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

Home

Traffic impacts due to the change in level from a sharply curtailed landfill activity to a landfill operation were not addressed. As was pointed out earlier, the impact of restricted loads on the Mississippi River crossing at Anoka and Champlin also was not taken into consideration. Summary The EIS is based largely on supporting a project for which the justi- fication for need is dated. A number of "crisis" situations that had been portrayed as occuring in the CON process have been shown to be incorrect. The rate increases imposed by WM~I and the restrictions on the Hwy. 169 Mississippi bridge crossing have served to illustrate over much of the past year just how "adverse" the impacts of closure are. The EIS completely fails to address the expansion in this light. As indicated in the City's original position statement commenting on the EAW scoping decision, the City believes that a valid assessment would consider the type, the magnitude, and duration of impacts considering a closed landfill versus expansion, rather than comparing an expansion with an operation that last existed at a similar level in 1986. Most importantly, the EIS addresses a time frame which assumes completion of the landfill operations inclusive of final cover by 1991. If, in fact, the EIS is to be considered adequate, approval should only be contingent on a time limited capacity rather than a volume based capacity. As the City is aware, as MC is aware, and all other parties are aware, simply approving a requested capacity initiated by an applicant has absolutely no relationship to the duration of any associated impacts since that capacity, historically, has stretched well beyond any projected closings.