Loading...
5.2 ITEM 5.2. MEMORANDUM 'ty of .lkRi• ver TO: Planning Commission FROM: Stephen Rohlf, Building & Zoning Administrator DATE: April 22, 1997 5J SUBJECT: LANDFILL C.U.P.AMENDMENT OVERVIEW The Elk River Landfill last renewed their conditional use permit and solid waste facility license with the city in January of 1996. The renewal period was for four years, but the landfill is proposing to expand beyond the original forty acre site that was approved. This expansion was anticipated by the city when the property owned by the landfill was zoned Solid Waste Facility Overlay District. However, no specific approval of this • expansion was given during the last renewal. Therefore, the Elk River Landfill is requesting an amendment to their current conditional use permit and renew their solid waste facility license. In addition,the landfill is in the process of renewing their permit with the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA). Since the city's license and conditional use permit specifically reference MPCA's permit,the city needs to consider whether or not to accept the proposed revisions to that document as is or be more restrictive. MPCA's current permit for the landfill was issued in 1983. Although the Planning Commission is not specifically charged with giving a recommendation on a solid waste facility license,the license and conditional use permit work together. Staff feels it is necessary and appropriate for the Planning Commission to be familiar with the license and comment on it to the City Council. ATTACHMENTS Vicinity map Application cover letter- from Victoria Kreger, Site Manager of the Elk River Landfill, dated March 27, 1997 • Lanfi197 13065 Orono Parkway • P.O. Box 490 • Elk River, MN 55330 • (612) 441-7420 • Fax: (612) 441-7425 Response letter- from Stephen Rohlf, Building &Zoning Adm., dated April 2, 1997 • Elk River Landfill's proposed"Long Term Development Plan", dated March 1997 Additional cover letter-from John Cannon of Camp Dresser& McKee, dated April 15, 1997, which includes revisions to the Long Term Development Plan originally submitted Map of site operations Revised draft conditional use permit and license SIGNIFICANT ISSUES Revised MPCA permit- Since the city's permits reference approvals given in MPCA's permit it is critical that changes to MPCA's permit are reviewed and approved by the city. The draft conditional use permit and license reference the most recent plans, deadlines, and documents submitted to MPCA by the landfill. Corrective action-The first cells developed at the landfill were unlined and, consequently,have resulted in ground water contamination. Methane gas has also migrated pass the landfill's boundaries. Besides assuring that the landfill is currently operating in an environmentally correct manner,the other major goal of the city's permits • is to get the ground water contamination corrected prior to it leaving the landfill's site. The landfill has and will continue to install active gas venting to control methane gas migration. This venting system also works in conjunction with the final cover system to reduce the extent of volatile organic ground water contamination. The City's conditional use permit and license contain language requiring coordinated monitoring of gas and ground water so the results