Laserfiche WebLink
I <br /> I <br /> i <br /> I <br /> I <br /> I <br /> I <br /> I <br /> I <br /> I <br /> I <br /> I <br /> I <br />I <br />! <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br /> <br /> [ <br /> <br />Ramsey Eandf~ll Expansion <br />June 25,1 !98~ <br /> <br /> The :s°il~ colored in the ~ are drier soils, but are of coarse texture <br />and have Very~ poor filtering capacity, thereby are rated SEVERE with respect <br />to landfill ~rea a~d daily cover for landfills. <br /> <br /> In summab~ion, both the Soil & Water Conservation District Board and I feel <br />that intrinsically both expansion fleas are very poor candidate sites. We <br />support .this lopinion on these facts. <br /> <br />1. AppnoEimStely 1/~ of the sites' areas contain wet soils of either organic . <br /> or doors,, sand texture. Not only the fact of a very high natural water table <br /> which( co~d provide the basis for widespread surface water contamination <br /> but ;a2so',the fact of the ver)F poor filtering capacity of the sand texture <br /> which~ could result in ground water contamination, contributes to a strong <br /> posSibilSty of the potential for extensive soil and water pollution. <br /> <br />2. Run-off that may contaminate protected wetlands and other large open water <br /> areaS. <br /> <br />3. The plan! for sealing and collection of leachates does not appear to be <br /> suff~ciel~t. <br /> <br />&. The CrOat De texture of the sand soils that make up the major portions of <br /> the ~Xpa ~sion areas have very poor filtering capacity which creates the <br /> potentia~ for widespread surface water contamination. <br /> The leve~s of ground and surface water contamination resulting from the <br /> existing~lan~fill should be thoroughly examined and studied, along with all <br /> the oth~s related environmental aspects before any further action is taken <br /> on expansion. At this point we do not stand in favor of this lar~fill expansion. <br /> <br />F <br /> <br /> <br />