Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes - 20080318 - Transfer Station 1 APPROVED 4/15/2008 MINUTES ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS TRANSFER STATION SITING WORK SESSION March 18, 2008 5:30 p.m. The Orange County Board of Commissioners met for a Transfer Station Siting Work Session on Tuesday, March 18, 2008 at 5:30 p.m. at the Southern Human Services Center in Chapel Hill, N.C. COUNTY COMMISSIONERS PRESENT Chair Barry Jacobs and Commissioners Moses Carey, Jr., Valerie P. Foushee, Alice M. Gordon, and Mike Nelson COUNTY COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: COUNTY ATTORNEYS PRESENT: Geof Gledhill COUNTY STAFF PRESENT: County Manager Laura Blackmon, Assistant County Manager Gwen Harvey and Willie Best, and Clerk to the Board Donna Baker (All other staff members will be identified appropriately below) NOTE: ALL DOCUMENTS REFERRED TO IN THESE MINUTES ARE IN THE PERMANENT AGENDA FILE IN THE CLERK'S OFFICE. PURPOSE: The stated purpose of the meeting is to finalize and adopt the exclusionary criteria. The general format and schedule for upcoming transfer station siting information sessions will be presented for discussion, feedback, and direction. Information regarding technical criteria, community-specific criteria, and weighting factors will also be presented for discussion, feedback, direction, and public comments. AGENDA: Commissioner Gordon asked if public comment would be allowed on the exclusionary criteria at the April public participation meetings. Ed Schuffler explained that on the flow schematic it states that there is supposed to be a decision on the exclusionary criteria tonight. Commissioner Gordon expressed concern that the Board had not had sufficient discussion about this at the last work session. Commissioner Foushee said that since everyone is not on the same page, then public comment should be allowed tonight on the exclusionary criteria at the beginning, and then on the technical criteria at the end. Commissioner Carey asked when the Board would make a decision on the exclusionary criteria. Chair Jacobs said that the public participation meetings are April 3`d and April 10th, and the Board has a regular meeting on April 15th. He suggested making a final decision on exclusionary criteria on April 15th. Commissioner Carey agreed. The Clerk said that no one had signed up to speak yet. Chair Jacobs said that the Board would then entertain comment at the end of the meeting. 1) Review and Discussion of Finalizing Exclusionary Criteria (Exhibit 1, Exhibit 2, and Exhibit 3) 2 Ed Schuffler said that he went through these details last time. Exhibit 1 is shown below: PRELIMINARY EXCLUSIONARY SITING CRITERIA A. Site must be located within Orange County. B. Wetlands and floodplains C. Endangered and protected flora and fauna habitats D. Protected sites of historical, archeological, or cultural significance E. Sites with majority of area having steep topographic slopes (>15%) F. Park preserves G. Site cannot be located in a critical watershed H. Site must be located within 3 miles of US 15-501, NC 54, NC 86, US 70, NC 57, 1-40, or 1-85 and within 10 miles of the projected waste generation centroid. I. Sites (single parcel or combination of parcels) must be at least 25 acres unless transportation access, existing buffers, and preliminary transfer station site layout demonstrate the adequacy of a smaller site area. Commissioner Gordon asked what was meant by item F, "park preserves". It used to be "parks and preserves." Ed Schuffler said that these are areas that are preserved as natural areas. Planning Director Craig Benedict said that these are areas that will have no development and these can be further defined. Any of these items should have a clear source, a definition, and a reference map. Chair Jacobs asked if this was protected open space and Craig Benedict said yes, if it has a conservation easement on it. Chair Jacobs said that the term "park preserves" does not seem as inclusive or as clear as "areas of open space in the County." Craig Benedict said that staff could work with consultants to have a more definitive description for parks, open space, greenways, etc., and which should be part of the exclusionary criteria. This could also be switched to technical criteria. Commissioner Carey said that it should go into the exclusionary criteria and the definition of park preserves could be tweaked. Commissioner Gordon said that we previously discussed the possibility of protected watersheds being included here and said that she does not see it. Ed Schuffler said that there was discussion about putting this in the technical criteria. Chair Jacobs said that it could be under item K in the technical criteria. Commissioner Gordon respectfully requested that when the County Commissioners asked the consultants to include something as a criterion, then the consultants should include it subsequently in the written materials. Otherwise it is lost. Ed Schuffler said that he thought it would go in as part of the zoning designation. Geof Gledhill said that there is no term, "critical watershed," in any of the County's planning documents. The language is "critical area of watersheds." 