Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout09/08/1987 - Solid Waste Abatement Commission AGENDA SOLID WASTE ABATEMENT COMMISSION EAGAN, MINNESOTA EAGAN MUNICIPAL CENTER CONFERENCE ROOMS A & B SEPTEMBER 8, 1987 11:30 A.M. I. ROLL CALL AND APPROVAL OF MINUTES II. ADOPTION OF AGENDA III. STAFF REPORT A. Organized Collection Study Status - TI C "'"1 IV. OLD BUSINESS A. Approval -Draft Solid Waste Abatement Strategy V. NEW BUSINESS A. Household Hazardous Waste Collection Proposal VI. OTHER BUSINESS v VII. NEXT MEETING VIII. ADJOURNMENT MEMO TO: CHAIRS NOEL AND MANN AND ALL MEMBERS OF THE SOLID WASTE ABATEMENT COMMISSION FROM: JON HOHENSTEIN, ADMINISTRATIVE ASSISTANT DATE: AUGUST 31, 1987 SUBJECT: SOLID WASTE ABATEMENT COMMISSION MEETING FOR TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 8, 1987 A meeting of the Eagan Solid Waste Abatement Commission is scheduled for Tuesday, September 8, 1987 at 11:30 a.m. in the Eagan Municipal Center conference rooms A and B. Lunch will be served. Please contact Jon Hohenstein at 454 -8100 if you are unable to attend this meeting. I. ROLL CALL AND APPROVAL OF MINUTES A copy of the minutes of the Eagan Solid Waste Abatement Commission meeting of August 11, 1987 is enclosed on pages S through j for your review. These minutes, subject to any change, require approval by the Commission. II. ADOPTION OF AGENDA The agenda, as prepared or modified, requires approval by the Commission. III. STAFF REPORT A. Organized Collection Study Status -Staff has invited Terr Guggenbuehl of Pope -Reid Associates, Inc. to be on hand at Tuesday's meeting to provide a brief update concerning the ' organized collection study. Enclosed on pages 7 -it is 94p5 correspondence received of the consultant concerning the analysis of the current hauling situation. Since this correspondence was ; . received, the consultant's time line indicates that alternatives to the pure open- hauling system will be studied and an additional update should be forthcoming at the meeting. Mr. Guggenbuehl will also provide an update on the expected completion date of the project as well as accept input from the committee on the analysis of information collected. No action is required on this matter at this time. 1 Solid Waste Abatement Commission August 31, 1987 Page Two IV. OLD BUSINESS A. Approval - Draft Solid Waste Abatement Strategy - Enclosed on pages 2Q - ,V _ is a copy of the revised draft solid waste abatement strategy statement for your review. This draft has identified and included appendices which have not been before the Commission previously. The first two of these will be folded into the strategy statement, those being the legislative mandate and authorization section and the general concepts section. Items which were modified as a result of comment at the last commission meeting are identified with an "X ". As the statement has been discussed at several meetings prior to this, it would be appropriate for the Commission to consider final approval at this time for a recommendation to the City Council. This does not preclude the opportunity for the Commission to make final modifications. However, it would be appropriate to take action at this time so as to facilitate a joint meeting with the City Council early this fall. Note: The text of appendix 1 will be distributed at the meeting on Tuesday. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To approve the draft solid waste abatement strategy statement as presented or modified. V. NEW BUSINESS A. Household Hazardous Waste Collection Proposal - The City has been approached by Dakota County concerning the undertaking of a household hazardous waste collection project in cooperation with Unysis on November 6 and 7, 1987. The collection would be publicized to Unysis employees and Eagan residents and would afford an opportunity to dispose of a variety of hazardous wastes including acid -based materials, adhesives, aerosols, solvents, paints and pesticides. The collection will apply to household hazardous wastes only. Liability will be assumed by Dakota County for all subsequent clean -up costs. Costs will be shared among Dakota County, Unysis and the City of Eagan, contingent upon Commission and City Council approval of a special allocation for this purpose. It is anticipated that the City's share will be in the neighborhood of $5,000.00, however, additional information will be made available at the meeting on Tuesday. Mr. George Kinney of the Dakota County hazardous waste office will be on hand to further discuss the proposal at the meeting on C7 Solid Waste Abatement Commission August 31, 1987 Page Three Tuesday. Mr. Kinney has indicated that Dakota County definitely wants to proceed with at least two hazardous waste collections yet this fall. Unysis has received corporate approval to participate and it is possible that those two entities will sponsor a collection regardless of whether the City participates or not. However, if the collection were to be open to City residents, it would be reasonable for the City to assume some of the cost. Typically, collections of this nature can range well in excess of $15,000.00, so a $5,000.00 share would not be out of line. Generally, the collection will occur at the Unysis Defense Systems building at the intersection of Pilot Knob and Yankee Doodle Road on Friday afternoon, November 6, and Saturday morning, November 7. The City will be responsible for publicity and its share of the costs. Unysis will be responsible for most material handling and disposal while Dakota County will manage special wastes and oversee the entire project. Please contact staff prior to the meeting on the 8th with any questions in this regard as prompt action will be necessary if adequate publicity and lead time is to be prepared by early November. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To approve or deny a proposal by Dakota County to undertake a joint hazardous waste collection with Unysis Corporation and the City of Eagan as proposed. VI. OTHER BUSINESS There is no other business pending before the Commission at this time. By way of information, staff has enclosed the article found on pages ::73.3 _,3�/ for your review, concerning the Hennepin County recycling program and its potential to meet Met Council targets in the immediate future. VII. NEXT MEETING The next regular meeting of the Solid Waste Abatement Commission would be Tuesday, October 13, 1987 at 11:30 a.m. Pending Commission action on the draft strategy statement, it may be appropriate to request a joint City Council /Commission meeting on that date. Further discussion of this matter will be appropriate at the meeting on Tuesday. l Solid Waste Abatement Commission August 31, 1987 Page Four VIII. ADJOURNMENT The meeting will adjourn at or about 1:00 p.m. 411 1.744 s L a ta Admi istrative Assistant cc: City Administrator Hedges City Planner Runkle 3H /kh r Subject to Approval MINUTES OF THE SOLID WASTE ABATEMENT COMMISSION MEETING Eagan, Minnesota August 11, 1987 A meeting of the Eagan Solid Waste Abatement Commission was held on Tuesday, August 11, 1987 at 11:30 a.m. The following