[{"_1":2,"_99":-5,"_100":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,75,87],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},"mediaId",6122751,"mediaKeyId","2694252-c7fa8f1c1246dbff14c67ba41facf189","parentId",2694252,"title","Burke County explores reopening/expanding landfill footprint and other options to cut disposal costs","audioSeconds",1170,"startMs",10006000,"endMs",11176000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=2694252-c7fa8f1c1246dbff14c67ba41facf189&start=10006&end=11176","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2694252-c7fa8f1c1246dbff14c67ba41facf189/thumbnail_10006000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6122751/Burke-County/North-Carolina/Burke-County-explores-reopeningexpanding-landfill-footprint-and-other-options-to-cut-disposal-costs","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6122751-238b2da1c07f53e9bb01047351e4b96d/orig.mp4?Expires=1771152219&Signature=jjyZvWvmNqv7RQIeIMztnh6YHsyKBfrRbccVvd2GYhiKxq9YdY51xu5UPff~fvxOqtJjutx2fSvc7MgJfqTO17xqrOwOgRVgYJFGSYVr7Hnc3~Frwyt0MSbxOaKLKNd-xAfw5Do4J8sk2C4e8ZCIX3tHOBf5rzB9yGLsh~fE880d64WwzzHzUJtcnXtkZDXaCVnpzGmLK3UCKsUUiayKiTPbTqyFU0vbhadQuA56wo~ELad0ehz5~EB4spi~zKnEZIK3nyeUys3nFmLl1cUmoa5uMoCYoNSBy2P7TywAJNVtlp-PCvQ5wTKQHQXCw9IPsfoblFAHak6IhygGU9ifvg__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","Burke County, NC","date","2025-03-19T17:00:15Z","article","Burke County staff asked commissioners to consider further study of a county‑operated municipal solid waste (MSW) landfill after staff reported significant near‑term savings from changes implemented this year and described a multi‑year path to permitting and building a lined MSW cell.

Solid waste staff (Mr. Sandow) said county restructuring of curbside and convenience‑site handling and a decision to transport MSW to Republic Services’ Lenoir landfill in‑house saved the county roughly $1,080,000 in the current fiscal year. The change required leasing vehicles, hiring operational staff and some up‑front costs estimated at about $250,000, but staff negotiated approximately $20 per ton lower tipping fees with Republic and implemented compaction of cardboard at convenience sites to reduce contracted hauling costs.

Why it matters: About one‑third of the solid‑waste enterprise fund’s operating costs are disposal/tipping fees; staff told commissioners that owning and operating an MSW landfill would be capital‑intensive but could save tens of millions of dollars over decades and would reduce the county’s exposure to outside landfill rate increases.

Technical overview and timeline: County engineering consultant Vance Moore explained that converting the existing Johns River site (where the county already operates a C&D landfill and transfer station) into MSW capacity would require significant permitting, environmental due diligence, cemetery relocation work in one portion of the site and construction of lined landfill cells with leachate collection and gas management. Moore outlined a staged process: a near‑term “fatal‑flaw” study (to assess streams, cemetery relocation feasibility, buffers and other constraints), followed by detailed permitting, design and then phased construction. Staff estimated that if the county pursued a new MSW footprint and moved forward without delay, opening a county MSW landfill would be several years away (staff mentioned 2029–2030 as an earliest plausible opening) and that an MSW landfill sized to current local tonnage could have a 35–40 year life; staff estimated lifecycle disposal savings in the tens of millions of dollars compared with continued reliance on contract disposal.

Budget and enterprise fund context: The solid‑waste enterprise fund ran a small operating surplus for the first time this year after the operational changes; staff emphasized the need to set aside reserves for capital replacements and for landfill post‑closure monitoring (the county carries an actuarial liability for closed landfills). The board heard that earlier landfills (East Burke, Kirksey Drive) are closed but remain subject to monitoring and that that post‑closure care and gas/groundwater monitoring are long‑term obligations.

