Laserfiche WebLink
I <br />II <br /> <br /> I <br /> I <br /> I <br /> I <br /> I <br /> I <br /> I <br /> I <br /> I <br /> <br /> I <br /> ! <br /> I <br /> ! <br /> I <br /> I <br /> <br />Nadene'Ki~g - The old site is generating leachate, will Waste <br />Manag~en~ put an infiltration barrier under the existing site? <br />Tha~t~w~ul~ be impossible and where does that leave us, will we <br />be better~off in a long run? <br /> <br />Mr. Co~k r You will be better off because you will have prevented <br />the g~ner~tion of 80,000,000 gallons of leachate. That is a very <br />significa~t number; it covers approximately 1/3 of the existing <br />site, <br /> <br />Nadene~ King - With the ground water flowing in the direction <br />Mr. Cook designated, it will still flow out of the old site in <br />that dire~tion with or without a barrier. If the water is 30' <br />deep, ~hoWi do you propose to dig deep enough to install an <br />infiltration barrier? <br /> r, <br /> <br />Mr. COok ~ The infiltration barrier will be constructed over <br />the eX~istlng landfill site; it will stop water from going down <br />into it. i The fact that ground water flows to the Southeast <br />means tha~ there will be less leachate entering the ground <br />water from the Northwest. We believe this is one step better <br />than just~ leaving the site with it's proposed cap. <br /> <br />Nadene King - Waste Management's presentation showing landfills <br />bein~ ~useid for parks after completion is just sugar coating <br />becauS~ y~ou have already said that this site will be an open <br />area .wher~ it is ended. It is a misconception. <br /> <br />Mr Co, ok i- Our presentation was to show you what can be done <br />with a landfill. Some communities want a major park developed <br />and some iareas prefer not to have a park drawing in the public. <br /> <br />Mike Woodward - 14910 Garnet Street - Has Council done any <br />studies ~egarding what the City will be doing with the money <br />received :ifrom Waste Management, if you do approve the expansion? <br /> <br />Mayor ~Ga~ec - There have been no studies; our biggest problems <br />are p~ote~ction, contract and the agreement. The number one <br />problsm ~s liability and protection. I definitely feel there <br />has t6 b~ money coming in and it should be used to still protect <br />the surrounding area and the residents of the surrounding area. <br /> <br />Mike iWoodward - By protecting do you mean compensation for not <br />being able to sell our homes and creating a need for sewer and <br />water? ~ouncil has a great responsibility to the people of this <br />City ~nd!they have to face up to it now. They can take that <br />responsibility and either vote it down or take that money and <br />try to sa, tisfy the people that are going to be nearly devastated. <br />It's notijust the dust, noise and fear of pollution; it's fmmily <br />stress a~_d not being able to invite friends to your home because <br />of the O~or. People begin to know you as the 'guy who lives by <br />a dump'. It's all on Council's shoulders and quite a few people <br />will be ~urt bad. We have a berm that is supposedly protecting <br />us from the borrow area but it doesn't really protect from noise. <br />Muffiers iwould muffle the sound very well but the banging and <br />lo.ud!i:ru~ks that come in from other places -- you can't muffle <br />those, The beepers are law, you can't get rid of that. We <br /> <br /> Council/P & Z <br /> Public Hearing <br /> <br /> <br />