of the active gas venting can be properly analyzed. The City's conditional use permit and license also contain language regarding remedial actions to be taken in addition to active gas venting if this action does not produce the desired result. Expansion - Figure 2 in the attached Long Term Development Plan shows the original permitted 40 acre landfill site (cells 1-11). This drawing also reflects the proposed 52 acre expansion(cells 12-18). Please note that there is a 200 foot buffer area around the expansion area which is mostly wooded on the south and west sides. Staff is recommending approval of this horizontal expansion to the extent to be permitted by MPCA. In fact,this expansion was anticipated when the city approved a rezoning of the property involved to Solid Waste Facility Overlay District. The questions for this amendment are how this expansion will take place. • The Planning Commission needs to consider land use issues such as preservation of adjacent property values, orderly development of surrounding properties, impacts on Lanfil97 essential services, aesthetics, screening, dust, litter and other land use impacts. The staff • recommended conditions in the draft permits address the technical/environmental aspects. Approval of the proposed amendments will allow the construction of cells 12 and 13. The specific construction details of each of these additional cells is proposed to be left to staff approval at a future date, as long as they are consistent with the overall approval given by the City Council. Final elevation- In staffs opinion,the most crucial land use issue the Planning Commission and City Council must consider with regard to the proposed amendments to the landfill's conditional use permit and license is the final elevation of this facility. The issue of height has been the subject of much debate and negotiation between city staff and the landfill. A summary of the discussion is as follows: • The landfill is currently at a maximum elevation of 1,100 feet above mean sea level (MSL). • Plans approved through the current city conditional use permit and license allow the landfill a final elevation of 1,105 feet. This elevation is consistent with the city's Environmental Impact Statement(EIS) on mineral excavation. This EIS was done to provide long range planning for the city's mining district and represents a component of the city's comprehensive plan. The landfill's property is part of the mining district and the landfill voluntarily participated in the EIS. Gravel is mined from the landfill • property prior to it being used as a waste deposit. • The landfill proposed a revision to their MPCA permit that would allow them to have side slopes of 3 to 1 versus the normal 5 to 1 side slopes The steeper side slopes proposed by the landfill could have accommodated an ultimate height in excess of 1,200 feet. City staff met with representatives of both MPCA and the Elk River Landfill on January 30, 1997 regarding the 3 to 1 slopes and expressed concerns about the ultimate height of the landfill. The 3 to 1 side slopes were rejected by MPCA. • The landfill submitted a Long Term Development Plan(dated March, 1997) for city review that proposed a final elevation of 1,170 feet. The cover letter from Victoria Kreger that accompanied the landfill's