members were present: Earl Milbridge, Tom Mann, Duane Soutor, Darlene Bahr, Jon Hohenstein, Larry Knutson, and Tim Hoel. Absent were Delmar De Bilzan, Thom Yehle, and Terry Schnell. Also present were Warren Wilson, Dakota County Solid Waste Planner; Bruce Robertson, Administrative Intern; and Catherine Meuwissen, Engineering Intern. MINUTES Upon motion by Hoel, seconded by Knutson, with all members voting in favor, the minutes of the July 14, 1987 Solid Waste Abatement Commission meeting were approved. AGENDA Upon motion by Mann, seconded by Soutor, with all members voting in favor, the proposed agenda was approved. DRAFT SOLID WASTE ABATEMENT STRATEGY Hohenstein discussed the Draft Strategy Statement that was in the Commission's packet and called for comments and feedback by Commission members regarding its contents. He went on to state that Administrative Intern Robertson and Engineering Intern Meuwissen are assisting in writing Parts 1 and 2 of the draft document. Hoel expressed his view that the City should reserve the option to stand alone should the County's policy be difficult to follow. Hohenstein indicated that a specific statement regarding Eagan's potential to stand alone could be included in the Draft Strategy document. At that point, the discussion turned toward the issue of composting. Members discussed the potential of improving Eagan's composting program through public education, utilizing the City Newsletter and the community garden club, and relaxing regulations to allow for backyard composting. Hohenstein closed the discussion by stating that the City Council will review and analyze the Draft Strategy Statement and will have the final say on the wording of the document. Wilson stated that the County Solid Waste Masterplan requires all cities to implement a source separation program of its own choice. If progress on County targets is not made by 1991, the policy will be modified by 1992. RECYCLING FACILITY TOUR Hohenstein discussed the scheduling of a future additional tour of the Reuter Resource Facility in Eden Prairie to be held for those SWAC members who were unable to attend the last tour. Commission members decided upon a tour date to be held sometime between September 8 and September 11 at 3:30 p.m. Commission members went on to discuss the possibility for additional tours of other solid waste management facilities such as Richard's Asphalt, NSP, and the Redwing Mass Burn Facility. Before closing the topic, Commission members discussed the unique technical differences between the various potential tour facilities. EDUCATION SUBCOMMITTEE Wilson initiated discussion on the status of Eagan's Education Subcommittee. It was decided that the SWAC Education Subcommittee members would meet with the County's Education Subcommittee on September 18 at 7:00 a.m. OTHER BUSINESS Hohenstein discussed a Letter to the Editor from the Eagan Chronicle entitled "Fewer Trash Runs Could Save Street Wear." The letter writer had stated that the numerous trash haulers that continuously drive up and down Eagan's streets were adding to the accelerated deterioration of our residential streets. A number of Commission members disputed the letter and stated that there is no evidence relating street deterioration to increased trash hauling. Knutson added that the Minnesota weight laws are closely enough enforced to prevent unusual or excessive wear. Hohenstein stated that the Organized Collection Study is underway and that Pope Reid will update the Commission regarding the study at the next regular meeting. NEXT MEETING The next meeting was set for Tuesday, September 8, 1987. ADJOURNMENT - Upon motion by Milbridge, seconded by Soutor, with all members voting in favor, the meeting was adjourned at 1:00 p.m. BR Date Chairperson Secretary (0 Pope - Reid Associates Inc. `r Environmental Engineering 245 E. 6th St., Suite 813 • St. Paul, MN 55101 • 612/227/6500 July 24, 1987 Mr. Jon Hohenstein Administrative Assistant City of Eagan 3830 Pilot Knob Road Eagan, MN 55121 Dear Jon: I've enclosed for your examination some materials regarding primarily the areas with low density residential land use such as single- family dwellings, townhouses, and other residential uses. Apartment complexes and similar high - density uses have not been included due to the type of collection process used which is similar to commercial collection. Please let me know if any changes need to be made. The results of the survey are now being analyzed. Several haulers were hesitant to identify service areas, much less routes. One hauler offered the information only if he was assured that service area would not be printed along with the names of each company. I have to agree - identifying haulers with most, if not all the data, doesn't particularly add to the study. As far as service areas versus routes, the information we have received should provide somewhat specific data for the study. I've also enclosed a brief explanation of the survey as part of the background information for the study. Additional materials will be sent to you within the next couple weeks. Please offer your suggestions or comments. Sincerely, (1 Terry J. Guggenbuehl Project Manager TJG /uj Encl. cc: PRA 146.01 file PRA 7 Telephone Survey: City of Eagan Solid Waste Collection Services Date of Survey: 1. Name of Service: 2. Address: 3. Phone: 4. Number of Employees: 5. Vehicles used and total number of each type typically used for residential collection in Eagan: a) Type b) Number c) Lease /own 6. a) Other residential collection equipment used (such as containers): b) Do you plan to purchase or lease any additional equipment in the future? 7. On what days do you collect residential refuse in Eagan? And what routes do your haulers take? (send map, if possible) Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Friday Saturday 8. Number of stops (per day /per route or other): 9. Average tonnage (per day /per route or other): 10. What are your rates for residential service, including special services? Rate Service 11. Do you currently collect separated recyclables in Eagan, either at the same time as regular waste pick -up or by special collection? Yes, same time Yes, special No, not at all If yes, is this collection done as requested or regularly? 12. If the City decided to contract for the collection of certain separated recyclables, would your company be readily equipped to handle the additional load? Yes No 13. Other comments: 9 l CITY OF EAGAN COLLECTION SYSTEM STUDY AREA ;f V / f ff J ff / , .: / kIMI : , r , .- fv/Ww 'tir . -: . -.. A ,,' A .. 4f Amro,P77—mair 7 err .. /f/ .,„ 2 g oor / .2; / l ie T ` *: , Terri A t v . AW , 0,,vo "--ww,,,,ww-e - 1 ........zz � st s . ritipt, / .� � Eli / I / m e mo � , ' , : �a. / %// � �• // /� //i fitVArallir 'I g a i ltr f' , MP' Z9 fr ° 11 I 41 hr W A? 16191. h ,,i' I i r .. ,,,,,ff 4, , we 4" „ . „„ viii „ A. 4 I T- dialer.. JAWS ill , 1 40Pk 4 : - ' # III -40 WAS I t . . AI bolaidisari „A ere sik dilommilkom 111 ri : ,,�► 01%, , � / //I V f V // r 6 11..,/,q/ : 4 i i !