Board direction: Commissioners agreed by consensus to direct staff to proceed with next‑step exploratory work — a targeted fatal‑flaw study and permitting assessment for additional MSW capacity at the Johns River site (or an alternate county site if fatal flaws are identified). Staff estimated a modest study budget for the coming fiscal year to test feasibility and return to the board with a clear go/no‑go recommendation; any construction would require subsequent multi‑year funding and permitting steps. No vote to build a landfill or to commit capital was taken at the meeting.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","Budget / Strategic Planning Retreat - Day 2","oneSentenceSummary","Staff reported that transitioning to in‑house transport cut tipping costs this year and proposed a multi‑year study of whether a county‑operated municipal solid waste (MSW) landfill on county property is feasible; board agreed to explore the option further.","taxTitle","Burke County, North Carolina","taxId",51046,"location","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":76,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":77,"_41":78,"_43":79,"_45":80,"_47":81,"_49":82,"_51":83,"_53":84,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":85,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":86,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6122756,"Burke County staff propose UDO updates, zoning and subdivision changes to speed housing and development",3063,6591000,9654000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2694252-c7fa8f1c1246dbff14c67ba41facf189&start=6591&end=9654","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2694252-c7fa8f1c1246dbff14c67ba41facf189/thumbnail_6591000.jpg","/articles/6122756/Burke-County/North-Carolina/Burke-County-staff-propose-UDO-updates-zoning-and-subdivision-changes-to-speed-housing-and-development","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6122756-c1aa682600e528d56b117007c19e5e05/orig.mp4?Expires=1771152219&Signature=IkOOvGa4jHvdCV5eTy6gYwj~PTYoPlO-pr8oMh04gxN4-0OjJYrleFSO7~lEEokmYoYDanmXQLwGL5~Q2UBUJ8U6TcTATdw7DWS2vkc0pJGDJ3w3Uogs9PAI3CisN5U8rN9gAdf9BGK-5usxuQ8J~KW8ibfGN1s7kcgMOeXN0GGOLFJig7883F9EMD~L6UNJwyODasHFuABZBm2PLb2nT10YdP4eEbaAjuvFgJGKWm89IYoPfW3s-YefymE6qhLzVz-So44HPj6AobTMPFgbSkZCDOpzMZGix1i8tEU~5GysZNIXSVN9taxI6BDHXYhCMOUqbtqNPDJmBZKHtOYlUA__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Burke County’s planning director reviewed the county’s land‑use code and recommended a mix of short‑, mid‑ and long‑term updates to the Unified Development Ordinance (UDO) and subdivision regulations intended to reduce uncertainty for developers and speed housing production.

Director Alan Glines told commissioners the UDO consolidates zoning, subdivision and site standards and that many developers research local rules online before contacting staff. He said overly restrictive lot‑size and subdivision standards and a complex permitting pathway create a cost and time barrier to builders. Glines recommended targeted short‑term changes (density standards, subdivision thresholds and special‑use permit triggers), mid‑term work on overlays and standards for new uses, and a longer‑term rewrite if community input warrants.

Why it matters: Commissioners hearing this presentation emphasized that where sewer and water are available, higher build density would produce housing faster and at lower unit cost; staff said those changes could be delivered as text amendments and sent to the planning board for its recommendation.

Key details presented: Glines explained that Burke County’s current residential minimum lot sizes are tied to whether public water and/or sewer are available; where neither utility is available a typical minimum is approximately three‑quarters of an acre, and roughly a half‑acre when both utilities are present. He detailed the county’s two subdivision tracks: a minor subdivision (one to six lots) with minimal road standards and a major subdivision (more than six lots) that must meet NCDOT road standards and is more costly to build. Staff said the county frequently sees 1–6 lot proposals that avoid major subdivision requirements and result in lower overall housing yield across large tracts.

Glines and staff noted that conditional zoning exists as a tool but that many builders prefer by‑right standards; making smaller lot sizes by‑right in sewered areas would remove legislative steps and shorten timelines for production. He suggested a text amendment process to create clearer by‑right options tied to the presence of public sewer and water and offered to return with draft language; commissioners gave direction to begin that work.

Other points: The planning director reviewed special‑use categories that currently require Board of Adjustment review (examples: campgrounds, kennels, large accessory structures) and suggested some thresholds (for example accessory buildings above 1,500 square feet) be reconsidered to avoid needless special‑use hearings. He also said the county’s comprehensive plan (Blueprint Burke) and future land‑use map are in place and should be more prominent on public websites so prospective developers and site selectors can find community goals.

Ending: Commissioners asked staff to draft a text amendment to reduce the minimum lot size where public sewer (and water) is available and to bring the amendment to the planning board; staff estimated a draft could be prepared within a few months. The board gave tentative consensus to prioritize short‑term zoning and subdivision adjustments as part of the FY26 budget and planning work.","Planning director Alan Glines urged updates to the county’s Unified Development Ordinance, subdivision rules and minimum‑lot standards; commissioners asked staff to draft text amendments to allow higher density where public sewer is available and to streamline conditional/rezoning pathways.",{"_33":88,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":89,"_41":90,"_43":91,"_45":92,"_47":93,"_49":94,"_51":95,"_53":96,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":97,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":98,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6122760,"Burke County leaders hear economic development briefing as county eyes product, housing and workforce strategies",1208,86000,1294000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2694252-c7fa8f1c1246dbff14c67ba41facf189&start=86&end=1294","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2694252-c7fa8f1c1246dbff14c67ba41facf189/thumbnail_86000.jpg","/articles/6122760/Burke-County/North-Carolina/Burke-County-leaders-hear-economic-development-briefing-as-county-eyes-product-housing-and-workforce-strategies","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6122760-5ddd7d9b720fbc3c173b74b1a271af82/orig.mp4?Expires=1771152219&Signature=cL9Y-R3onnpdiWVwQ0kEaL~e8nTKNmy1y5x7e3bKmV8Zfp-oRLBbVmIsKYXneKT~pd8-YxHh4OVAsV2hKyBVUH5Q5rsLQWwkLNq~RZehQNPjuINuqhSvrEcMuWBOfVWsmdCShdzDl6k4i4xfl~ahf4RmbNWytFPA78Uxk4r3fK9Y38qXC3693c~v9TtIxpo~ZND6LL4dOW4iRJ2NUw1TMFwXY0ArCUGXo9~9kiHa~8jLiZOirGtGqbXIX3hm-vzsCZSM0vE5yMevwf20jYuBiJSpLx~~loF6PRC7NVK4dlc162l~PQZnR7JzMFKTh7GU413i46JTHCp850IqIbX49Q__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Burke County commissioners on Tuesday heard a lengthy economic development briefing that outlined weak recent tax-base growth, the county’s manufacturing workforce strengths and the need for more “product” — ready-to-occupy industrial buildings and pad-ready sites — to attract corporate investment.

