Minutes - Council - 06/25/1984 - Joint Public Hearing with Planning and Zoning Commission

Home

Mr. Don Otter - It was not our intent to do so at that time. Roger Hermanson - As far as I can see, there is no value to your proposals; water flows to the South. I see no value to digging up land that is better used as a wildlife refuse. Solvents and shifting could break up the liner. You are going right over a pond that could be a spring and causing direct pollution to ground water as well as aquifers. Resident - 15308 Sunfish Lake Blvd. - What's in it for Ramsey? Do we have the option not to approve this? Can we split this option between the North and the South or is it all tied together? Mayor Gamec - Waste Management makes the presentation and we have the option; we can put conditions on it. What they present, we don't have to say yes or no to. Mr. Goodrich - The applicant has the right to apply for a Conditional Use Permit. They own the property and we have laws governing how and when a Conditional Use Permit is issued, similar to a beauty parlor for example. When a person applies for a permit to operate a beauty parlor, the City has no gain but is obligated to hear that person because that person has property rights and interests. One fact the City has to gain, of course, is the possibilities and why the Council initially got into this subject, why we considered the contract and why we negotiated the contract for the past year almost. We never discussed the North side, that was never part of our negotiations until June of this year; always our emphasis was on the South side and concern about Site P. The fact that we could not get the size of Site P reduced at the Metro Council, we couldn't get the buffer changed, the fact that no one here tonight or anyone anyplace else can tell us that Site P will not come in the City. Then Waste Management applied for the Conditional Use Permit. The possibilities if Council issues a Conditional Use Permit: the existing landfill would be purchased, we woul~d be rid of having the City of Anoka own a landfill in our City with the variations there. A non-resident owner is a difficult situation, they have everything to gain, they can collect fees and Ramsey cannot. That would resolve that issue. We considered the possibility of Anoka County buying the existing site~ we spent several months negotiating something there. We discussed with the City of Anoka the possibility of two cities owning a landfill and trying to work out some resolve there so that Ramsey could to some extent control our own destiny on the landfill issue given, as always, that the existing site is there. You can't take it away or do anything with it. We have an existing site and some liability concern, we have concern with closure and post closure and what's going to happen to that site. It will always be in Ramsey -- should it be a park, should it be passive or active. The City felt we should have some control over it; it is in the center of our City. We are concerned now with the possibility of almost 420 acres, in the heart of Ramsey's industrial area, being considered as landfill. With the conditional use permit there is a possibility for the City to gain some control. The City can gain some funds; we would obtain 10% of the gross from the existing site, we would receive $10,000 per month with a CPI Council/P & Z Public Hearing Page 19 of 23