` UNSHADED AREAS REPRESENT MAJOR NON -HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL AREAS (ZONING DISTRICTS R-1, R -2, AND R -3) /D EXPLANATION OF HAULER SURVEY Between July 13th and July 25th, 1987 a telephone survey was conducted of all refuse haulers licensed in Eagan. A sample survey is included in the Appendix. Since the survey is the main source of information used to describe the existing residential waste collection system, it was very crucial to achieve the coopera- tion of waste haulers. However, the level of detail on a few important questions was not as intended. A complete description of each question, exp- ected level of detail and problems encountered follows. o Employees Haulers were asked the number of employees that typically serve their residential accounts in Eagan. There were no problems in acquiring this information. o Vehicles The type of collection vehicles used in Eagan, the number of each type, and whether the vehicles are owned or leased is important information tc determine load capacities and the potential for separate special collec- tions. Every hauler responded with the requested information. o Other Equipment The survey asked if haulers used other equipment such as containers. Other equipment, in particular containers, could be useful if the City starts contracting for collection of recyclables or yard waste. No problems were encountered in receiving this data. o Collection Routes and Dates One of the most important questions asked on the survey was the approxi- mate daily routes of each hauler. Routes and collection dates can help determine if extensive overlap is occurring. Most haulers were unable to specify precise routes but service areas were provided. Although less specific than actual routes, service areas can be used to locate area 11 where more than one collection company travels the same residential street each week. Some companies were hesitant to release route infor- mation for competitive reasons. o Number of Daily Stops This question, coupled with the daily routing information, helps to iden- tify the density of pick -ups or the stops per mile which is an indicator of efficiency. Haulers were asked to identify those stops which were non- apartment complex residential and within the City of Eagan. Haulers did not hesitate to release this information. o Average Tonnage Haulers were asked to indicate the average tonnage of waste collected on their routes on a daily or weekly basis. This question was included to determine vehicle capacities and provide additional background infor- mation. Some haulers did not have this information. o Rates Monthly or quarterly rates for existing services can be used to compare with alternative systems to determine if any differences are apparent. It was pointed out to haulers that rate information would not be used to compare one company with another. Every hauler supplied the requested data. o Current Recycling Haulers were asked if they provide separate collection of recyclable materials or yard waste as a special service. The intent of this question is to identify current curbside recycling activities in order to assess the potential for city -wide curbside collection. o Potential Recycling A final question asked if haulers were currently capable of providing curbside collection of recyclables or yard waste. The question was added to gain insight on options available to the City for a potential curbside recycling program. 13 CITY OF EAGAN ,' /61M LICENSED SOLID WASTE COLLECTION COMPANIES JULY, 1987 1. Action Disposal Commercial Only 4300 E. 65th St. Inver Grove Heights, MN 55155 455 -8634 2. Browning- Ferris Industries Commercial Only 9813 Flying Cloud Drive Eden Prairie, MN 55344 941 -8394 3. City Clean -Up William Kreitz 2841 Burnside Ave. Eagan, MN 55121 454 -6768 4. Dana's Eco Service 3313 Valley View Drive Burnsville, MN 55337 435 -7209 5. Dick's Sanitation Service Commercial Only 21338 Dodd Road Lakeville, MN 55044 469 -2239 6. Expert Disposal, Inc. Not Collecting as of 7/87 3131 Sibley Memorial Hwy. Eagan, MN 55122 688 -6666 7. Knutson Rubbish Service 14345 Biscayne Avenue Rosemount, MN 55068 423 -2294 8. Laker's Disposal 3275 East 260th Street Webster, MN 55088 461 -2276 9. Mendota Heights Rubbish 20700 Donnelly Avenue East Farmington, MN 55024 437 -6786 CITY OF EAGAN LICENSED SOLID WASTE COLLECTION COMPANIES (Continued) JULY, 1987 10. Metro Refuse Commercial Only 8168 West 125th Street Savage, MN 55378 890 -0861 11. Quality Waste Control 1901 West 144th Street Burnsville, MN 55337 435 -3454 12. Roadway Rubbish 2400 Dodd Road Mendota Heights, MN 55120 454 -7152 13. Triangle Services 1881 Lexington Avenue Mendota Heights, MN 55118 454 -1848 14. Valley Sanitation 15296 Dresden Trail Apple Valley, MN 55124 423 -2992 15. Waste Management, Inc. 12448 Pennsylvania Savage, MN 55378 890 -1100 16. Woodlake Sanitary Service, Inc. 9813 Flying Cloud Drive Eden Prairie, MN 55344 941 -5174 1S DRAFT EAGAN SOLID WASTE ABATEMENT COMMISSION STRATEGY STATEMENT I. LEGISLATIVE MANDATE AND AUTHORIZATION (See Appendix 1) A. Minnesota Waste Management Act of 1980 B. Metropolitan Council Solid Waste Management Development Guide and Policy Plan C. Dakota County Solid Waste Masterplan II. GENERAL CONCEPTS (See Appendix 2) A. Waste Reduction B. Source Separation C. Centralized Separation D. Centralized Processing E. Land Disposal III. REVIEW OF CONCEPTS AND VENDORS - Since August of 1986, the SWAC has studied and discussed the folowing issues and concepts with the listed resource persons. A. Metropolitan Council Mandate - Jim Uttley B. Dakota County Waste Abatement Planning - Warren Wilson C. Dakota County Hazardous Waste Planning - George Kinney D. Goodwill Industries - Attended Donation Center - Del Edwards E. MSD /Supercycle - Recycling Redemption Center, Curbside Collection, Reverse Vending - Linda Bartels F. Rohn Industries - Business Paper Recycling - Dennis Fields G. Reuter Resource Recovery - Centralized Separation and Refuse Derived Fuel - Doug Reuter and Jerry Misukanis H. Waste Management Inc. - Co- Composting - Lanny Ross I. Tours - Reuter RDF Facility and 3M Hazardous Waste Incinerator J. Monitoring Legislation - Organized Collection and Container Deposit K. Monitoring Citizens League Recycling Study IV. PRELIMINARY FINDINGS A. General Findings 1. The mandate for solid waste management clearly states the responsibility of cities to implement a landfill abatement strategy. The nature of such a strategy may be flexible within certain paramaters, the most specific /4v parameter being that source separation opportunities be made available within communities. 2. The Solid Waste Abatement Commission's first responsibility is to define a strategy to meet Eagan's waste abatement needs. In /` addition, the Commission may advise the Council concerning recommendations for County action to facilitate waste abatement in Eagan. 3. While the City will benefit from cooperation with the County, the City should not 1 I unnecessarily limit its options for waste � management and waste abatement if effective alternatives are present. 4. Landfill abatement through recycling, etc. has a positive effect on the Metropolitan systems and environment by reducing landfill use and resource contamination while reducing demand for non - renewable resources. 