Laserfiche WebLink
Metadata
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015 Laserfiche. All rights reserved.
432 <br /> <br />TUESDAY, AUGUST 14, 1990 <br /> <br />proposals are due in October, and at that time further analyses can <br />be completed with regard to the costs of the alternatives. <br /> <br />Mr. Joyce reviewed the conclusions of the study-which were: 1) a <br />joint operation would be less costly thanindividual operations; 2) <br />development of a large site, such as the Martinsville North site, <br />would be more cost-effective; 3) post-collection recycling with <br />landfilling would be theleast costly alternative; and 4) waste-to- <br />energy scenarios would be more costly, but would potentially have <br />other benefits for the community. <br /> <br />The recommendations were also listed by Mr. Joyce: 1) pursue a <br />joint disposal facility; 2) improve existing landfill conditions; <br />3) evaluate the proposals received from'the private sector; and 4) <br />prepare a joint solid waste management plan by July..l, 1991. <br /> <br /> Upon motion,.duly seconded and by unanimous vote, City Council and <br />'==the Henry County Board of Supervisors (in separate motions and <br /> <br /> votes) moved that: <br /> <br />The City .and County pursue the development of a joint <br />landfill facility; <br /> <br />The engineers and the staff be authorized to do the <br />preliminary geotechnical investigation at potential sites <br />to assess the subsurface conditions and engineering <br />characteristics;.and <br /> <br />The staff and the consultants bring this information back <br />to the City Council and the Board of Supervisors so that <br />they can agree upon a site on whichto submit the <br />application for a joint disposal facility. <br /> <br /> <br />