Laserfiche WebLink
O ity of Ramsey <br />1.','I!~3NOWTHEN P~OULEVARDN.W.,RAMSEY, MINNESOTA 55303 · (612) 427-1410 <br /> <br />Mr. Steve ~((,.¢~'o, Chairman <br />Metropolitar~ .r:ouncJl <br />Hears Park <br />230 East Fi~'hb Street <br />St. Paul, ~IN 5'510] <br /> <br />Re: <br /> <br />Corament,'; ~;n the Draft EIS for the Proposed Expansion <br />of tNe Ar}.~ka Sanitary Landfill <br /> <br />Dear Mr. Ke6 ;':;:: <br /> <br />The purpose el' the City's review of the Environmental Impact Statement <br />(EIS) for (h~e v..;rtical expansion of the landfill is not necessarily to <br />take a pos'.it-i.,~ on the landfill expansion issue. Rather, it is to <br />make it's <_'.on~:~;-:ns known relative to the quality, adequacy and <br />validity of- {"i~ i. nformation presented in the EIS document. The <br />following c,~ra,a~';,R:s~ therefore, express concerns on those points which <br />the city dj ¢.'f~:r; with those expressed in the EIS. It is not the <br />intent to indi,~:,~t.e whether the City agrees or disagrees on each aspect <br />or statement ~_~f the EIS. We hope that, taken in this context, the <br />tenor of the co~.tments is viewed in a relatively neutral and objective <br />posture rathe;- :h.a.n as strictly a negative position. <br /> <br />City Cou}lci . a}-~i City staff have discussed these comments with Waste <br />Management {~*~Hi.{i ) personnel at their request. While the parties are <br />not necessa];ili*? :in agreement in all cases, both parties understand the <br />other' :~ c'.o~,".,~ ~-~'.. <br /> <br />Introduct i.'~f~ <br /> <br />The ElS oil ;.It,_ } z'opesed vertJ.cal expansion of Anoka Sanitary Landfill <br />has been r.:v.i<wr:.d by the City of Ramsey. The City's comments on the <br />EIS a]re her'r~.i}, } eJng submitted. <br /> <br />As a gener,,il r,r~l e, our review leaves the City with the impression that <br />the EIS wa~', (;ompleted as a supporting document to the Certificate of <br />Need (CON) ~,]x;~,~ss rather than as an objective evaluation of impacts <br />and all,term~{':,'~,~ -to the proposed action. The CON application and <br />analysJ, s {;~3(~r~'.,,~t~tioN which is contained in the EiS is dated and stale <br />relying en i~,.:- ,~pplicant's proposed 1986 expansion capacity rather <br />than the :;v.~;t ~,.m'~ nc, ods as reflected two years later. <br /> <br /> <br />