submittal, dated March 27, 1997, also identified 1,170 as the height being requested by the landfill in their MPCA and city permits. • In a letter dated March 28, 1997, city staff member Stephen Rohlf expressed concern over the 1,170 height to MPCA staff. • In a letter dated March 31, 1997, Greg Korstad, attorney for the landfill, requested that language in MPCA's permit that referenced the required approval of the ultimate • landfill height by the City of Elk River and Sherburne County be stricken. Lanfil97 • • Bill Armstrong of MPCA staff confirmed in a letter to Stephen Rohlf, dated April 2, 1997, that the height of the landfill was not an issue that the MPCA permit will address. MPCA considers final elevation to be land use issue to be resolved locally. • In a letter dated April 2, 1997, city staff member Stephen Rohlf highlighted the city's concerns regarding the finished elevation at the landfill to Victoria Kreger and emphasized the city's authority to regulate final elevation as a local land use issue. • City staff met with landfill representatives on April 9, 1997. The major topic of discussion was the ultimate landfill height. City staff expressed the following concerns regarding additional landfill height: 1. Negative impacts on neighboring property values and land use. 2. Negative aesthetic impacts -The property on which the landfill is situated is already one of the highest points in a five county area. At 1,170 it would be the highest point and a treeless dominate feature on the skyline. Staff is concerned with how this elevation would impact nearby residences and the Railroad Hiking Trail and Woodland Trails Park, both of which currently offer natural settings. US Trunk Highway 169 is the major corridor entering the city from the north. The average elevation of this • highway adjacent to the landfill is closer to 1,000 feet than it is to 1,100. The landfill is the first thing one sees when entering the city from this road. 3. Adding 70 feet to the elevation the landfill would exacerbate existing dust and litter problems. 4. Allowing the landfill a large height increase over surrounding adjacent property eliminates the potential to screen the landfill with trees. Trees can not be planted on waste disposal areas because their roots will potentially penetrate the final cover barrier layer used to close the landfill. Sherburne County's ordinance, which does not apply within the city, limits the height of a landfill to 25 feet above surrounding average grade. • At the 4/9/97 meeting the landfill representatives explained the economic benefits of the increased height. The additional height allows the landfill to get more use from each section of liner they install by placing more waste on top of it. • The landfill proposed a compromise of 1,145 feet; between the 1,105 that is currently allowed and the 1,170 they were requesting. City staff indicated that they felt the negative impacts of increasing the landfill height were not sufficiently mitigated by • Lanfil97 • reducing the height to 1,145. The landfill would still be the predominate feature on the skyline. • City staff made a counter proposal to the landfill to recommend they be allowed to increase their final elevation to 1,120 feet. Staff's research indicates that a final elevation of 1,120 greatly reduces