3 Commissioner Gordon said that watersheds deserve their own separate category. Chair Jacobs said that, since this is a working document, then he would suggest on the bottom of Exhibit 5, that there be a space with a list of additional concerns raised by the Board of County Commissioners so that they can be tracked. Commissioner Gordon said that she remembered early on talking about other things, such as sites that are freely offered, and she is concerned about things being brought up by Commissioners and not being included in the documents. Ed Schuffler made reference to item H, which was discussed last time regarding sites being within three miles of major roadways. This was where the discussion about the railroad came in. This is being considered for the technical criteria. Chair Jacobs said that the Board had asked for a map that showed the actual 10-mile distances from the waste centroid. Ed Schuffler made reference to Exhibit 2, which shows the centroid of population and employment together. Chair Jacobs said that the Board talked about how the trucks cannot go through the Town of Hillsborough, so what may be 10 miles on a map is not 10 miles in reality. He thought that the Board wanted a map that showed the actual ten miles that a truck would have to travel to get north of the Town of Hillsborough. He needs to see this on a map. Ed Schuffler said that the furthest site would be right up to Hillsborough, so it would not run into the north of Hillsborough. Chair Jacobs said that since this is exclusionary criteria, then that would exclude NC 86 and NC 57 north of Hillsborough, but it is not indicated on the list. He would recommend taking NC 57 off the list, as well as NC 86 north of Hillsborough. Commissioner Gordon said that she would argue against the ten-mile centroid as an exclusionary criterion, because it would take out sites that are on 1-85 east and west, which could be possible good sites. She stated that this should be included in the technical criteria and not in exclusionary criteria. She said that some of the sites on 1-85 would be 16 miles away. Chair Jacobs said that one of the issues that the County dealt with about a year ago is that both Chapel Hill and Carrboro expressed reservations about having to drive their vehicles very far. He thinks that there must be some road mile cutoff point that is optimal for trucks that are designed for carrying garbage. Ed Schuffler said that, based on the way it is set up, if the mileage is more than about 15 miles, then there will have to be a transfer station to get to the transfer station. If there are no sites at 10 miles, then it can jump to 12 miles. Commissioner Carey said that 10 miles may seem strict, but it can go up to about 12 miles. Chapel Hill and Carrboro should have a chance to comment on this again. He wants to be clear about allowing the extra two miles. Ed Schuffler said that there was discussion about, as the consultants go out and look for sites, that if they do not find sites at 10 miles, then they would come back and ask for a higher radius. Chair Jacobs suggested listing it as up to 12 miles and then giving a weighted factor to distance from waste generation. Ed Schuffler said that the technical criteria does look at this again. Commissioner Gordon suggested setting the maximum distance from the centroid at 15 miles, since that is what Ed Schuffler referenced as the maximum distance. Commissioner Foushee said that she would like to come to some conclusion on this criterion. A motion was made by Chair Jacobs, seconded by Commissioner Foushee to change the exclusionary criteria (item H above) to say"within 12 miles of the projected waste generation centroid." VOTE: Ayes, 4; Nay, 1 (Commissioner Gordon) 4 Commissioner Gordon asked for maps with the radius from the centroid marked. Ed Schuffler asked which centroid to use -the population and employment or just the population. He recommended using both the population and the employment as shown on Exhibit 2. Chair Jacobs suggested that if maps are used that some of the roads be labeled. He said that it looks like the mean center is on Eubanks Road. The Board agreed to using Exhibit 2, which was a map of Orange County depicting the center of solid waste generation. Ed Schuffler made reference to item I and the size of the parcel. There was some concern about acreage and allowing sites that were freely offered that might be less than 25 acres. Chair Jacobs suggested making the grammar consistent all the way through on the list of exclusionary criteria. Commissioner Gordon asked Ed Schuffler to look up the maximum allowable distance for garbage trucks to travel one way, and report back to the Board, and he agreed. PUBLIC COMMENT: Neloa Jones asked about the buffer for the 25 acres. She asked if the 25 acres allowed for a large enough buffer. She urged the Board to be as clear as possible about all of the criteria before identifying sites. She would like the Board to start big and work backward. Ed Schuffler said that the 25 acres is the base and they will look at these properties that are at least 25 acres. Chair Jacobs asked about the minimum buffer and Ed Schuffler said 50 feet is all that is required by the State, but he would look at a 100 to 200-foot buffer. Chair Jacobs asked that this information be made available at the public participation meetings. 2) Adoption of Final Exclusionary Criteria Delayed to a subsequent meeting. 3) Discussion and Approval of Transfer Station Siting Information Session Format and Schedule (Exhibit 4) Exhibit 4 is shown below: TRANSFER STATION SITING PROCESS Transfer station siting public information sessions are scheduled for Thursday, April 3, 2008 at 7:00 to 10:00 p.m. in the F. Gordon Battle Courtroom, 106 E. Margaret Lane, in Hillsborough and on Thursday, April 10, 2008 at 7:00 to 10:00 p.m. in the Southern Human Services Center, 2501 Homestead Rd., in Chapel Hill. The public information sessions will include a presentation describing the function and operation of a solid waste transfer station. The transfer station siting process will also be discussed in detail focusing on the purpose and use of technical and community-specific criteria and weighting factors in the evaluation and final selection of a recommended site. 5 • Exclusionary Criteria include the stipulation of