10/12/88 Special - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Mr. Gerald Zimmerman, Page 3 September 14, 1988 Chairman The city, however, may be able to comply with FAA's order if an orderly closure program is agreed upon with a fixed date of closure which coincides with airport improvements. MC's draft EIS on the vertical expansion addresses the need, impacts and alternatives to the proposed expansion. As stated earlier, no determination has been made as yet regarding the adequacy of the document. The document does contain information directly related to the CUP application and should be incorporated into the record. Some of the points made in the EIS.are highlighted herein. Excerpts from the draft EIS state: "Assuming the successful implementation of the waste reduction/resource recovery schedule, the Council projects that 20,605 acre-feet are needed for land disposal of all the Metropolitan Area waste generated between 1985 and 2000. The capacity of the eight existing landfills serving the region was estimated at 11,909 acre-feet in 1985. The Council's landfill development schedule is predicated upon the assumption that the difference between these figures, 8,726 acre-feet, should be added during the period. Since the preparation of the Council's plan in 1985, some additional information abou~ existing landfill capacity is available from county annual repor%s to the Council, landfill reports to the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency and requests for permit expansions. This information is summarized in Table 2-1. Approximately 10,454 acre-feet of capacity remained as of April, 1956. The current annual use rate for the region, 1,848 acre-feet, will exhaust the available capacity within six years, unless new capacity is created or waste reduction/resource recovery initiatives be~in to have the anticipated impact.' It is important to predict as accurately as possible the currently pe-~mitted remainin~ capacity and estimated useful life of the Anoka landfill. In recent years landfills approaching their anticipated closure dates have consistently operated beyond expectations, in most cases, expansions were proposed and continuous cpera~ions, albeit at a reduced scale, were in the interest of the landfill operators. Closure usually involves e×pensive environnental protection measures and crea~es an opportunity through the regulatory approvals mrocess to oppose a resumption of business. The operators ~ypica!!y raise tipping fees or deny access to packer trucks tO divert waste.