the negative impacts previously stated, but also accommodates the landfill's economic concerns. • In a phone call on April 14, 1997, Ms. Kreger indicated that Elk River Landfill, Inc. and its owners had accepted staff's proposal for a final elevation of 1,120 MSL. The additional attached cover letter from John Cannon, dated April 15, 1997, indicates that the landfill has revised its final elevation to 1,120 MSL. Ms. Kreger has also indicated that the landfill will revise their submittal to MPCA to reflect 1,120 feet as their maximum final elevation. RECCOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of the attached amended conditional use permit contingent on the Elk River Landfill revising their proposed permit with MPCA to reflect a maximum finished elevation of 1,120 feet above mean sea level. • • • LanfiI97 O i C/ / / / . .— E A i g g I ...! 0 1 I 1 1 .6 ;1 :i 11 i I E gl 31 3 rE: ill 41 ig g a •.•_•,...•.:‘,...:,..-.........,.• ,-4-•,,-•:..,,-•;-•„ ,... • .0. ,,j 1 ..,.._•.„•^-..,-..,-,If 0 .5,0..,,,,..•.. . ..4,.....,......, ,•..• Ma .4.•:,•tIO t•..4e•VA's.,•• • • . it.'444'. :;11:,••*.'<•gr ...+Vt • Ski... ... ..e-5.' P.' ... - - ... ;4.*73....444.9.';:;\i74414.44.::'';'• ::::.14'd . -. " .---- — .-- ....- . .... ....>. 4114:11 14 : t 44,P4.:r+4'4 5:il4f• It:....-:0_,._'46,131*,:t:.0.1..V2.1.1"*.‘,„tol • jP:• 44'..; .4' t..:*4 • C'c...> 4.411046.44.64„:44411.....40k4.4 ,!A••(•• .- 1 t • • • - - :'.‘.);t 07•'>ti: 4..:..'‘,%''s''':f'''1*:4.4't ...itiplo_4...)...:AS•_ ,.,0,,;.....,41..fikolk _ 0 I . ELK RIVER LANDFILL , .. , ... 1 .... ... . ..„... - . 1 I . - ‘41"l& I• •• • „...,•......c „A _________ _____ ________..__. ___ _. • . . . • ”1,•SC....0 f•••/•• • . ... . -...-.-......,........ ..... ”.... -........,_. ..-...... ...-...-... -............-.-6.--........-- . C • i6 . / • .1 -4- ?..4 i 9. • _ i:: . .--. os 'a •EF' : • ,:. • , . , . CASE NO. CU 95-31 .. . . , . . • " • : . ......til*/*/ .. ,... ?qv,. 4.0a.rr _. .... c...... • •. 1401 11 ., I. .1.. \‘1.. —.--—.. .- .•s .,. , AI _,----- ., ..- - .:... • - I 1 _ ____ ___ ..._ ........ .....___ Z...P • . . I _ •_ .. 5 • ' 1 . ti I A V .--...._._1---%----- if 1 1 1 ..._ i 1 1 1 ' 1 . ,I, LI: 1 1 _ 1 ity of Y River April 2, 1997 Ms. Victoria L. Kreger Site Manager Elk River Landfill, Inc. 22460 Highway 169 NW Elk River, MN 55330 Dear Ms. Kreger: The City of Elk River ("City") is in receipt of your letter dated March 27 and • attached documentation requesting an amendment to the Solid Waster Facility License Agreement ("License"), dated January 16, 1996, and Conditional Use Permit ("CUP"), as amended on January 16, 1996, for Elk River Landfill, Inc. ("ERL"). In your letter, you state that the CUP and License authorize the landfill to be "conducted according to plans approved by the MPCA without the need for further approval by the City each time MPCA makes a modification." The License and CUP do state that the operation of the landfill may be conducted "in accordance with authorization and limitations contained in MPCA Solid Waste Permit No. 74." However, it has and continues to be the City's position that the License and CUP authorize operations consistent with the landfill's existing MPCA permit. When ERL proposed modifications to its MPCA permit, such modifications must also be reviewed and approved