5. A system which includes waste reduction, reuse and recycling is preferable to one which does not because it optimizes the use of non - renewable resources. 6. Waste management is a public service due to its health, safety and welfare implications. In the past, Eagan has provided for this public service through privatization by free enterprise. 7. Recycling, due to its larger public purpose of reducing environmental and other impacts, can be viewed as part of that public service. 8. The private sector and market may continue to provide a mechanism for waste abatement, given appropriate conditions. However, government mechanisms may be necessary to guide market forces and to quantify hidden costs. 9. Education and the modification of waste disposal habits will be the keys to any successful waste abatement strategy. 10. The City Code currently prohibits any method of waste disposal other than in area landfills. Recycling, composting and other means of landfill abatement will require an amendment of the Code. Because organized collection, curb -side recycling and other potential changes in the waste management system will also require City Code modifications, such amendments should be approached in a comprehensive manner. (See Appendix 3) B. Recycling and Resource Recovery 1. Given an adequate delivery system and 17 incentive structure, recyclable resources can be effectively removed from the waste stream. 2. The Metropolitan Council targets for waste abatement cannot be met by the 1988 deadline, due to the stage of Dakota County's waste management development. The City would be premature in implementing any comprehensive waste abatement strategy until the County program is better developed. 3. Convenience and a sense of personal benefit will be keys to the implementation of a recycling program. Where a clear public purpose or economic benefit are perceived by the public (WW II metal and rubber drives, , deposit bottles, etc.) waste reduction, reuse and recycling have been accepted by the public. 4. Source separation of recyclables maintains the integrity of most recyclables better than centralized or mechanized separation. Both the Metropolitan Council and Dakota County have mandated that cities provide source separation alternatives as a part of their waste abatement /management strategies. 5. No recycling program will receive 100% compliance and, therefore, there is a need for centralized separation technologies to effectively remove recoverable resources. The costs of such centralized processing should be focused on those who do not source separate, thereby contributing to the economic incentive structure of the waste mangement system. 6. Residential and business recycling needs are of a different character and must be addressed separately. C. Economic Considerations 1. The current open hauling system, with relatively inexpensive land disposal, does not address landfill abatement objectives and will have to be modified by new market realities, rate structures, local regulation and /or public demand for waste abatement. 2. The type of centralized processing technology adopted by the County may dramatically impact the nature of the waste abatement obligations of the City and the costs it may have to bear. Likewise, the types processing technologies not chosen may represent lost opportunity costs for communities faced with implementing the system. 3. While source separated recyclables are generally of higher quality, the extra effort of each source separating household or business is a hidden cost. Source separation strategies will require economic realities which reward separation. 4. Volume based fees will be an essential element of an effective waste abatement strategy. 5. The County is in a unique position to affect the rate structure and the economic realities of recycling due to its intention to designate County wastes to a centralized processing facility. By charging more for mixed wastes and less for that with recyclables removed, the County facility can encourage recycling through the market mechanism and reduce the need for unnecessary public expenditures. 6. Certain abatement alternatives will benefit from centralization among cities or for the County as a whole due to economies of scale. V. DRAFT STRATEGY FOR WASTE ABATEMENT The City of Eagan Solid Waste Abatement Commission recommends a strategy which considers the role of Dakota County in defining the waste abatement realities of its cities. It also recognizes the functional opportunity afforded the City to influence the shape of the County's waste management system. In the immediate future, the City would be best served by a conservative approach to waste abatement which functions to provide recycling and waste reduction alternatives to residents and businesses at a minimal public cost. As Dakota County's waste abatement system evolves, the City's can mature with it to address community needs in the future. A general description of such a system is outlined below. The Solid Waste Abatement Commission recommends that the City of Eagan: A. Provide voluntary recycling and source separation opportunities to Eagan residents at the least possible public cost and through the private sector where possible (recycling centers, compost, business recycling). B. Provide voluntary waste reduction alternatives like back yard composting through ordinance amendment. C. Address hazardous waste collection issues including physical collection, costs and liability. D. Ammend portions of the City Code pertinent to refuse management to provide for waste abatement and recycling alternatives. Define acceptable waste reduction strategies and facilitate their implementation. E. Analyze collection and recycling alternatives through the Organized Collection Study. Prepare 1q to implement as rising disposal costs increase incentives to source separate and centrally separate. F. Recommend that Dakota County: 1. Choose a central processing alternative which includes a centralized separation component. 2. Identify the preferred central processing technology and the City obligations and costs it implies prior to enactment of the designation ordinance. 3. Implement a rate structure for the processing facility which encourages source separation by passing through the real costs of mixed waste processing. 4. Centralize and coordinate programs which will benefit from economies of scale: centralized separation, compost, recycling markets, etc. 5. Act or require the central facility to act as a market of last resort for recycling contractors and programs, haulers and residents. 6. Standardize education materials for schools and cities to help develop habits and attitudes for separation and recycling. 