Agenda - Planning Commission - 02/07/1995

Home

Page 2- January ~15, 1995 Z.B. Landfill -- Neighbors Fight New Landfill Site to Protect Drinking Water Weyerhaeuser v. Pierce Comity, 873 P 2d 498 (Washi~gto~O 1994 Land Recovery Inc. (LRI) collected and disposed of solid waste for Pierce County, Wash., under a long-term contract. Its landfill was expected to be full by 1996, so LRI looked for new landfill sites. The company identified a 317- acre parcel in which a Iandfill could be operated with a conditional use permit. However, neighbors used a freshwater stream on the site for its fish and its drinking-water wells. LRI's proposed site was next to Weyerhaeuser's land. When the county gave LRI a favorable environmental impact statement (EIS), Weyerhaeuser appealed. The hearing officer ruled that citizens could not directly question staff members who prepared the EIS at the hearing, but could submit written questions. After much negative public comment, the hearing officer recommended approval of the landfill permit and dismissed the EIS appeals. Weyerhaeuser and other neighbors appealed to the county council, which returned the case to the hearing officer for further findings. The hearing offi- cer made additional findings to support LRI's permit application. Weyerhaeuser appealed again. The court reversed the county's decision, stating the ElS was flawed and insufficient to support the county's approval. LRI and the county appealed. DECISION: Affirmed. The hearing examiner was wrong to pr~ohibit questions to staff members. The county code stated that interested parties had the right to cross examine witnesses. That right should have been protected because the landfill was an environmentally sensitive project, hnd drinking water sources were at stake. The county relied on the EIS's clearly insufficient findings to support the permit. The EIS did not examine alternative sites, which was required by state law. The EtS had to be revised to address all deficiencies, and future public hearings had to allow residents a chance to question county staff members. Klickitat County Citizens Agai~st Imported Waste v. Klickitat Country, 860 t'.2d 390 (1993). Landfill -- County Adopts New Ordinance to Block Landfill Banks CouJ~ty v. Chambers of Georgia I~,c., 444 S.E. 2d 783 (Geosgia) 1994 Georgia's Department of Natural Resources required landfill permit apPli- cants to get written zoning compliance verification for their proposals from the county where the land was located. This was one of the first things a landowner had to do to get a tandfill permit from the department. R&B Wastes Inc., operated a landfill in Banks County, but planned to expand and sell the site to Chambers of Georgia Inc. Chambers asked the county to issue the verification based on its plans for the proposed expanded landfill. County officials refused to issue the verification. Chambers sued the county and asked the court to order the county to issue the verification. Later th..e, same