The county manager opened the session by saying the agenda item was an economic development forecast and stressed the connection between creating jobs, expanding the tax base and improving residents’ economic mobility. He and consultant Crystal Morphis presented data showing that Burke’s total property tax base has largely tracked inflation in recent years and that the county has lagged regional peers in post‑COVID economic growth and in new corporate investment.

Why it matters: Commissioners were urged to treat product development (buildings and sites), workforce training and regulatory streamlining as linked priorities. Presenters said one large corporate investment generates tax revenue equivalent to hundreds of new single-family homes without creating the same service demand, making such investments a strategic way to grow the tax base without proportionally raising service costs.

County manager (identified in the meeting as Brian) told the board Burke County’s current total tax base is “about 10,800,000,000.0” and that long‑term growth has been modest; he said most of the county’s recent corporate investment reported by the state’s Economic Development Partnership of North Carolina (EDPNC) — roughly $29 million over three years — came from one large project (the UNIX project). He compared Burke to nearby counties and showed those peers attracted substantially more reported investment in the latest three‑year period.

Crystal Morphis, CEO and founder of Creative Economic Development Consulting, told commissioners that the primary factors companies use to decide where to locate are labor availability and ready real estate. She recommended the county invest in workforce “on‑ramps” and short‑term credential programs (examples cited: Fast Forward, 12-in-6-style certificate programs) and called for a multi‑level approach that coordinates local infrastructure, education and regional/state partners. Morphis said 38% of recent site prospect requests wanted a building and an additional 25% preferred a building, meaning the largest single market opportunity is having usable buildings available for immediate occupancy.

Board discussion focused on the county’s limited inventory of modern industrial buildings (class A stock with 30‑foot clear heights and 100,000+ square feet) and the effect that shortage has had on missed opportunities. Commissioners asked about barriers; presenters pointed to a combination of insufficient pad-ready sites, utility capacity, permitting timelines and access/road limits. Commissioners and staff noted a Drexel site — rail served and utility-ready — is shortlisted as one of two potential locations for a very large project, and that a shell building proposal for the Burke Business Park is advancing through procurement steps.

A consistent theme was workforce: Morphis said manufacturing remains Burke’s largest employment sector (about 26% of local employment) and stressed aligning educational and training outputs with employer demand — including trades, electromechanical and advanced manufacturing skills. She and staff discussed childcare and affordable housing as practical workforce constraints: child care shortages were identified as a major cause of labor force disengagement and one factor that employers consider when assessing a location.

Commissioners also heard that business retention and expansion (BRE) should remain the county’s top priority because about two‑thirds of new jobs and investment nationally come from existing local businesses. Morphis advised that incentive policies should be structured to support expansions of local employers as well as new prospects. The county manager and staff emphasized BDI (Burke Development, Inc.) and other local partners should continue to track incoming requests for information (RFIs); staff said there were roughly 40 RFIs in 2024 the county could not respond to because of lack of product.

Ending: Commissioners signaled interest in continuing the shell-building project and product-development work the county has already started; they pressed staff for follow‑up on site readiness, utility capacity and timelines for the proposed spec building at the Burke Business Park. No formal action was taken on policy changes during the presentation; staff said more detailed implementation recommendations would be brought back as part of the county’s budget and capital planning process.","County manager and consultant Crystal Morphis outlined economic indicators, gaps in developable industrial buildings and workforce challenges; speakers urged focus on product development (spec buildings, pad-ready sites), workforce “on-ramps” and marketing the county to recruiters.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Burke County explores reopening/expanding landfill footprint and other options to cut disposal costs

Burke County staff propose UDO updates, zoning and subdivision changes to speed housing and development

Burke County leaders hear economic development briefing as county eyes product, housing and workforce strategies