Agenda Packets - 1983/03/14 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

MEMO TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Clerk -Administrator DATE: March 7, 1983 SUBJECT: PROPOSED HAZARDOUS WASTE PROCESSING AREA IN THE CITY OF FRIDLEY Attached please find a Notice of Hearing from the Minnesota Waste Management Board indicating that on April 19, 1983 at 1:00 p.m. and 7:00 p.m. at the Fridley City Hall a hearing will be held by the State Hearing Examiner's Office for the purpose of gathering additional information on the proposed Hazardous Waste Processing Facility site in Fridley. The hearing is the final step in the statutorily established process prior to the final selection of hazardous waste processing areas by the Waste Management Board (WMB). The area which has previously been identified as Fridley Site A, note map attached, abuts the westerly Mounds View City limits from County Road H to County Road H-2. On November 30, 1982, staff submitted a memorandum, copy attached, recommending that the City of Mounds View go on record supporting the City of Fridley's opposition of the preliminary identification of the site by the WMB. On December 13, 1982 the City Council adopted Resolution No. 1523 taking such a position. Unfortunately, the WMB did not agree with Fridley's position and on December 17, 1982 adopted Fridley A, " . as a proposed area for transfer/storage and chemical treatment with direction to explore possible alternatives with the City." Attached is the WMB's "Basis for the Selection of Criteria and Selection of Areas for Inclusion in the Proposed Inventory of Processing Areas" dated February 24, 1983 with the WMB's analysis of Fridley A. Also attached is the cover sheet of a report from the Anoka County Soil and Water Conservation District which summarizes the findings of the District's Board of Supervisors from a technical analysis of the soils at Fridley A. The Board suggests that Fridley A be removed from the list of proposed sites for four basic reasons. These are: 1. A natural water table ranging from 0 - 4 feet in depth. 2. The relatively poor filtering capacity of the predominant soils on the site. 3. The location of the site in a "... densely populated area that could be directly affected by contaminants."