My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Agenda - Council - 03/23/1982
Ramsey
>
Public
>
Agendas
>
Council
>
1982
>
Agenda - Council - 03/23/1982
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
4/15/2025 12:28:57 PM
Creation date
5/20/2004 11:17:13 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Document Type
Agenda
Meeting Type
Council
Document Date
03/23/1982
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
241
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
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 />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br /> <br />- 10- <br /> <br />criteria for expans'ion of existing landfills. Based on input from the public <br />at an informational meeting held in April 1981, two additional sites were <br />identified, including the Bunker Hills site. <br /> <br />Each site was characterized with respect to residential development, soils, <br />parks, surface water, agriculture and other pertinent factors. Reduction in <br />the number of sites to the complement specified by the WMA was accomplished by <br />Anoka County Board action, based on the recommendations and deliberations of <br />the county's Health Board and Environmental Services Committee. <br /> <br />The Bunker Hills site compares favorably with other potential sites identified <br />in the county's siting process. <br /> <br />CONCLUSIONS <br /> <br />The proposed Coon Rapids/Andover site is generally compatible with <br />surrounding land uses. The site would be a temporary nonconforming use <br />within a designated regional park. <br /> <br />2. The site is not expected to represent a conflict with existing or future <br /> development patterns in nearby areas. <br /> <br />Soils on the site are highly permeable and do not protect surficial ground- <br />water. Lower aquifers are believed to be artesian and may also be pro- <br />tected by a confining bedrock formation. The system of dou§le liners and <br />collection systems, as proposed by the county, would lessen risk to the <br />surficial and upper drift aquifers. <br /> <br />4. Use of the site is not in conflict with Council policies for agricultural <br /> preservation and protection of natural resources. <br /> <br />5. Access to the site is excellent. No roadway upgrading is needed. <br /> <br />6. The site is within a feasible hauling distance from potential waste <br /> generation sources. <br /> <br />7. The site was satisfactorily evaluated in light of the quality of other <br /> potential sites. <br /> <br />SA268A <br />3/5/82 <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.