DCPCUP-0000-00715 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

` J A-1 * My opinion is confirmed by the information gathered from the offices of governmental experts: Joe Brusca, DNR Solid Waste Manager says their is no regulation or rules prohibiting trees from being planted over landfills, but says that some consideration should be given to planting species that are more resistant to possible methane gas in the soil. He also says that should a problem develop with normal planting systems that a raised earth berm with planting, or plantings in large concrete containers would be obvious alternative practices. Tom Hunt, of the DNR who was involved in the landfill closing says that all kinds of plantings could work on this site. Conifer trees 6' in height should have been planted by the ball and burlap method or by Vermeer truck and that they would likely have survived. He says a little easy checking with a simple hand operated soil auger would have indicated the best location for the recycle site and the necessary landscape screening. Prof. Patrick Walsh, Ag. Engineering, University of Wisconsin, who Mr. Skaar says told him recently that trees could not be planted over a landfill has indicated to us that quality vegetation programs are achievable over a landfill. Prof. showers, University of Michigan is doing extensive research on growing trees and landscape screening over old landfills. John Rdfidl, DNR recycle co-ordinator, says that a recycle site, in order to be successful, must be open every day so that residents can visit it at their convenience without making a special trip or interrupting their other activities. This criteria eliminates the Natvig Road site. Bob McDonald, Dane County Regional Planning believes that a successful recycling site must be in the circle of convenience of the residents of the municipality. He further says that a situation where implied monitoring occurs would be ideal. All of the above opinions and information certainly refute any and all excuses Mr. Skaar has given for not complying with the 1986 screening condition. qc submit that it would be extremely irresponsible for your committee to give an applicant with this kind of record any further consideration. The Town of Cottage Grove needs a better recycling program that they are now providing at this site. They are spending $8,000.00 per year at this site and the results are negligible. = think a comprehensive study of possible methods of operation and alternate sites is necessary. This site needs full time management when it is open and there- fore for economic reasons is only open one day per week. All experts in recycling, state unequivocally that a recycle site must be more accessable and open on a full time basis to be effective. The denial of this C.U.P. will not be a problem for recycling in Cottage Grove, but will actually be a step towards the creation of a much better and more economical system at a much better and more accessible site.