My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
ARCHIVED REPORTS_1981
EnvironmentalHealth
>
EHD Program Facility Records by Street Name
>
H
>
HARNEY
>
17720
>
4400 - Solid Waste Program
>
PR0440058
>
ARCHIVED REPORTS
>
ARCHIVED REPORTS_1981
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/17/2020 2:16:11 PM
Creation date
7/3/2020 11:00:35 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
EHD - Public
ProgramCode
4400 - Solid Waste Program
File Section
ARCHIVED REPORTS
FileName_PostFix
1981
RECORD_ID
PR0440058
PE
4433
FACILITY_ID
FA0004518
FACILITY_NAME
NORTH COUNTY LANDFILL
STREET_NUMBER
17720
Direction
E
STREET_NAME
HARNEY
STREET_TYPE
LN
City
LODI
Zip
95240
APN
06512004
CURRENT_STATUS
01
SITE_LOCATION
17720 E HARNEY LN
P_LOCATION
99
P_DISTRICT
004
QC Status
Approved
Scanner
CField
Supplemental fields
FilePath
\MIGRATIONS\SW\SW_4433_PR0440058_17720 E HARNEY_1981.tif
Tags
EHD - Public
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
265
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
Franchised Collector Costs. As previously mentioned, <br />none of the alternatives would affect collection and haul <br />costs of the Lodi City franchisee, since the Lodi City e <br />franchisee would always use the California Waste Removal <br />Systems transfer station. However, if the county franchisee <br />also used the California Waste Removal Systems transfer <br />station in all alternatives and was charged the same disposal <br />fee as at all landfills, the county franchisee's collection <br />and haul costs would be reduced to essentially the same as <br />Alternative A.1 or A.2. As shown in Table 7, the cost <br />reductions to County franchisee would be greatest for <br />Alternatives C.1 and D.1, since direct haul to distant <br />landfills would be eliminated. However, overall cost <br />reductions are not significant. <br />Service Area. As previously discussed, several cost <br />items were based on facilities having specific service <br />areas. Public and other commercial hauler costs were based on <br />cost of haul to the nearest facility. This also affected <br />transfer haul cost. If facility service areas are established <br />in different ways, collection and transfer costs would change. <br />One extreme case would be to assume direct haul to landfills <br />only, except for the Lodi City franchisee which would continue <br />to use the California Waste Removal Systems transfer <br />station. This could occur in the unlikely event that the <br />California Waste Removal Systems transfer station is not open <br />to the public and the Eight Mile Road transfer station is not <br />built. In this case, costs of Alternatives A.1, C.1, and D.1 <br />only would be affected, because if the Eight Mile Road <br />transfer station is not built, Alternatives A.2, C.2, and D.2 <br />do not apply. <br />R1 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.