waste transfer station, it would have all the
amenities, the benefits of the Chapel Hill Town property in terms of location,
operational considerations, etc . except for one crossing of the railroad track . It would
also be removed from all these properties and the school . It may scale higher on the
demographic people weighting criteria and stay equal on the others . I don' t know .
I ' m just trying to think out of the box and not throw a monkey wrench in the works .
Those operational things would be really great. There is a small stream that might be
a problem .
Guild states that there would be no lease cost either . [It' s County-owned]
Wilson states that it is true that you would have to cross the tracks to get to that
property . This is a fairly flat piece of property that as no obvious environmental
issues . That stream does not extend to that property .
Sassaman states that I am under the impression that there is not a lot of train traffic up
and down that line, just coal to UNC but isn' t that part of what they are thinking
about in the mass transit — the rail corridor . I ' m just tossing it out.
Vickers states that there are other sites around they could look at, but the question is
are we going to go back into that site search or just evaluate this site compared to
what they have ?
Sassaman states that we are evaluating Millhouse because it was offered to us by
Chapel Hill and does it make sense to think in terms of an alternative site that we
already own .
Wilson states that if the SWAB wishes to make the suggestion to the BOCC that' s
possible . I ' m not sure the Commissioners would welcome another site or not.
10
Minutes - Regular Meeting
Solid Waste Advisory Board
June 3, 2009
August 6, 2009
Norwood states that now that it feels that this is winding down I have to come out of
my neighborhood again and say any of the sites are in the Millhouse area and Gayle,
and I and Reverend Campbell made two maps . One was what Rev . Campbell
considered, and I asked him to do that because I didn ' t live here that long ago, was a
large area that was considered by him and the people in the neighborhood to be the
Rogers Rd . neighborhood which included Millhouse also because the loudest
participation during the landfill siting process came from the neighbors of Millhouse,
they supported us . We were forced to make a smaller area for compensation for
landfill benefits basically for where they could do water . So from the neighborhood
let me say whether it is the lower property or the upper property anything in that area
the neighborhood is going to step up and say " excuse me but . . . "
Bowerman asks what Bonnie said is reflected in how you are rating this site for
neighborhood compensation . Do you also note that new homes are going in or does
that fly under the radar ?
Wilson asks if the BOCC want to know more and asks the Town whether this is truly
being offered or not and the Towns says ' Yes we are going to formally lay it on the
table ' , Bob do you know what additional level of evaluation would then need to take
place in order to bring the BOCC to a possible decision point along with the Hwy 54
site ?
Sallach states that utilities and access are the key parts . We feel that the
environmental issues need to be confirmed but we don' t see red flags at this point.
Wilson asks is the site a viable site if the BOCC decides not to extend water and sewer
another 500 ft. to this site, even though that has been identified as a major weakness in
Hwy 54 with fire protection, cleanup, etc . Would this site still work with the same
development concept as the [Hwy] 54 site ?
Sallach replies yes . Chapel Hill has indicated that there is already a well on site, so we
do feel like there is that capability to develop a small supply but you would have to
have storage as far as fire protection is concerned . You would be looking at a similar
type system as Hwy 54 . We would want to confirm the soils that they perc [olate] .
Generally the soils were better than what we' d seen on Hwy 54 .
Norwood states that in the environmental issues is there some way to check and make
sure we don' t have endangered species . I can tell the difference between a downy
woodpecker and cockaded woodpecker and the one at my feeder was the cockaded
and was there until they cleared land for the Habitat [for Humanity] homes . Is there
some way to check to make sure we don' t have endangered species or their habitat?
11
Minutes - Regular Meeting
Solid Waste Advisory Board
June 3, 2009
August 6, 2009
Sallach states that you could look for habitat, then you could look for the species itself
or you could evolve an environmental evaluation that looks at that.
Sassaman asks Steve what the Board would like from us .
Yuhasz states that the Board has not discussed what we ' d like specifically from the
SWAB . We will be looking at the evaluation we will get from Olver . I think we ' ll
consider the SWAB ' s reaction to the evaluation and whether the SWAB thinks this is a
viable site from the technical standpoint and the things the SWAB considers in
evaluating the sites . I don' t think we are looking for you to say " Yes this is the site or
No this isn' t the site " . Just an overall feel that this is a site that would function
appropriately for the purposes we need to have a waste transfer site and any other
factors that you think would be in addition to or complement the overall Olver
evaluation .
Sassaman asks have you gotten some of that from our discussion.
Yuhasz replies I think I have . Particularly Bonnie ' s concerns about [if] this fits in with
the overall Rogers Rd . - Eubanks Rd . sphere is something we will have to consider .
Some of the other things that I wasn ' t aware of like the fact that the railroad [track
line] is elevated and that there are some existing potential mitigating factors that the
impact might not be as great as when you look at it on a flat piece of paper .