by the City through amendments to the License and CUP. The MPCA has consistently stated that it does not have the authority to regulate the final elevation of landfills. In fact, the MPCA has expressly stated in the draft permit reissuance for the landfill that final elevation is to be addressed by the City and Sherburne County. Thus, final elevation of the landfill is a land use issue to be addressed and regulated at the local level. • The current License approved operation and development of the Landfill consistent with a list of 10 plans and reports (see Page 2 of the License). 13065 Orono Parkway • P.O. Box 490 • Elk River, MN 55330 • (612) 441-7420 • Fax: (612) 441-7425 • These plans and reports anticipate a final elevation of 1100 MSL. The list of identified plans and reports does not contain the Long-Term Development Plan, which proposed a potential final elevation 1170 MSL. Thus, it is the City's position that the current License and CUP approve a final elevation of 1100 MSL and the proposed final elevation of 1170 now requires review and approval by the City through a License and CUP amendment process. City staff is very concerned that an increase in the final elevation of the landfill by 70 feet could, among other impacts: • Have a negative impact on normal land use development and on property values in the local area. • Be inconsistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan which contains a final elevation of 1100 MSL for the area, as well as with the Environmental Impact Statement on mineral exploration, which also contained a final elevation of 1100 MSL. • Limit the ability to screen the landfill from view through use of trees. • Impair the aesthetics of the view of the skyline from many locations in the City, in particular from nearby parks. • Exacerbate existing operational • problems related to blowing dust and litter. • These are issues related to public health, safety and to welfare and consistency with the City's Comprehensive Plan that the City is entitled and obligated to address as part of the amendment process. In your letter, you indicated a willingness to discuss alternative development plans. It is my belief that it would be useful to have such discussions prior to presentation of this item to the Planning Commission, and I suggest that we meet very soon to determine if we can resolve these issues prior to development of a staff recommendation on the matter. If you would like to meet, please contact me at 441-4904 at your earliest convenience. Sincerely, 4 • y Stephen Rohlf Building and Zoning Administrator • CDMCamp Dresser & McKee Inc. consulting 445 Etna Street,Suite 65• engineering St.Paul,Minnesota 55106construction Tel:612 772-1313 Fax:612 772-8199 39-1- 947-1997 operations Anniversary April 15, 1997 Mr.Steve Rohlf City of Elk River 13065 Orono Parkway Elk River,MN 55330 Re: Elk River Landfill(SW-74) Long-Term Development Plan Revision for Final Grades Dear Mr. Rohlf: As a result of recent meetings and other discussions with the City and Sherburne County,we are submitting,on behalf of Elk River Landfill,revised drawings for the Long-Term Development Plan. The revised drawings show a the final grades reduced to 1120 feet,based on 5H:1V slopes with a top area with a minimum slope of three percent. The elevation cited