1/20/1987 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Fr_ �l yl�`/ JAN 2 ® 19 BooK 6 7 u; 44 of landclearing debris following any clearing operation of a site, County staff has taken the position that the debris is to be hauled to the County landfill or burned on-site after receiving a permit from the Division of Forestry. Addi- tionally, staff has allowed for a sixty day grace period so that the vegetative material can dry and burn more readily where burning is the selected disposal method. . - Planning Staff is opposed to allowing the removal of landclearing debris through on site burying or composting due to the prolonged `breakdown period of non -herbaceous material which serve as breeding places for vermin or create unstable building sites. In your letter you suggest certain changes to the ordinance that you feel will eliminate staff's concerns, however, I do not believe that the suggested changes are enforceable given the present County staff and feel that on site burying will have long term negative effects on future building sites in developing areas. I am presuming that your request is based upon the changes and greater restrictions to the Division of Forestry's open burning rule. I agree with you that the new rule will create diffi- culties in disposing of landclearing debris in the North County and that the air curtain incinerator concept is a disposal ` approach which could be useful in that area. If you wish to pursue these matters further, I suggest that you present your thoughts to the Board of County Commissioners at their next available meeting so that County staff may be authorized to do additional study and prepare a formal recom- mendation to your request. - If --you have any questions or if I*may be of further assistance, please contact me at 567-8000. Sincerely, r Art Challacombe ,Chief Environmental Planning Mr. Mensing stated that it costs a contractor $100 a load to come to the south county to dispose of land clearing trash, such as pepper trees, etc., and he, therefore, would like the County to loosen their standards for burial of such materials on site. He explained that he is talking about larger sites, i.e five acres or more. Chairman Scurlock expressed his opposition to Mr. Mensing's first proposal re burying on site as he did not believe there is a mechanism for keeping this under control and felt it could create more of a problem later for building sites. As to the concept of the development of an air curtain incinerator site for the North County, he suggested that Mr. Mensing present his pro- posal to the Utilities Department for analysis and recommendation to the Board. 44