areas where development is prohibited by federal, state, or local laws or regulations. Exclusionary criteria also include consideration of transportation distance, land use, zoning requirements, watershed protection, and other factors that may significantly impact the environment, facility costs, or project implementation. • Technical Criteria include specific engineering, operation, and transportation parameters that should be considered to assure that sites are feasible from a technical design, environmental, and economic prospective. • Community-Specific Criteria consider the impacts that the facility will have on the surrounding community. The primary objective of these public information sessions will be for Olver, Inc. to provide the public at large with information regarding the operation of a transfer station; to provide the public at large with information regarding the site selection process; and to receive broad public input and comment on the preliminary set of site selection criteria and weighting factors, so that the needs and concerns of the residents of Orange County can be integrated into the final decision- making process. These public information sessions are being conducted by Olver, Inc. on behalf of the Orange County Board of Commissioners. A summary of session proceedings will be provided to the Board and posted to the website being maintained by Olver, Inc. as part of the Orange County Transfer Station siting project. Chair Jacobs asked the consultants to provide contact information for the Olver firm for the public so that people can ask questions later. Ed Schuffler said that he would cover this with the public and what is presented at these public meetings will be put on the website. Chair Jacobs asked how the room would be set up and Ed Schuffler said that they would do a PowerPoint presentation with handouts and then answer questions. Commissioner Gordon said to make sure that the exclusionary criteria are also addressed at the public participation meetings along with the other two criteria. 4) Discussion, Feedback and Comment on Technical Criteria, Community-Specific Criteria, and Weighting Factors (Exhibit 5, Exhibit 6, Exhibit 7, and Exhibit 8) Ed Schuffler said that the Board has not gotten into the weighting criteria and the way things are ranked. Bob Sallach went through Exhibit 5, as shown below: PRELIMINARY TECHNICAL CRITERIA A. Central Location to Collection Routes B. Access to Major Transportation Routes C. Site Size Requirements D. Sufficient Space for Onsite Roadways, Queuing, and Parking • 6 E. Truck and Traffic Compatibility F. Ability for Expansion G. Space for Recycling, Composting, and Public Education H. Buffer Space I. Gently Sloping Topography J. Access to Utilities K. Zoning Designations and Requirements L. Carbon Footprint Impact Bob Sallach said that each site that has been selected from the exclusionary process would be ranked with respect to each other as they are related to the technical criteria from 1 to 10, with 10 being the most desirable. Once this process is completed, then the weighting factors would be applied to specific evaluating criteria. Commissioner Nelson said that he is thoroughly confused and he asked the consultants to bring something back to the Board with suggestions about how to weight the criteria. Bob Sallach said that as they go through these public participation meetings, they will receive feedback from the public and then they will bring back to the Board of County Commissioners a recommendation on how the criteria should be weighted. Commissioner Gordon said that it is hard to know how to measure these criteria, such as truck and traffic compatibility. She asked the consultants to describe what the various criteria mean and how to measure them. She said that the criteria need to be quantified because they seem to have different scales. Some criteria are more than just"yes" and "no" and descriptions are needed. Also, there was discussion about not putting the transfer station on a priority bicycle transportation route. The County has an adopted bicycle plan that identifies priority bicycle routes. Bob Sallach said that, after a site has been identified, the consultants will lay the facility out on a site, identify buffers, etc. Chair Jacobs said that he thinks that Commissioner Gordon is asking that, for the public, that each criterion have a definition to go with it for the exhibits. The consultants agreed to this. Bob Sallach said that the Board of County Commissioners had asked about weighting factor points to a particular site. If a site is ranked most desirable with a particular criterion, the way you compute the points would be to multiply the points (1-10) by the weighting factor assigned to that criterion. The total points would then equal 100. Chair Jacobs said that Exhibit 7 states that the Board would be discussing the weighting factors on April 15th. He thinks that it is sufficient at this point to note that the consultants would be coming back with their professional recommendation about how weighting factors would be applied to these criteria. Commissioner Nelson said that the one criterion that he is most interested in seeing a definition for is the one about environmental justice. Bob Sallach said that the consultants would like to present the community-specific criteria to the public in a general manner, and then receive feedback. Based on that feedback, a definition would be created to bring back to the Board of County Commissioners. 