includes the final cover. The reduction in elevations reduces the volume for the facility by 726,200 cubic yards, as • described in the Long-Term Development Plan,from 13,871,600 cubic yards to 13,145,400 cubic yards. All the drawings are attached. The final grading plan and the cross sections are revised to show the reduced elevations. These sheets supersede the previous submittal. If you have any questions,please call. Eighteen copies are provided,three with full-sized sheets. Sincerely, CAMP DR SSER&McKEE,INC. .mac ohn Cannon,P.E. ` 'Project Manager cc: Vickie Kreger,Elk River Landfill,Inc. Debra McDonald,USA Waste David Lucas,Sherburne County Matt Ledvina,B.A. Liesch Associates Bill Armstrong,MPCA , 4 1 4 1 Q 0 j2.00W • + • . • • , • :: : • • ! . • ---- 1+00E + , /� , co i N 3+00E + • b I . 1 i • f i o4 .. 0, 4. 6+00E • • • • , I. , 5 7+OOE • Fc _ : 8+00E - + • * + , t n - 0 0� 0 <00 C ) rn rn rn m F - m I 0 9+OOE • . rr-, �. fir- fir-, �r-c Q N u, 0 0 0 A I i 10+00E + •� �• �• li,-�• '_a i I r 11+OOE r y 0, f j I I L ll I I I 1 1 I 1 I3+o0E , _ I � � L. 14+00E + , 9 70 980 L_ L 1000 I 15+00E —. ID2o _ .- loco 16+OOE - I 17+OOE • • • • , L. N N f� —N. ..a.L.._.N—..�).. N (D CO 7.I 5 5 d W N 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o--•.—o. 0 0 U) U) N U) U) U) U) U) U) U) co N U) —••rth.. .V)— • !DeSRNeo... J.CAPM/OI( CAMP DRESSER 8 MOKEE INC. CRaa n. M.COL Iveer 041C0 IV. CROSS o.c0 w. REV' + aveo. J.CANNON. �M LOI E DATE DOWN CNKO REMARKS DTE, SEPTFMRFR IS.% era l•"v ,,'•w""�,..........�` T f 1 I CI 0 0 .0 . . . • • _ __- - _ r — I �♦`Z` • • • • ` • \ . li '.O.♦O••♦♦�♦♦1 IIS I I •••♦♦! ♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦ \\ 111 1 )----- cop:r„.•••%%. __J it II II --_-7S ♦i♦ l I I 1 ,- .�4•23.2 I44 1 1 1 i( •/ t i.♦.♦�♦�♦�♦AA • • • . \ 1 • 1 .1 1 1. 1 1 .'••\".♦�♦�♦♦♦ --- —. \ 1 I 1 1 n♦♦ I I ����► ♦j j; — �� `t I 1 1 111 III 'I II .............., ... ii , i % III zic... :,41,_._....., G4F44 .•-••• • 4" i►•i�• m rn ►*�i����♦�♦� i• ,��\ I I i I • I I • 1 4.4:•♦♦ ♦♦ r co 1 1 •iIt' !mj •i ii•♦•♦•:♦'•♦♦i!�•♦♦�•:♦�•�♦�••• I •ii l i i♦iiiiii•••i 4 • • I 1 .1 I . 1I 11 r-1 ' ,.4** *--U'eo••i•�-. •,.•i ♦i••`♦,'i•ii4* . I j. i i . 1 • 11 ♦ O � Ofe 410%0.�• I I % % I 11 Ii I I I 1 I I I •♦�►,♦♦41♦••4 I I 1 1 I I 1 per♦♦••►••1 p 1 1 0 0 0- o 0 0 . - i♦�J��or 4, II 1 1 1 I 1 I I I I 1 1 I ►mo %J%•4 I I I I 1 10 I .I I I I I I 'i• �i•�•ii� I I I 1 I li 0 - • • l l\\ . 'i �♦••♦�♦�4 • I. I I • 1 , 0 100 200 300 \I— ♦•♦♦♦•♦•♦♦♦ I 1 V I 1 SCALE IN FEET i i' i ' i I .'� / /' LEGEND: 1._ 1 • _ _ _ ) I I C -% /•,e)L • 1 I • / ` •-::.--•:-...FINAL GRADE CELLS hR �/� I ���BASE GRADE LTGP .1 I V/(TOP OF CLAY GRAOD \`_ I — -�•� —PROPERTY 30UNOARY - .. _ d I _• • - • • I FUTURE CELL BOUNDARY 00.10 FILL BOUNDARY 000 I I • . • • 0 1020 • 1040 —��- I • _ ..` • (0 UTE GRID ORIDN EOUALS SHERBURNE Q CO CO �! Q) C71 I A W N• O O COUNTYOCOOK NAEAST249017 .546 i O p O O O O O O O O O O O O O 0 0 0 O : 0 0 O U) O N CD N U) LI) U) cn U) (A U) 1 PROJECT NO. 8231-003 ELK RIVER LANDFILL.INC.(SW-74) 1 I•FILE NAME, EU(RIVER,MINNESOTA BASE ;RA D E S 9NEET NOI IG TERM DEVELOPMENT 1 i / 6 ,== 1. 9 1 9 , 9 I 9 - l+00W I ` 9g°• • , ^� -! , ,, }:'.. I. 1, 00. '�� .. \ U vN . .,. -9998130::;-'-- L., !. 0+001 •, I •• I + `��'• + . ;� ,-=',-,,/, ,,:, / ,.....) ...., 7 .