7. Specifically request a blanket exclusion from the Metropolitan Council's 1988 mandatory source separation requirement for all Dakota County cities to allow them to come into compliance as the County implements its waste processing facility. G. Develop a comprehensive waste management system combining appropriate public and private elements by modifying and expanding upon these initial recommendations. Such modification to be consistent with the development of Dakota County's waste management program. (See Appendix 4) H. Possible Alternatives - A set of four possible alternatives has been prepared for consideration. These are intended to illustrate the combination of tactics in the development of a strategy, but are not all- inclusive. (See Appendix 5) VI. CONCLUSION The City of Eagan has a mandated public policy obligation to address landfill and solid waste abatement in the immediate future. The mandate will require some expenditure of public funds and public effort, but such costs can be substantially mitigated by the proper application of incentives to and regulation of free enterprise. Dakota County is in a unique position to encourage recycling by establishing a two - tiered price structure for mixed and separated wastes at its centralized processing facility. The City of Eagan has an obligation to insure the provision of this service through the appropriate application of public and private effort. WASTE REDUCTION Waste reduction is the process of reducing the amount of solid waste generated. It includes product reuse, increased product life, reduced material use and product design and decreased consumption of products. It also includes activities such as mulching - back yard composting of yard wastes. These areas require continued industry support and attention by lawmakers and the media. From this definition, it can be seen that cost cutting measures regularly practiced by business and industry and conscientious purchasing patterns practiced by consumers qualify as waste reduction. Business and industry respond to the profit motive, which is perhaps the greatest incentive to reduce unneccessary consumption in their processes. Most consumers, however, are willing to pay for the convenience resulting in the purchase of products that are managed for that purpose or products that are not needed. Waste reduction activities are the most cost effective ways to manage solid waste because materials do not enter the waste stream. These activities are also the most difficult to accomplish since they require changes in life style, consumption patterns, work habits and require voluntary effort by homeowners, businesses, agencies and individuals. Waste reduction is also difficult to legislate. For these reasons, waste reduction is best accomplished through education. Emphasis must be placed on making consumers aware of the consequences of their actions, and on informing citizens, public officials and businesses of methods to reduce waste volumes. Waste reduction because it is dependent on the behavior and cooperation of both industry and the general public, is difficult to accomplish. Although, with education and economic incentives, waste reduction can become a reality in our society. SOURCE SEPARATION Source separation implies the separation of materials, by the generator, from the municipal solid waste stream prior to the collection of the remaining mixed municipal solid waste. The materials subject to source separation are yard waste and recyclable glass, tin, aluminum, ferrous metals, paper, corregated cardboard, plastic beverage containers, drain oil, batteries, tires, furniture, clothing and some plastics. Also implied are systems of collection, processing, and marketing of separated materials. The effort expended by the generator of solid waste consists of separating the materials from the waste stream collected as trash and making them available for either pick up or taking them to a drop off site. This is considered by some as an inconvenience, but as the cost of disposing or processing solid waste increases and as the public becomes more aware of solid waste management, source separation becomes more attractive. Depending on how the program is designed, recyclable materials may be mixed together as or may have to be secured by type. For' ?:xample, yard waste is typically bagged if it is collected via routed pick -up or it can be loose if it is delivered to a drop -off site. Collection can consist of routed pick -up, either separately or in conjunction with the pick -up of trash or delivery of materials to the drop -off site by the generator. Routed pick -up is appropriate to areas that have a fairly dense population such as larger cities. Drop -off sites can be as simple as attended sites with containers for disposal or they can be redemption centers at which materials can be redeemed for cash. Curbside collection of recyclables enjoys the highest compliance rates of any recycling strategy due to its convenience. Under curbside programs, any individual merely puts separated recyclables at the curb as he or she does with ordinary refuse. It is kept separate when collected for transfer to a processing facility. Such a system requires either specialized equipment or separate pick -up to maintain integrity of the products. In conclusion, source separation requires the cooperation of the waste generator. Public education and economic incentives will tend to increase compliance in meeting source separation goals. CENTRALIZED SEPARATION Also called centralized material recovery, centralized separation involves the separation of recyclable or compostable materials at the actual central processing facility. Centralized separation has historically been considered only a process to be carried out before waste combustion. Using it only to extract recyclables or reduce the volume of waste has never received much attention, largely because the savings were never comparable to its cost. Currently, the technology of recovering materials at the centralized processing facilities is well established. Shredding, magnetic separation of metals, air classification, and similar techniques have been successfully used for a number of years. This technology can extract recyclable materials, process recyclables previously separated at the source, and reduce the total volume of waste. It can also be adapted to produce refuse - derived fuel (RDF) for combustion or supplemental material for co- composting. Source separated materials can be processed at such facilities or waste can be sent to other locations. CENTRALIZED PROCESSING Centralized processing, also called central processing, is defined as the processing of mixed municipal waste collected from within a designated area at a single facility. Centralized processing facilities have a capacity to process large volumes of waste for the purpose of volume reduction and /or resource recovery; some facilities accomplish both. Centralized processing has the potential of achieving the greatest percentage of volume reduction in solid waste management. The types of centralized separation procedures include mass burn waste incineration, refuse - derived fuel production, and composting /co- composting. The incineration processes are able to produce steam for use as heat and, through co- generation, electricity. Aerobic composting produces heat and composted humus, while anaerobic composting produces methane gas which can be captured. The following