Sassaman asks is there anything that the SWAB would like to convey through Steve .
Vickers states that from a technical standpoint it fits the criteria for a site to lower the
carbon impact. It is adjacent to Chapel Hill ' s industrially zoned areas for the county
it' s mostly farm area out there . You can' t locate a site that doesn ' t have neighbors
somewhere and I think this has some advantages in the fact that there is [are] barriers
and they can be improved if you want to .
Smith states that this site would be attractive to the Town of Hillsborough for cost for
two things . Cost of driving from Hillsborough to it and unloading and getting back
home . It would be very attractive to Hillsborough .
Norwood states that being on both sides of the fence and having a lot of information
about how appropriate this site might be, I still have to go with the history and the
promises to the neighborhood because I am their representative .
Bowerman states that I have a hard time getting past the fact that it butts up against
the same people who had the landfill in their backyard the whole time but it has good
points too .
12
Minutes - Regular Meeting
Solid Waste Advisory Board
June 3, 2009
August 6, 2009
Wilson asks Bonnie what was _ the Rogers Rd . neighborhood ' s response, involvement,
or opposition to the Towns Operation Center when it was developed in that same
area .
Norwood states that a lot more attention was being paid to transfer station issue and
the promises issue than was the operations center or the bus garage or the
development across the street or the habitat development or the Green Tract issue or
any other things . They were completely involved in the transfer station .
Wilson states that since the transfer station will generate significantly less traffic than
any of those other things you just mentioned I wonder why .
Norwood states that I ' ve often wondered the same thing with the Animal Shelter
being there, this office coming here . With the Animal Shelter, it' s not just the shelter
but also Animal Control and all their offices . I kept mentioning that there was a
bigger picture but as I told the newspaper, I can ' t speak to oppression . I ' ve lived here
23 years but that is not my culture and the promises that were made were made
before I was here . All I can do is support the beliefs and feelings of the people in the
neighborhood and they wanted to focus on the transfer station fight. Quite frankly I
don ' t think we could have beat the Town out of the garage or the Animal Shelter or
anything else, because it has been shown to us in meetings that the Town will do what
they are going to do .
Bowerman states that I don ' t think that anybody in any way made it clear before those
were already done deals . I don ' t think anybody had any input whatsoever and that' s
why nobody said anything they couldn' t. I don' t think we knew what it was until
two months after they put it up .
Norwood states that that is why I got on every board that I could so that I would have
the information so that when the neighborhood came to me I could say " this is here,
this is there " and I have spent many years going to these meetings .
Sassaman states that to sum this up for you Steve, it is what I think and I hope is what
the rest of the board is saying, sort of what I said before . I think the Millhouse Rd . site
to me appears from an operational standpoint be a no-brainer . It' s a good site
operationally, assuming it can be shoehorned into that piece of property . Certainly
economically it' s got some benefits . From an environmental standpoint, I think not
having seen the wetland analysis and not having seen an endangered species analysis
and all the rest of it, but those more generic environmental issues of emissions and the
rest of that, it also makes a lot of sense and it seems to be a superior site .
However there is the issue of the people, that whole demographic, social economic,
impact issue . That will probably exist no matter where we try to put a waste transfer
13
Minutes - Regular Meeting
Solid Waste Advisory Board
June 3, 2009
August 6, 2009
station just by the virtue of the need to have it close to the garbage centroid . People
generate garbage . If you are going to put your garbage facility near the generation
point, logic tells you it is going to be near people . That is going to be the problem .
I guess the Commissioners, since they are that elected group to solve the problem,
they are going to have to decide what group of people are going to — whose ox they
are going to gore . I ' ll go back to what we said a couple of years ago, whatever we do
we try to mitigate the effects on the people in whatever way we can and that would be
unique . It would depend on the specific needs of the communities .
One of the things here is we have the railroad . There might be something that can be
done there to reduce the impacts if we were to build there . The main thing that
bothers me with what I know now but the fact is I would probably say that for about
every single site we would pick .
Doses that pretty much capture the consensus ?
Norwood states that no other site selection has the history we have here and I think
that is the trump .
Yuhasz states that up to this point this has been surprisingly fairly easy decision for
me . Once I was convinced that we needed to have a waste transfer station, I to this
point had only one choice and that was site 56 . All the decisions that were made
concerning the waste transfer station were made before I came on board . The only
decision I had to make was which of the three essentially identical sites on [Hwy] 54
we were going to look at.
Bringing this site forward now makes what had been a fairly easy decision much
more difficult for me . There actually is a decision now to be made if the
Commissioners are going to decide this . I did say when we were discussing this at
the work session the economic impact and the overall environmental impact is
something that as a representative of the entire county I have to be concerned about
those issues . Someone said to me early on, " It doesn' t matter where you put it
because wherever you put it those folks are going to be mad at you . " I think that is
true from a certain standpoint that there is no way to site a waste transfer station that
is going to make everybody happy .