- P� -„,.........1.0001, . woe (� l alli ""� ..L,..._ „2„......_____--0(f5 ��107 j. I , ----------L) •I•^+" � ��1 \1020 1 f L___:--- ,— '---'7030 1 I "< a< i .g, / �r°� 1 � 70,600\. __777,71ir_;_,___i____Li_Li' l �SL6PE• `�� o .� o� / I ��' .°°/ C % 100 � r ----7------\ 4: 7 1080 1 ot%4 es' \ / / , v \ 1 •\_- •, 4+00E • , -; (4. ,RONS . N . . 11� • 'NI • i •\ • ft 4 °• ,�6+00E ` / �-, ..e�N •A \ (1 � o . 7i�E • °� ,0:----,.Q��� [ X11 I 1 1. • _i: a� = • I I , 63 OXD l oee 1 I ``\g+Q� u C V 1116 3 :t S OPE t I �+ i � 111 1 . '," / J (i x_,_,_ -k 4-r- fi I 9+0. J - . pyo , i '120 - \ .�_ . i Vig \\N• � � �'� • 1\ 1118 .. \ ! ••••••••"., ' , 1716 =i " • 1:1 . ; • 1 r 1 / j � • N ass a< )A I � I ( .OX) _4_,:-....‹. 11 00 off° • 1114 • /33.311 SLOPS r • 1 } _� 1112 I • 2�\ \�`/ \ .' 1110 Iii . I • 0 E ♦ \ \ °c( \I 1 I \ 1100 ! • // 'I 1 \ill =1 i� • I I /i'/ - ri r /, r ((�A b �,-.', o '1090 1 1 /// 31 -14+00E .4 -,-----.../• 108. // T�//I / • > I ���`��� / 1 5:1i5IL0 < ',.. . ___./ i I ,W,,,,,, ,, - _ . 101 • / `. \ \ • • • • fv - Vf � ,.. 7,-,1;,....:_•0&_,...,•—•41.1...,... 'n o 0 -_ ,L,.--4,2„-- ----1 Zb �o o" .'-`'sof ' o - tooCJ .- .:.:SQ� ': . 4! u,�i-- � aeeato 4, J.CANNON, CAMP ORESSER&McKEE INC. awn.en M.COL ELK RIVE WET CMl9 a, E11( ORM 049 eT,ip, LONG TEF M REy e. en J.CANNON •"^" K CSM N0. DATE DRND N CHKD REMARKS mMARCH 1997 0.:::::7=:,,,,..r. :,`,,,..r. I 1 I 1 A a � f'f � © 0 0 —mo0_-�'=----`'.-! ,./..e_.%:`..as., ..,_,.„..„_,_...,...,. . 7... 'i'..--.\I:-.- -'''''' '':-.:.------' :"::::::: ::::'.<7,„:77-..., moo`(...�.-.,.......rte^ - Ar ___ 111 �• O ==_ _\ r` 04*���••♦r4•♦ • pool . \\ • 1/4• 7�w.`.4�•f•3 _______________T________-o 101 ________________ \,,,... \i i I JA .- 4'a.�.•♦ s �- mss. s ,L7701 •1_ 11-\\',' 1\'iy� I .0-..-1-♦♦• sol- ✓ \\ -', \ 1 I ►♦- :.♦i♦❖♦♦♦• _ 1% II I '11 ,� r � ♦♦� �a31 I I1 1 Vin'WW♦ eat.. - :‘1 1 1 I I /4► ••�,♦••• as 0301 �. : 1 1 1 II 1 4040V►A♦ .. \ 1 1 \ • t • �..�♦4r1♦♦ I Ii ► `� ♦•� IIP►OAiwz 04e1 o•oo•c4 ����1�•� •, • • 1 I i 0 0 _1 \i 1 '\ N "449414 k N..i..,1 n • 40 ,r4•it♦..._. -.►♦ 0 0 I' ^•�i'99i�i i ►.��•i•iiiiii viii,••• 1 v ) X11 1 I 1 --- 11 .9T �IiJ1 •••t , I .1 I I. .c._,.0 0 • • \ I I I 1�•i•♦•►♦ 1 I II 1 \2/1 ^\ ♦�♦4�♦►❖ �I j I I F /� 0 100 zoo 300 I I . .11?i�MI,t.s II I I . o ,3_ ► ♦♦• I Ir 17/ 1 ic,.,---...,.... �-- \•\ ,_____11 -'T_ >$/ / e / ' I / • , , /J came owes I i� —/' `• _.--------;_=>_,FINAL GIME CELLS HI U •I BASE GRADE LIMP -�-Los. / ��� �J•-�_t- - /� a -(TOP OF CUT GRAM ■ v .-r �- _ 1------1. ---� �. I LI 1 •� �'" _ *`,, -, .-^ ,, —.._FNOFERTY BOIWABT JI ^^�-c'-1 x�,� FUTURE CELL BOUNDARY -_ry '.. • • • ♦ . \ ♦ \� I. �i(�,�x y! DEMO FILL BOUOAIIT 1 ` I �y ` y N - O on ORD ORDN EOUALS SI ERBURNE -' 0 + - 4 1 1 f.41 1 _ . CIXMTt COORDINATES 2{90n.B{6 - �.. O O'' �O a--. O--0 • 0 O O i O O 0 WORM seona.4'EAST. ,... N N L (!f i I i r N FRwECT NO. 0231-003 LANDFILL.INC.(SW-74) FILENAME. MIA FINAL GRADES .. M DEVELOPMENT 2 I , 1. 7-9 e)0 0 0 o 0 • . GEOMEMBLAYE LA —YER—\ TOP OF CLAY LAYER O a X 41"C4.ER CI-AY`N.1 1180 1160 I1�"PROf ERTY BOUNOA Y - SF 1140 LYSRAETER 1 3 BOTTOM OF CLAY LAYER 8CA1E 1120 1i _ '.c.-,...."