is a more detailed description of the various types of centralized processing facilites. Mass Burn A mass burn system incinerates waste in virtually the same condition it is delivered to the facility. Prior to incineration, waste is usually mixed by front -end loaders or grapple cranes and undesirable material is removed. Some facilities also mechanically or hand separate recyclables before the remaining waste is incinerated. Most mass burn technologies have a primary chamber which incinerates the waste and moves the burning waste horizontally from the point of charging to the point of discharge. Refuse - Derived Fuel Refuse - derived fuel processing significantly alters the condition of solid waste before it is burned. As with mass burn, many RDF facilities mechanically or hand separate recyclables before the remaining waste is processed. When waste is processed for refuse - derived fuel, goals are to: 1) reduce the size of waste to give better, more consistent burning characteristics; 2) classify the materia's received to increase the heat value. A series of shredders, hammer mills, and air knives classify the waste to produce a product that is lightweight, uniform in size, and has a greater energy value per unit than a comparable unit of unprocessed solid waste. Following production, the refuse - derived fuel can be used in its original form (fluff), it can be densified to enhance its handling characteristics, or it can be dehydrated and densified to yield a product which can be stored. Composting /Co- composting A third type of centralized processing is composting /co- composting. A biological process which occurs naturally, composting can yield both energy and material that can be utilized. There are two different processes that can be emp'oyed; aerobic and anaerobic. Aerobic composting takes place in the presence of sufficient or excess oxygen; the microbes active in aerobic composting produce heat but do not produce methane gas. Anaerobic composting takes place in conditions which are oxygen starved; microbes active in anaerobic composting produce both heat and methane gas. a1/ Both aerobic and anaerobic composting produce humus and heat. Heat is generated during the processes due to activity by microbes. This heat can be utilized for such purposes as heating buildings and preheating water. Because of the many different types of centralized processing and the significant impact centralized processing has on decreasing the sheer magnitude of solid waste generated by our society, centralized processing facilities will continue to be expanded in the future. LAND DISPOSAL As a method of waste management, land disposal is thought of as a last resort; although, until recent years, land disposal of solid waste has been the primary method of managing the metropolitan area's mixed municipal solid waste. Land disposal has occurred in a range of environments, . from uncontrolled, polluting, unaesthetic open burning dumps, to landfills that, when properly designed and operated, have less chance of causing serious pollution problems. A critical concern regarding any land disposal facility is to what extent the waste material can escape into the soil and groundwater and adversely affect the surrounding environment and water supplies. New land disposal facilities should be located, and modern technology incorporated into their design, to reduce public health and environmental risk. Another important consideration is controlling the type of wastes going into the land disposal facility. In recent years, compliance with increasingly rigorous and detailed standards for environmental protection have increased the cost of land disposal. It is estimated that, in the future, waste reduction and resource recovery will reduce significantly the need for land disposal but will not eliminate it entirely. Landfills for municipal solid waste will be necessary on a short -term basis while reduction and recovery systems are developing. They will also be necessary for the waste that cannot be processed and for the residue from recovery operations. However, increasingly in the future, land disposal of solid waste will be kept at an absolute minimum. as S+`R' '--,',..:„',701:'f.,--) x� _ ... - ., c. . ♦ •F- +5' s • . A 3 5 6.37 SEC. 5.3 GARBAGE AND REFUSE HAULERS • Subd, i, Definitions. The following terms, as .sed in this S shall have the meanings stated: A. "Garbage" means all putre scible wastes, including animal offal and carcasses of dead animals but excluding human excreta, sewage and other water - carried wastes. _ II, "Other refuse" means ashes, glass, :rockery, cans, paper, boxes, rags and similar non - �utrescible wastes but excluding od. sand, earth, brick, stone, concrete, trees, tree branches and wo Subd, 2. License Required. It is unlawfu for - any person to haul garbage or other refuse for hire without a license therefor from the City, or to haul garbage or other refuse from ed. his own residence or business property other than as herein except Subd, 3. Exc eption. Not hing i this Section s «;. shall pre person from hauling garbage or other refuse from their own residences or business properties provided " a the following rules are observed: (1) that all garbage is • hauled in containers that are water -tight on all sides and the bottom and with tight- fitting covers • on top, (2) that �` all other refuse is hauled in vehicles with leak -proof 4 r bodies and completely covered or enclosed by canvas or other d y ' - - Y ' r S - s i + 'r i ; s ti .,.'.�g w + i k , 1 r X ` -n r i -� 4- !:::' , ,...+ ; a 153 -1 ... f titr ^ r ? ` "- G u''. 4 } y:_ '..'''...-*'.% A nra ♦,p M Y l f 3 t Y � - r v i..a,.. °'�o-r� r'ri ^' .1..� i p t ..„,,,,. .. „,„ . „ ...: , ... , _:f,.....„;,..:_ : ..„,. : , ..t '� - : y - . awt ° .�+�r. 4 i c FL �, rtZ s'r ;" 'fI- C2 b a+ y-'* s 4' ' a ` n^ + s "^ �.. r., K � -.` -,f ,. .1-T 'R. a' `''''' lr4`; ■ ,,yc. . , i. � 'v A--`1.;,.; p er means or material so as to completely eliminate the possi- - bility of loss of cargo, and, (3) that all garbage and other :.. •- a refuse shall be dumped or unloaded only at the designat sanitary land -fill. - Subd. 4. Hauler Licensee Requirements. A. Hauler licenses shall be granted only upon the condition that the licensee have water -tight packer -type vehicles in good condition to prevent loss in transit of liquid or solid cargo, that the vehicle be kept clean and as free from offensive odors as possible and not allowed to stand in any street longer than reasonably neces- sary to collect garbage or refuse, and that the same be dumped or unloaded only at the designated sanitary land- fill, and strictly in accordance with regulations relating thereto. B. Before a garbage and refuse hauler's license shall be issued, the applicant shall file with the City Clerk- Treasurer evidence that he has provided public liability insurance on all vehicles in at least the sum of $100,000.00 for injury of one person, $300,000.00 for the injury of two or more persons in the same accident, and $50,000.00 for property damages. C. The Council, in the interest of maintain- ing healthful and sanitary conditions