By Rosalind S. Helderman
Washington Post Staff Writer
Monday, September 15, 2008
Even on the nicest days, Bobbie Mack rolls up her car windows as she gets close to home in Upper Marlboro to block out the stench wafting from the only landfill in Prince George's County, which is located across the street.
"I put Bounce in my car vents," she said. "That way, I get the Bounce smell, not the trash."
After more than 40 years of operation, the landfill on Brown Station Road will reach capacity in 2011, and Mack thinks the time has come to put the county's trash elsewhere. So does the County Council, which tomorrow is scheduled to vote to replace the landfill with a trash-transfer station somewhere else, where garbage would be trucked and crushed before being shipped to landfills beyond Prince George's.
"I think this is an opportunity for the County Council to look forward," said Mack, who has lived next to the county landfill since 1978. "We have done our civic duty."
But residents who live near the proposed transfer station site off Route 301, south of the county courthouse and administrative building, don't want garbage near their homes any more than do Mack and her neighbors. They believe it makes no sense to add truck traffic to the already clogged highway or to put the station in what they think remains a relatively pristine rural area. They do not trust county officials who have downplayed the possible environmental impacts and smell of an enclosed transfer station.
"I walk through that site three times a week, and I think this is environmental suicide," said Mary Benson, who lives nearby. "It is one of the last wild areas of Prince George's."
For years, county leaders have been bedeviled by the politically sensitive issue of where to put garbage. A second landfill in Bowie closed in 2000, raising concerns about the county's diminishing garbage space. The next year, an effort to place a trash-transfer site on 200 acres close to Bowie State University died after nearby residents raised objections.
The council rejected a recommendation by the county's Department of Environmental Resources in 2006 that the county build the transfer center at the same site now under consideration on Route 301.
Instead, council members asked the Maryland-National Capital Park and Planning Commission to hire a new consultant and complete a new study weighing "community input" more heavily as a criteria in recommending sites.
The new study took more than a year and involved four public meetings. The study excluded putting the transfer station at the landfill. It still recommended the site on Route 301.
County Council Chairman Samuel H. Dean (D-Mitchellville) said the county-owned 216-acre property makes sense because it is near major highways and a rail line and is across the street from a wastewater treatment plant.
"We have to begin to find a way to handle our refuse," said Dean, who said he likely will vote for the proposal. "To me, this is the most efficient and effective way to handle our rubbish."
Still, some residents said they don't think the study involved as much community comment as advertised. Notices ran in newspapers before public meetings, but many said they had no idea the process was underway until they were alerted by letter to a final public hearing, held last week. The letter was sent to property owners who live within two miles of the site.
"We're getting railroaded into this site," said Jacqui Hayes.
They said they sympathize with residents like Mack but think the site of the current landfill could accommodate the less-intrusive transfer station, which would confine the environmental impact to an area that has already been compromised.
"It's outrageous that they've spent millions since the 1960s trying to preserve a greenway by the [Patuxent] river, and now we're going to put a trash-transfer site there," said Fred Tutman, riverkeeper of the Patuxent, which flows near the proposed trash-transfer station. "It seems like a very discordant use."
Officials with the county's Environmental Resources Department refused to provide basic information about the existing landfill, including how many acres of the county-owned site are devoted to the landfill and how many are unused. Carol Terry, a spokeswoman for the department, said the department's director had decided no public information could be provided because of the pending council decision.
The council is scheduled to vote tomorrow to formally amend the county's 10-year solid-waste plan to include the new transfer station. If County Executive Jack B. Johnson (D) does not object, the county would then seek state permits to move forward, a process that could take several years.
Charles Renninger, who was the chairman of a county-appointed Environmental Justice Task Force, said his group toured trash-transfer stations in other counties and found there was little smell or litter. He said it is unfair to continue putting all the county's garbage at Brown Station Road, noting other less-than-desirable projects that are in the same area, including construction rubble dumps and the county jail.
"The longer we wait, the more difficult it will be to deal with this issue," he said.
"The trash is going to have to go someplace."
View all comments that have been posted about this article.