-- 1100 ' SIPANA atm I 1080 NtAAi 91A 1060 1 — 1040 10201 1 GRWNOWA TER TABLE 1000 J DATUM"EV 960 1 940 920 - I — SEPARATION TO GROUNDWATER GROUP OS6ASc IN 4+00W 2+00W 0+00 2+00E DETAIL 411 NTS • • 9+00 y 1180 — L 1160 114011°E.TY .AR . . oN. BR0 ru 9 aA1120 6 i R .F1100 1060CS S HI NAL. ADE _ - Cko 1060 1040 Q� �� ''t` �l _ 3 — 198o iii miliiiim■ ,. DATUM ELEV 960 OM 940 GROUP EAST 920 SECTION s.BBE 0+00 2+005 4+005 6+00S 8+0OS 10+00S 12+0OS S a 3 • I E/4R M X C .IRC MPGA fnMMFNTS DESm Eo A,. 1 CANNON CAMP DRESSER 8 MCKEE INC. aI - o..w.n. M rn7 f ',WET O*O sr. 9 I f o.oa 0• n. `.wm. CD�I—, EA. . ^ANON LONGfi0. DATE 0455 CNNORENARNS o.L APRR 1907 � // / / l 4 4 0 -o 16+20 SOUTH L PROPERTY BOUNDARY } f'�� j%SIGH y..=. � 1 r� F►ML GRIM - . I TOP OF LLAT LA 3 �f11� WATER TABLE fz 4+OOE 6+OOE 8+OOE 10+OOE 12+OOE 14+OOE 16+OOE 18+OOE EAST -- - - - •ROPEFTY SOL NOARY FINAL GRADE _ s111111 I I. I W �` TUP L1 LLA ATpR- \ J� - La COI 1 WA[ER TA ILE 14+005 16+00S 18+00S 20+00S 22+00S 24+005 26+005 28+005 — • PROJECT NO. 2566-004 X RIVER LANOF1U.INC.(SW-74) FdE NAMES tax 1 ELK RIVER,MINNESOTA CROSS S ECTI O N SEET Na. PERM DEVELOPMENT PLAN 1 4 _ f j1 -r - 1 ► Y 1 Y 1 Y • . . r- POND 2 I . 4 . . - .-o-.-°-°-.zo7:.• qi. 4►"lrtiP7.►•T.::0•►► 1 •i\\\1` ii i i'►:.iSi!': ,e°� :i:ii'•O. 111111 1. .4►..� .--- °.•►•►►>•► . 11111 1.4.4►. ." - - • i. ► ► ►►. ►► 1 111111 ��►�°► ►•• .... i. .:i f f Of 4.4 - • . , 41144• ►4►.0.,0.4►.�.°°► ►•►►�►°►► .1 44kk4 . . 114444W% . ..i.q.4,4, e•40. 4f, . ' . iei ' 4 _ iht4 Itssi I'4, 40 4 . A. 4&_440: 4 - - ' '' 40 • .,4V: 114V404,144• �• 44444 !s►<• i1 ; 4.►.00. .o4 :►c.4.=..4,,.404 ►4,.. . 4 : • i ilk Nht... 41 • 11.41,404 .40 44: . 4, .404 4o . V. . 44:A: . 41, . .404 I 1 n I ►4,•41+.0 •Jitt.,►Nf•. 4.4': 9 •• 4 �� ►00009Q00000000.600000�00 I Nilik , 14►f• °°►�►f•.04►f .°°►•11:.°.► 1,, /�1.4i 00► 4►.•100►0 ,► ..0 +►1•: 1\��e\\1�/ lid:►4i��i°►tai!:► �►°4i�4 �••4•:►ifi°►•0i• ill' 1%N ``N1OOH/:�4!i►it�►�► ' ••40 ►ip •4° ' . ,�►4Vii• 1`%`� �1 /� ►O► ►4►4•.•0♦►+►4.0 ►a►4 .•.♦►04►... ```�1 t0►►+►4•.00►•►0�►+►4,f♦♦• ►404 ► , 111 ` l OVA 00►"4'44v ...0000.0►+►4•:0♦trim i ; 1 . 't INN N\ NO 01. 404. 4$4. .. -_•_-_ _-_ _ A. ' 4V . 0 , 4 If .j•0.. •..0.0.0°���0�0�0���0������►��4' ► 111`` 1f; /10A.:►-0�0�0�0�0�0�0�0�0�0�0�0�0�0�0�0�07,�4�•►44 f a ���4►_�����A�������4►����A�f.•►4�4 ```% `' `I�oAoIIt��s�o Moioiiiiro-�4 • • i• • I 17#1,:rd' i - 9 - \—POND 4 ra _ - _ - - - • (1) 1' /)?4149 4 7 --''' 1 I3/ 7I JRC 1 MODIFIED FOR 11X17 FORMAT I DESK eo s.: JRC CAMP :q=,S-;: & `,<-"= :No. ORA. JRC • -- ELK R1' CROSS_ .0 3.: E L K . • J•a0,1 s. ...—mss • • 2.00,1 _ I .1.....•m..• - 2.00 . - 1.005 • 2.005 J•ees N 005 7 5.005 i ., • ' 6.005 A. � . i 404. 04.: - . ' . 0.005 IeA. . i0' 100' 400' 400' 4. . 4o, . I 0.055 SCALE �-->r -� o •4►4 1 pir .044 • . I . n-ods LEGEND ,�.► r • 'I • 12.005 J EXISTING CONi0UR5 1 ,o . i . .I . u.005 to �� � PROPERTY LINES p►�4 r . 1 • :..aes iI. • , FINAL GRADES � i • 5-005 1* ! I• is ' • :6.005 �������: ♦♦ aas POND 1 ►��r♦�r,����. AREA DRAINING TO POND 1 t.�, �. . re.aes k.• " • 1• . 1,.005 N�i i.u 1 \ AREA DRAINING TO POND 0 — ►.� ,. • ' . • 20.055 ' 21.055 0 ►: 22.005 AREA DRNNINC TO POND 4 .10 I 23.005 ifto I S' . ' . • 2.•003 MN , POND OUTLET IA . • i • • 25.005 r I p� ;26.a05 // I. Z7-005 /I. • 23-005 — • 2=-0as 1 6 c ) -iv ____ ER LANDFILL (SW-74) -LONG-TERM -DEVELOPMENT PLAN , _-- RIVER_ LANDFILL, INC. RETENTION PONDS 4 City of Elk River 13065 Orono Parkway • P.O. Box 490 Elk River, MN 55330 LOCATION 1V MAP CASE: cr