Lusby next up for compactor improvements

Friday, Jan. 9, 2009

On Jan. 6, the commissioners slated construction on the Lusby site to begin in fiscal year 2010, and Mt. Hope, which is in Sunderland, in FY 2011.

Traffic problems were a main concern about the Lusby convenience center, where cars often line up into H.G. Trueman Road, causing jams, according to Utilities Bureau Chief Barry King. The commissioners agreed, with some of them fearing the situation could be a danger to drivers and a problem for nearby Appeal Elementary School. The county's plan calls for the current compactor site to close, being replaced with a new, much larger one at the convergence of Southern Connector Boulevard and Margaret Taylor Boulevard. The project is projected to cost almost $2 million, although King warned of a possible cost "escalation" as plans are refined. The costs will be provided by utility fees, according to King's presentation.

"That would be my number one: seeing the backup and safety hazards [removed]," said Commissioner Barbara Stinnett (D). Stinnett said she also supports improvements at Mt. Hope but prioritized Lusby because attempts to attract upscale businesses, including restaurants, to two nearby shopping centers, could be compromised by having a trash compactor nearby.

"The one down there in Lusby, it's offensive," she said. "… It should be given some priority because it's dirty and it's nasty."

Jerry Clark (R), whose district includes Lusby and Appeal, said the Lusby site is a priority but that Appeal should wait. He questioned the advisability of making road improvements to relieve pressure at Appeal, because the plan ultimately calls for the compactor site to move to another section of the Appeal Landfill.

"It just seems silly to me to spend $3.3 million for those improvements and then, a few years later, say, ‘Let's build that site,' and you've wasted $3.3 million," he said. According to county Project Engineer Mark Buckler, the cost for the proposed stop-gap traffic improvements, which would include new trash boxes, would be $1.35 million.

Mt. Hope and Lusby would both be better investments, he said.

"I will admit Mt. Hope needs to be fixed on a par or even ahead of the Lusby one, because that's been a mess for a long time," Clark said. Traffic issues are the main problem at Mt. Hope, too, Buckler said, with cars lining up in the road to get into the site.

Commissioner Susan Shaw (R) suggested improvements in Lusby could take pressure off of Appeal, which, according to the presentation, serves only a quarter as many as use the Lusby site.

Commissioner Linda Kelley (R) said all the projects are worthy, but that in light of budget concerns some will have to wait.

"In a perfect world, where we had all that money, that would be wonderful thing to do, but we're facing some real restraints," she said.

Project funding is hampered by a decline in the county's solid waste fund driven by the overall economy, according to King. Doing both Lusby and Appeal would exhaust the fund's reserves and saddle the county with $3.5 million in debt. Adding that Mt. Hope would add $2 million in debt and require an increase in the solid waste fee from $107 to $125 over three years, $6 more than otherwise.

Trudy Mihalcik, a librarian at the Southern Branch in Lusby, said the traffic problems associated with the compactor did not directly affect the library but that she often saw traffic snarled on H.G. Trueman Road.

"I don't really have any experience of it affecting Appeal Lane as such, but I go past the compactor site several times a week, and there's a line of people waiting to get into there," she said.

emitrano@somdnews.com