I will consider this and I will consider the effect this has on these neighbors and the
effect it will have on other neighbors but I think I have to also factor into that the
economic cost to the county has a whole both initially and over the long term . I think
that is going to be the tough part to weight those different factors .
14
Minutes - Regular Meeting
Solid Waste Advisory Board
June 3, 2009
August 6, 2009
A decision has not been made by me or the Commissioners to this point, but I think
we are in a different economic situation now and I stress that we are in a different
economic situation going forward than we were two years ago . I think economics will
weigh more heavily now than had this decision been finalized at that point. .
Sassaman states that ultimately I don' t see it as an economic issue . I think taking
particularly what Bonnie has said into account we have an opportunity to save some
money if we were to go to Millhouse Rd . as opposed to the Hwy 54 site, but it would
be difficult for me to save that money and put it in our pockets . That money, as
Mayor Foy said, should go to improving the communities that are directly impacted
by what we are doing . If the Commissioners decide to so with Millhouse or some
nearby site it behooves them to make a very definite commitment to the
neighborhood that is affected . Something that is measurable and quantifiable and the
outcomes can be determined .
Yuhasz states that there was a discussion about that and I believe a resolution was
adopted as how we were going to go forward with Rogers Rd . Task Force that would
be made of up of Orange County, Chapel Hill, Carrboro and involve Rogers Rd .
citizens to discuss how we are going to provide those services . I think that is
something in the minds of the commissioners . I didn ' t mean to say that economics
was the [most important factor] but it is important that we have the resources to do all
the things that we would like to do so I think we should be careful where we spend
the money so that we can spend our money where it is going to do the most good .
Sassaman states that the money needs to stay in the county .
Borwerman states that I know you mentioned the Rogers Rd . Task Force and I know
that Millhouse didn' t really get a lot of say in that but if we put this up near there I
again want to put in for them because obviously they are the ones that will be bearing
the brunt of this and they are not a big part of that task force so it' s not just of the task
force it may have to enlarge from what Chapel Hill decided who should be on there .
The other thing is ' as we say it' s saving money' I think the entire county looks at this
area as where garbage should go . I think odds are the transfer station will probably
go here but if it does it should be made clear to the county what the people in the area
are putting up with and how they are contributing, what money they are saving the
county — the impact on the people you are putting it on.
Vickers states the garbage will be transferred out of there . And now that the County is
talking about cutting off the longevity for long-term employees, they are discussing a
forced retirement program for older employees, they are talkmi g about furloughs -we
do have major financial issues in the county . It will come down to needing to do 18
15
Minutes Regular Meeting
Solid Waste Advisory Board
June 3, 2009
August 6, 2009
things and there is only money for 12 and the decision will have to be made of what is
critical . It is unfortunate, but it is the County Commissioners' job .
Wilson states that one additional comment to follow up on Linda' s concern is the
BOCC has already determined that once a site has been selected a citizens advisory
committee of the neighbors surrounding that will have substantive role in
nities, mitigation for noise and traffic . Once the
determining how it is developed, ame
decision has been made for the site, staff will move to formulate that committee and
get them working before the facility is even designed .
Norwood states that we must be absolutely sure that the County is who will dictate
what we request, what Gayle was saying, because if Chapel Hill, because we are on
Chapel Hill ' s property, if we are under their jurisdiction might as well not have the
meeting because they are going to do what they want regardless of what the
committee says .
Yuhasz states that the County is in charge of this . I would like to express my
appreciation to the SWAB and all the people that have been involved in looking at all
these issues for much longer than I have . I think the Commissioners and the county
can' t express enough their appreciation for the work that this group does .
4 . Programs/Services Update
Solar Tech South — Interest in Solar Photovoltaic Project at Landfill Pollock states that the
Economic Development department indicated that there was a company based in
Orange County that wanted to create a photovoltaic solar electric generating array
somewhere in Orange County - the direct conversion of sunlight to electricity . We
indicated as the landfill there might be some land that would be suitable - the closed
C &D landfill . The footprint of the site is about 11 acres . They came out with
Economic Development to look at it and determined that about 3 . 5 acres is suitable for
their type of application.
There are two things about this project that are exciting and interesting . One is that
the County has chosen an economic development strategy to attract a solar cluster .
The interesting piece is that there are very few compatible uses for closed landfill
sites . They can ' t bear a lot of traffic or buildings with foundations that have to
penetrate the cap . A project like this, which wouldn ' t generate any people traffic, is
just about as ideal as it gets .
We have continued to work with Economic Development and Solar Tech South . On
the 16th they will be coming to the Commissioners with a brief presentation . It is not
obvious how the economics will work for the project but they look pretty sound in
general with the respect to the development of electricity and the sale of electricity
from the site .
