Loading...
02-02-1993 - Puente Hills Landfill. • City of West Covina Memorandum TO: City Manager and City Council AGENDA FROM: Michael L. Miller F-2 Environmental Services Director ITEM NO. SUBJECT: PUENTE HILLS LANDFILL DATE 2-2-93 Summary: This is a report on the draft Environmental Impact Report for the Puente Hills Waste Management Facilities proposed by the Sanitation Districts of Los Angeles County. In mid-1992, a draft Environmental Impact report (DEIR) was issued. for public comment on the proposed Puente Hills Waste Management Facilities. The official public comment period has closed. This report was agendized for City Council review and consideration. This is a City Council policy matter. Staff makes no recommendation. HISTORY In mid 1992 a draft EIR was issued on the proposed Puente Hills Waste Management Facilities. The project description for this EIR contains the following: 1. Continued operation at the Puente Hills Landfill at the current rate of disposal. This is set at a maximum of 13,200 tons per day and no more than 72,000 tons per week. 2. Expand the area devoted to waste disposal on -site to encompass an additional 130 acres for a total of 660 acres. 3. The proposal would extend the life of the landfill by 20 years to 2113. 4. Construction and operation of a materials recovery facility and rail loading facility that is sized to handle up to 4,400 tons per day of commercial waste for the purpose of recovering a minimum of 15 percent recyclable material. A more extensive discussion of the project and a summary of its potential impacts is attached in the Executive Summary for the DEIR. This report also sets forth the mitigation measures that could be applied to the project to reduce environmental impacts to less than a significant level. Finally., if there are any unavoidable significant impacts, these are also listed. Staff has obtained a copy of Responses to Comments on the DEIR. Over 200 letters and many hours of testimony and many comments were received during the public review period and hearings. The responses have been organized by the Sanitation Districts by topics to facilitate responses. This report should give the City Council a sense as to the type of concerns and opposition that exist toward the project. It should also give the position of the Sanitation Districts in response to those concerns and opposition. Staff has had some input from people familiar with the positions of the opposition to the.project. Their technical concerns were submitted in their letters to which the Sanitation Districts responded. The general opposition relates to the moving of the disposal area to within 1,000 feet of homes and the request to have this landfill operation continue for 20 years from 1993. The landfill is secheduled to have its land use permit expire November, 1993. • E PROCESS It is staff's understanding adequate by the Sanitation regulations of the Californi appeal period is now runnin file a court action claiming or otherwise procedurally regulations If there is no forward. The matter would.then be sch Los Angeles County Regional will act on the Sanitation Di the Landfill's conditional u 1993. Any Commission actic County Board of Supervisors. will render a decision in la -2- iat the EIR has been certified as istricts according to the laws and Environmental Quality Act. A 60-day during which interested parties may he EIR is not in compliance with CEQA eficient under the CEQA laws and ourt action, the process will move duled for public hearings before the lanning Commission. The Commission atricts request to extend the life of e permit for 20 years from November, i is appealable to the Los Angeles It is expected that the Commission ter 1993 or early 1994. In addition to the County's use permit, a revised solid waste facilities permit needs to be considered by the Local Enforcement Agency. In this case this the Los Angeles County Department of Health Services. The revised permit needs concurrence from the California Integrated Waste Management Board. It is expected this revised permit would be issued in late 1994 or early 1995. Although the comment period on the DEIR has been closed, the City Council does have the opportunity to express any position before other agencies. This matter iwas agendized so as not to preclude any option the City Council may want to exercise PAST POLICY It has been the policy of past West Covina City Councils to only take a position on projects that directly affect the City of West Covina. The best example of that previous policy was the Irwindale Waste to Energy Facility. The City'was potentially impacted by the air emissions from the facility. Thus, the City Council took a position to oppose the facility. The past policy reasoning had been expressed by the past City Councils at public meetings. It can be summarized as,"If we don't want other cities to tell us what to do with BKK, then take no formal position on projects that do not directly affect the City. This past City Council policy is subject to change by any subsequent City Council. The, reference to the past policy is only to provide the City Council with full information on the history of this policy matter. Because this is a City council -policy matter, staff is making no recommendation. OPTIONS The City Council has the following options: 1. No formal -expression of a position, for or against, the project. This approach would be implemented by receiving and filing this report. ` 2. Express a formal position, for or against, the project. This would be enacted by a motion to oppose or support. j 3.. Express publicly any concerns) on either side- of the matter, but do not act to formally enter a City position, for or against the project. This would be implemented by a motion of no action. J -3- RECOMMENDATION This is a City Council policy matter, thus there is no staff recommendation. Michael L. Miller Environmental Services Director MLM:vs , Attachments