Agenda - Council - 09/27/1988 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Gateway Airport The operation of a landfill within 5000' of an airport serving piston aircraft has been determined to be an incompatible land use by FAA. The state of Minnesota as well as the MC supposedly acknowledges federal policies and regulations yet continues tb violate them with respect to both expansion of existing-fills and siting of new land fills. Whether the airport is improved or not, it does exist as part of regional, state and national systems plans. The proposed landfill expansion both serves to create a greater hazard to air navigation by increasing its size, but also would extend the period of time where hazardous conditions could occur due to continued operation of the landfill. The EI$ on page 116 refers to the possibility of a temporary delay of two years for airport improvements which would occur as a result of the landfill operations. This again could only be assured through a time limit imposed on the landfill expansion rather than simply approving WM/~I's requested volume for the expansion. The EIS on page 116 also erroneously refers to the development restrictions imposed due to site P. Those restrictions apply only within the candidate site and buffer area themselves, not to land outside of these areas. At a recent public hearing for a Conditional Use Permit, WMMI stated that they have since revised the height of the proposed landfill to 1020' MSL. This elevation would be below the horizontal surface of the existing airport and aside from the period of time when vehicles are operating on it should not infringe on protected airspace. This proposed elevation should be reflected in the final EIS. On page 120, the excerpt from the draft airport master plan indicating that "A check with area pilots and Mn/DOT relative to bird strikes, close calls or other related problems, indicates that the existing landfill has not been a bird attractor or created a hazard area" is a statement that FAA specifically raised an issue with. The EIS on page 121 refers to "extending the hazard potential over the landfills new operating life-something less than three years". This can only be true again based on a time limit to complete the landfill expansion rather than a permitted volume. The point that the EIS fails to consider is that the potential hazards associated with the continuation of the landfill will increase, not soley because of the landfill itself, but also due to the increased number of operations that have occurred and are expected to occur at the airport. 5