16
Minutes - Regular Meeting
Solid Waste Advisory Board
June 3 , 2009
August 6, 2009
At this point I would like to ask the SWAB if there are any questions or if you all want
to make any statement regarding the project.
Sassaman asks what is the total surface area of the cells .
Pollock replies I ' m not sure but the intent is to generate 500 - 700 kilowatts of
electricity .
They are to give us a technical paper tomorrow .
Sassaman asks how high will the array be above ground .
Pollock states that from photographs of similar arrays is less than 20 ft.
Sassaman asks are there any negative impacts associated with migratory birds .
Pollock states that I don' t know a lot about migratory birds .
Vickers asks are they intending to sell it for carbon credits .
Pollock states that the question of power sales and how this is going to work is
interesting because there are three economic streams associated with the sales of
photovoltaically generated electricity . One is the sale of the electrons that they can
turn around and power light bulbs with it. The second is the nature of federal tax
laws has changed, so that these projects have a lot of tax credits at the federal and
state level associated with them and those are going to be owned under this particular
model by a private developer . The third stream of income from renewable energy
credits because those are required under State law for renewable portfolio standards .
It is a fairly sophisticated financial arrangement.
What I ' d like to ask you all is if you ' d like to convey any kinds of concerns or interest
in the project to the BOCC . The path that we are going to look at is presentation in
front of the BOCC from Economic Development with Solar Tech South and they will
ask for Board approval .
Sassaman states on the surface it sounds good but without specifics it is hard to make
that judgment. There are a lot of environmental issues I would be concerned with one
being the wildlife the other being whether it would have any vista impacts . Are there
any downsides ?
Norwood asks Blair there is some gadget that was put up that studies oxygen and
carbon dioxide, would this thing interfere with that study .
17
Minutes - Regular Meeting
Solid Waste Advisory Board
June 3, 2009
August 6, 2009
Pollock states that if it is the F . A . C . E . project, Duke University project to study carbon
dioxide flux, no it is about a mile and a half from that. These are basically
photovoltaic solar collectors .
Yuhasz asks are there any other sites other than the 3 . 5 acres on the landfill that might
be suitable .
Pollock states that this seemed from our perspective the best location in terms of its
stability and lack of other uses and out of the traffic .
Sassaman states that we don' t know enough to say " yea " or " nay " . We would like to
hear from them and ask them some of these questions directly .
Landfill Leachate Sezver Project Wilson states that the sewer is up and functioning . We
are pumping leachate into it. The leachate basin has been dismantled and filled in
and will serve as part of the site for the landfill gas recovery system .
Scavenging at Recycling Drop -off Sites Pollock states that over the years the issue of
scavenging has come up several times . It has come up again as an issue at the
unstaffed drop -off sites . There are several people who have been dumpster diving
and scavenging paper from the drop - off sites which leads to the concern of identity
theft. Staff is of the mind to recommend a path that makes any sort of scavenging and
picking out of any bin for any reason illegal under County ordinance . Currently it is a
little grey area legally . It is clear at the convenience centers that policy has been made
for safety and liability that no one can go into a dumpster and get anything .
Sassaman states that when we discussed this about five years ago wasn' t the
conclusion that the ordinance declared any material put into a county recycling
facility was county property .
Smith concurs .
Norwood states that the person that does the coupon thing it upsets people when
they 've put papers into the container and this person is rummaging through it. I don' t
know how you would enforce other than having people tell . I agree on diving in but
where we left it was if it was hanging outside and you could get it without touching
the dumpster it was fair game .
Wilson states that there has been some fairly clear feedback and we hope to bring an
ordinance revision to the Commissioners in the Fall .
Other Wilson states that at the meeting on May 14th the Town of Chapel Hill raised
the question as to whether we had properly coordinated with their staff regarding
18
Minutes - Regular Meeting
Solid Waste Advisory Board
June 3, 2009
August 6, 2009
some of the data used in our hauling analysis . The answer is, we did coordinate
closely with their staff, but there was some misinterpretation by higher management
regarding an alternative evaluation that was done a year earlier that utilized a
different methodology . However we did reengage with Town staff and they made a
couple of minor changes which increased the cost and emissions impact.
Bowerman asks is this just Chapel Hill, no one else needed recalculations .
Wilson replies the numbers are total emissions but the changes result only from the
change in Chapel Hill data .
5 . Board Member Comments Norwood states on the scavenging thing I know it costs
money but it makes money too so please re-implement selling of lumber .
Wilson states that now there is a good market for grinding and selling it. It would be
more of a hassle to load and selling it. We could only sell it for a fraction of what it
would cost to manage it.
Smith moves to adjourn .
Norwood 2nd .
Adjourn 9 : 13pm
Next meeting August 6, 2009 .
19