in the City, hereby reserves the right to specify and assign certain areas to all licensees, and to limit the number of licenses issued. D. Each applicant shall file with the City Clerk Treasuter, before a garbage and refuse hauler's license is issued or renewed, a schedule of proposed rates to be charged by him during the licensed period for wh• '-, the application is made. The schedule of proposed rates, a compromise schedule thereof, shall be approved by the Council before granting the license. Clothing herein shall prevent a licensee from petitioning the Council for review ` of such rates during the licensed period, and the Council may likewise consider such petition and make new rates ' effective at ary time. No licensee shall charge rates in z excess of the rates approved by the Council. E. No hauler operating on a route in a resi- dential district shall operate a truck on any City street when the weight of said vehicle exceeds eight ton per axle. , ; F. No hauler shall operate in a rsidential ` district after 8:30 o'clock P.M. or before 5:30 o' A. M. •� -,,: of any day, and no hauler shall operate in a residential district on Sunday. _ G. Each vehicle for which a hauler's license 4 r, -` is issued shall exhibit such license in a prominent position 5:;1'--'--41.. '�_� on said vehicle. (1 -1 -83) '_;.-:-„•:;., r , i 154 fl .. T+ i 1 " '- 1 . L S ' 49{ Y l �l"' - • ti L.. t . {� t;.;...*,,,,, • y y^ '• -7. 1 s ,X i cy J • ,.;,,,,,,r-..4, _ . CHAPTER 10 PUBLIC PROTECTION, ' .41, - - . REFUSE. CRIMES AND OFFENSES 4 ECTION 10.01. STORAGE, DEPOSIT AND DISPOSAL OF Subd. 1. Definitions. The following terms, as used in this Section, shall have the meanings stated: A. "Refuse" - Includes all organic material resulting from the manufacture, preparation or serving of food or food pro ducts, and spoiled, decayed or waste roods x:. from any source, bottles, cans, glassware, paper or paper products, crockery, ashes, rags, and discarded clothing, tree or lawn clippings, leaves weeds and other waste prod - ' ucts, except human waste or waste resulting from building a R construction or demoli l Dwelling tion. B. "Residentia" - Any single building consisting of one through four dwelling units with { individual kitchen facilities for each C. "Multiple Dwelling" - Any building used ma for residential purposes cons isting o m ore than four ; dwelling units w ith individual kitchen facilities for each D. "Commercial Establishment" - Any prem ises where a commercial or industrial enterprise of any kind is � carried on, and shall include restaurants, clubs, churches, -, r 4 and sc'r.00.ls where food is prepared or served. u r Subd. 2. Storage. t A. It is unlawful for any person to store _ �' a ' refuse on residential dwelling remises for more than one ` t' ` week. All such storage shal be in five to thirty L s a metal or g Y gallon „ • � ,., a plastic c with tight- fitting covers, which ,� shall be ma in a clean and sanitary condition; -1-.-.7-. g " " provided, that tree leaves, weeds and grass clipping may be F '` stored in plastic bags and tree limbs must be s tored in _�§ ;" � bundles weighin no more than seventy five g - pounds and no m;,,,1,-,--,-:.-,.., � r` longer than four feet. B. It is unlawful for any person to store �w refuse on multiple dwelling pr emises for more than one week. F z A ��� Such storage shall be in containers as for residential ro dwelling premises, except that so- called "dumpsters" with ` close- fitting covers may be substituted. y person t , C. It is unlawful for any store A • y " n , ' refuse on commercial establishment premises for more than �t forty-eight g ,v • ° hours S uch storage shall be in containers as } �� for residential dwelling premises, except . that so- called w xt� "dumpsters" with close- fitting covers may be substituted (1-1-83) "+ • 4 � D. It is unlawful to store organic refuse r r unless it is drained and wrapped. a te' �^. , 226 r ''''' , 4' T FB: -y 3 k:. .r . : " r `* �. y iT y,Y ro G 4 4 b' �; 33` , 'r , r •ry �i r t 4 „ : . ' i�5 s F v L .f "' ,:- 9 +, - w a 0 y Yt' ' te a + - ': ' ' .. X-h :A;a i 1: 3- ,4, ,te . -. R , •1- r. { . _ Subd. 3. Dep�� it. It is unlawful for an Gerson to deposit refuse from' :any source, rubbish, offal, or � r� r= body of a dead animal, in any place other than a sanit landfill. -- Subd. 4. Fire Danger. It is unlawful for any person to store, deposit or dispose of any refuse which n flames or heated to the point where it could cause dancer of fire in other refuse. Subd. 5. Disposa The Council may, by resolu- lion, adopt, wild from time to time amend, adjust and revise such rules, regulations, rates and charges as it deems necessary c; proper for the operation and management of t`e sanitary lani1] - It may give notice of any such action .�s it deems nece ry. SEC. 10.02. TOILET INSTALLATION REQUI:2ED. It is the duty of every cwner or occupant of any property within the y City, having a dwelling house or business building situated thereon, which property is abutting a street in which there are City water and sewer mains, to install a toilet in such dwelling or business buitdir-g and make connection thereof with such water and server wins. The City shall serve Y' 4 :written notice upo s owner or cccuparit requiring the installation of toilet facilities u po n premises described in Y - said notice, and connection thereof with the sewer and water t`4 x mains, all of :�hich shall be done within thirty days after :-- .; - -7,7* ---- - - - -t % •, } ' _ z service cf such written notice. whe never any owner o r ; occupant shall default in compliance with such written -� s. notice the Council m by resolution direct that a toilet be "' `� installed and connection made with the water and sewer m ains x �` and that the actual cost of such installation be paid in the r : - � ` first instance out of the General Revenue Fund, and asses i against the propert SO benefited. After such installa, ?.. r ,� " ."° and connection is completed by order of the Council, t „e ' ` City shall serve a written notice of intention to make an +-' _ assessment therefor. If such assessment is not paid within ten days the City shall certify the amount thereof to the ' =1 � ; "a ? County Auditor in the same manner as with other special - f , . assessments, provided that the Council may by resolution { provide that the assessment be spread over a term of five ' , _ ° (5) years upon written request by the owner of the p roperty. Ut z SEC. 10.03. MAINTENANCE OF INDIVIDUAL SEWERAGE Y , SYSTEMS. It • unlawful for the owner or tenant of any p ; premises to p ermit an individual sewage disposal system to � ' SKY +; overflow, or expose the contents thereof a ground. S _ �” Source: Ci Code Y , � i}4 `p, �" , Effective Date : 1 -1 -83 (1-1-83) , �a (Sections 10.04 through 10. 09, inclusive, reserved for r a � - future expansion.) e 227 Zg t S .;�r . 'I`+ :, .er ti:" ,�wT a rte �� ''7:1:= .- �' h v+ ''; ...p ;;;;_.,,,...11,;,,,:. .,,,* . i - �.,�-. �[.ls p J. Y 1j g - , Y k��_ 4 - .k f yy !sg w o k' 14'F' . r "' , 3 x T . lam... :.. e —,:::s4,-t.', � !� h -, l • >r..F� -. r'rY¢Y .mss -1 - y''`.'