7 Chair Jacobs suggested having the Human Rights and Relations Director work on a draft statement on what Orange County means by environmental justice. Shoshannah Smith said that she has the statement from the EPA about environmental justice, but not from the Hurrran Relations Commission, as it is in the process of being drafted. Chair Jacobs said that if the feedback came back to the Board by April 15th, then the HRC could develop its definition. Shoshannah said that the HRC is going to be meeting with the consultants on April 14th and there will be more clarity. Commissioner Nelson said that he thinks the public participation meetings will be much more productive if there is a draft definition for discussion. Shoshannah said that the HRC does have a draft and she can circulate it and have it at the public meetings in April. Chair Jacobs made reference to the community-specific criteria and asked for questions or comments from the Board. Exhibit 6 is shown below: PRELIMINARY COMMUNITY-SPECIFIC CRITERIA A. Environmental Justice Considerations B. Impact on air Quality C. Impact on the Local Infrastructure D. Adjacent Land Uses E. Proximity to Schools, Churches, Recreation Sites, and Residences F. Prevailing Winds G. Number of Residences Impacted H. Presence of Natural Buffers I. Impacts on Existing Businesses J. Buffer Zones and Screening Measures K. Traffic Compatibility L. Impact on Historic or Cultural Features M. Impact on Non-protected Neighborhood Character Commissioner Gordon said to give people some description of what these mean, as will be done with other criteria. Bob Sallach said that he would expand or at least put in a preliminary definition for each criterion. He asked if the Board had other items that it wished to include in this list. • 8 Commissioner Gordon said that she asked earlier to put freely offered parcels as preferred sites. Commissioner Carey said that this should go under technical criteria so that it can be given some weight. Bob Sallach agreed. Commissioner Gordon said that under land use, a site should be preferred if the land use is non-residential. Bob Sallach said that he would like to leave land use open at this point. He said that it could be made too exclusionary. Commissioner Gordon said that her suggestion should at least be written down and recorded. Chair Jacobs said that this should be listed under the items that were raised by County Commissioners for future consideration. Commissioner Gordon said that the site should not be in a residential area, and preferably in an industrial or commercial area. Bob Sallach then reviewed Exhibit 7, Meeting Timeline. The only change is that the decision for the exclusionary criteria is being moved to April 15th Chair Jacobs noted that the meeting listed on June 30th is an additional meeting for the Board of County Commissioners and not before a regular meeting. 5) Public Comment Period Yonni Chapman made reference to the public information sessions and said that it has been fairly evident that Olver has not always been able to present what they have to say even to the County Commissioners without confusing them. He said that he has attended public information sessions in the past related to the landfill, and he was extremely disappointed in the process, because the biggest majority of the time was taken up by trivial presentations and the discussion was minimal. He said that the presentation should be kept to a minimum and the discussion to a maximum. He said that what really bothered him was when Commissioner Nelson asked about the definition of environmental justice and the consultant responded that it would depend on the public information sessions. He said that this comes far too late in the process and the public needs to know about this particular criterion and exactly what the Board of County Commissioners is thinking about in terms of environmental justice. It needs to be up in the front at the forums so that there can be some substantive discussion. He said that this demonstrates a lack of understanding as to how to define environmental justice. He thinks that this should be asked of the experts (i.e., HRC, EPA, etc.). He finds this approach to be too little too late. Bob Nutter said that the waste will be taken from the transfer station out of Orange County. He hopes that a transfer station would be near a railroad, because he believes that this is the cheapest way to move large volumes of things. He said that the site where the landfill is now is near a railroad and this would be an ideal situation for a transfer station, and it would be cheaper to move the solid waste out of the County. Barry Katz said that, between all of the criteria, there are 25 areas and the Board is trying to optimize among 25 variables and then weight them. He said that this is almost impossible. He said that Planning Director Craig Benedict used to have maps of Orange County with different variables and colors and you could see what was happening around the County with these maps. He suggested looking at all of the technical criteria and almost all of the community-specific criteria, then the sites could be mapped out using the Planning Department's expertise. He said that this would be a quick way to see what is in and what is out. Regarding prevailing winds, he said that the Department of Environment and Natural Resources has all of the data about prevailing winds. 6) Further Comment and Feedback as desired by the Board to Olver, Inc. and/or County Management 9 Chair Jacobs suggested that it would be advantageous to weigh the balance of the time of presentations to give as much opportunity as possible to the public to speak. Bob Sallach said that they would follow that format. Commissioner Gordon suggested that Bob Sallach share materials with the Board of County Commissioners before the public participation meetings. Chair Jacobs said that this could be done through the Manager. The meeting was adjourned at 7:12 p.m. Barry Jacobs, Chair Donna S. Baker, CMC Clerk to the Board