My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
10/12/88 Special
Ramsey
>
Public
>
Dissolved Boards/Commissions/Committees
>
Planning and Zoning
>
Agendas
>
1980's
>
1988
>
10/12/88 Special
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/21/2025 11:10:45 AM
Creation date
2/24/2006 11:46:29 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Document Type
Agenda
Document Title
Planning & Zoning Commission - Special
Document Date
10/12/1988
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
123
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
The financial resources cf the landfill o~er and the regulatory structure nay <br />not be sufficient to make the site environmentally safe. <br /> <br />AESTHETICS <br /> <br />Sensitive residential areas currently experience unobstructed views within a <br />half-=ilo of the site. The approximate four-foot increase Ln height associated <br />with the expansion will have a negligible impact on increasing the size of the <br />viewshed. Vegetative growth will gradually screen mo~e areas from the <br />landfill. <br /> <br />Nuisance impacts associated with landfill operations ca,not entirely be <br />avoided. Trucks make noise, litter is subjected to the wind from the time it <br />is being dumped until i~ is covered with dirt, and decomposing =aterials create <br />odors. The strategy to understand the nature of these problems at the Anoka <br />Landfill involved a review of reports of nuisance issues from citizens at <br />community public meetings, interviews with city and county officials, a survey <br />of residents most likely to be affected and follow-up lnte~'!ews with residents <br />who were willing to share their concerns. <br /> <br />Litter is the most frequent concern expressed to public officials, but a s~-vey <br />of residents indicated that the impact of odor and 'noise are more severe. <br />Rodent and insect implications were viewed as inconsequential by about half the <br />respondents. Nuisances tend to be viewed as frequent. Odor was generally <br />perceived as a su~er season problem. <br /> <br />CONCLUSION <br /> <br />The EiS ccntains supporting documentaticn for each of the topics discussed <br />briefly in this su-u~ry. Mitigat!cn measures to address issues and concerns <br />are evaluated as well. <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.