� appip,A.4 POTENTIAL WASTE MANAGEMENT DEVELOPMENT MODEL 1988 -89 Drop -off Centers (Compost & Recycling) (Collection Modifications) 1989 -90 Routed d Collection Alternatives (Rising Costs) 1990 -91 Increased Desire to Separate 1991 -92 Comprehensive Waste Abatement System I • 30 SCENARIO EXAMPLES I. Low Tech - Low Cost (Example: Attended donation center with compost program) A. Education - Emphasis on waste abatement, ease of separation, and location of donation centers B. Source Separation /Donation Centers - Location of one or more full- service donation centers (Costs dependent on number and responsibility) C. Yard Waste Composting - Maintenance of community program utilizing County system as market D. Collection, - Require either volume -based fees or separate collection of recyclables E. Pros and Cons 1. Pros - Low cost - Limited City responsibility 2. Cons - Metropolitan Council requires mandatory separation if voluntary separation fails to meet targets. II. Low Tech - High Cost (Example: Curbside recyclable collection with donation center backup) A. Education - Emphasis on separation, convenience and relative costs B. Source Separation /Collection - Routed residential collection of separated recyclables, yard wastes, and mixed wastes. C. Yard Waste Composting - Full scale independent program to assure high quality compost and marketing. D. Donation Centers - Location of relatively few donation opportunities as safety valve for routed collection. E. Pros and Cons 1. Pros - Higher participation - Economies of scale . 2. Cons -High cost - Possible duplication with County programs 31 III. High Tech - Low Cost (Example: -reliance on County intermediate processing with voluntary programs) A. Education - Minimal B. Source Separation - Limited to hazardous and special wastes and voluntary programs C. Collection /Intermediate Processing - Designate all wastes to County facility and rely on it for separation D. Pros and Cons 1. Pros - Low cost - No need to change disposal habits 2. Cons - Metropolitan Council and County plans require source separation - Reduces quality of recovered recyclables IV. High Tech - High Cost (Example: City participation in RDF or co- compost system) A. Education - High intensity - locally managed B. Source Separation - Variable depending upon technology, allowing for voluntary programs C. Collection /Processing - Locally managed waste processing system D. Intermediate Processing - Locally managed and operated E. Pros and Cons 1. Pros - Local direction 2. Cons - Costs and duplication - County designation of wastes limits viability • • R ecyclin g T of trash ts/ is slower than hoped . • 3 -year goal far from being met By Steve Brandt Staff Writer Now that Hennepin County has ar- ranged to send much of its garbage to energy - producing plants by 1990, county officials are paying increased attention to recycling to handle the remaining trash. However, if the county is to meet its current goal of recycling 16 percent of its garbage in three years, officials will have to produce significant im- provements in recycling programs ' that are just starting in many com- munities and not yet adopted in oth- ers. Indeed, among officials involved with recycling there is more hope than certainty that that goal can be reached. Moreover, for county commissioners the issue poses the political question of whether to use their powers to order mandatory recycling by home- owners and businesses to meet the goal. The experience of St. Louis Park, where officials expect to recycle about 21 percent of waste this year, shows that a community can accom- plish the job, according to County Board Chairman Mark Andrew. But the experience of other munici- palities such as Plymouth, which has yet to recycle 3 percent of its waste in a 16- month -old program, indicates it won't be quick or easy to get a large number of residents to recycle their refuse. "It will take mandatory recycling," said Dick Pouliot, who runs Plym- outh's recycling efforts. "There are a great number (of people) who say, 'I know I should do it. I feel guilty not Garbage continued on page 3B •••∎ a • ° a .° ono = c h i = ^o , C, u o0U'. 73' >E ^ • o o W . 0 - u � " a u a aE• R o v o•� a s co ,u ty D c.K ycd g � � � 'ai � 6 ° OEu v �p:. R. O R a ca u C u .., > O •:..) ` t. R O. O u 1AWN ^ ;p R aim _ c u Q s� >, s y ° c.,_:" � ° a s ��° ° s rr ° O h4. G 17) C V •. c ` i1 O ro ^� ,n O 1•- "^ V O U ° w A u . �- Y u, r O _ 04 ..... ,y 'D C a � i • j Nril j �� D p ia �� m o ' o :" . .a ^cZ e< ° ►;R:h'I' O.. =� 3 � . c u 8 0 =�� .0 c u 7 O , C.�.+ E u u ca C „y 0. N >0 R A 7 • ^J ,n N O n O . , /•t .0 0 ^ 0 a ri b . (J u .-. • :: 5 E ■aJ 15 CIO ci • E /) C _ oA v f]. V , EE ^ O - .Y `c, • ,te ,6, " O -- = cc� o � �. =Rai °v>• ^oa ° "".0 � ^. ;.• N C o iJ o , O w u :a :� r 'O . • • ' v FS) c.... 11 OWO > .-, u ,n ,a �• ' y R a Z a, .. 'n u ` o .° �: h > , :` f.- ' �n :•••' O ,.: • W p O v, 1 u . a , .. `d u U >„ u c^ O v .n 'fl u , U ~ ' ;7, C c7 . C s , , , w "O O .- x11. 0 ... y 1 al 0i C y... • ;7 E., F. • ti v O 0 "J • :� 7 S u .0 i ' T i', '� ,G O V, V . r C ^ 0 C 5 ,�..0 C .� Y ,= U ,n 0 a) `'.. ,c," R i := 7 a — . U V ... ,.....n" °� r 1 •+ ' '+ C] . :7 ..� A U b ^ O t- R , 7 f1 O , _ O v1 ; O t.. 4-1 5 4✓ O C y O S , 0 . v N , to ,M.p a t7 .J R .�,O u Ism , � O O E a ; 0 • • 'd R 'O to � 4 � t1 �0 ' i7 M . 0 '0 • .� V • �,O o ... u . u b . ° ' 0. � F •U V o0 y 1" ' 0 u "0 - - U ^ .. 'C7 G.) R " ^ N N oa a c o 00 0 �."3 u ^ o ' -. b• -• . .�° '0 .1 Ca .0., b 51 u Quu x.CU� r�aR ^ .nu� A~ ,S . a • o c , • v >, is o o ..... a C4 1.... � _ • . (MS cJ u ° C.) R u� 0 u u O— U uu. , 0 VI/ aRU 0 p... R a " . 1 17 O 3 >, K � ' :> �J .c `n r , ^ a . 5 O J y •�'- a Ci R �'" O �w o c. v, %. .. .c .0 7� . O n , L c u o a C14' : o a +1 / ou U E a 8 4 w c'' • > ° x-5 a° R o A cJ , o : :a 3 'S gMg/ c v u u > a2.�.b•E coo ' E ci a,X N R^ =r ° ° G C U y,_, 00 w. C cJ'0.0 0 r 4) ..0 O a t.: C- u � ;",.7.7., `T '0 > R C CU 0 . X u. -‹ a3. .c a E H - o m u v c 2. 3 Z U . - Ei E H.c 3 MUMS ILI O a)�0,,..,O � R C V S LI° ��O O . c Cpo ob 3° - ' °i "u� . • ) .... ••. c ,,, N T ' E RS 2, .., O y .00 a p 0. 0c p • 3 a' 5 tf , ' `� O a . U li � 7 4. • G u u°� .p oi v) o . >,c ro E ~ 6. U co t0 . ^ 'U ° C E >, •0 as C h •D R 'O O � N O L , .2 ^' v 0 o4 C v o � �! atl ° • � OA C C c C O El v oQ `._ •� u ,0 on E ^ c ca ., U c ° cv • - ,o.n c un E �Oa - . v Rum_c et E . ... v ti R •^ v O C R C,, C O ta v, O u 7 °o C y • - C O. C p , = y 10 r ii rit y M 'O >. R u CJ aJ O E O N 4 E 0 N u C '-, R 'O p = o y i� «o c °'� oor v o '� � C '> c c c o ° � ° o .c v o o . R 0 C °° ^" „. O o4 u " i • .E .c p on a, . U j ° u C ' c. � n ° c o G° 0 . L H R 7 a-, u E l e Q• 3 R y .:L C 0. j y - U 'v -0 O 5c. s c E E "" 5 E- F- 0 u as tu.. t F-- 5. :°: vim f o a J./ . M E E T I N G N O T I C E The Eagan Solid Waste Abatement Commission will hold a Regular Meeting beginning at 6:00 p.m. on Tuesday, 13 October 1987 in Conference Rooms A & B at Eagan City Hall 3830 Pilot Knob Road, Eagan, Minnesota A joint meeting with the Eagan City Council will follow at 7:00 p.m. For more information about this meeting, please call Jon Hohenstein at 454 -8100.