Additional Comments Summary Response to Additional Comments

More documents

Recommendations

Info

RESPONSE SUMMARY REVISED DRAFT ORDER OF APPROVAL NO. 10052 Comment Period – September 13 – October 28, 2010 Commenter Mark Heinzen (Written 10/27/2010) Comment Synopsis My Name is Mark Heinzen and I live approximately .75 miles from the entrance of Mirrormont and 2.5 miles as a crow flies east from Cedar Grove Composting. I would like to thank you for accepting comments and concerns regarding the odor emanating from the location at the Cedar Grove Recycling Center. I attended the public hearing on October 19, 2010 at Maple Hill Elementary School and found it to be very eye opening and concerning on how the Cedar Grove Recycling Center, in particular how the Owner, is handling complaints regarding this odor issue. On several occasions I have called to complain of the strong odor and even requested a tour of the facility to help better understand the process on how Cedar Grove Recycling works. Although the conversations on the phone had been pleasant there was a sense that if I would just go away so would the problem with no action plan to resolve it. I figured I was wasting my time so I stopped calling I wonder now how many other people followed suit as well? On occasion I ride my bike to work and during my ride the odor can be pretty unbearable. The route that I take is Issaquah Hobart Rd SE, 152 Ave., Cedar Grove Road to the Cedar River Trail and on to Renton. The valleys, wind currents, inversion layers and other such factors make it very unpredictable to which day would be better than others but one thing for sure is when I do approach the composting facility it is where the source of the smell is at. On 10/19/2010 and in all fairness to the citizens of the surrounding neighborhood and the freedoms and protections that governs us all with the great services that Cedar Grove Compost provides in compost that is purchased by citizens of the community some of who were present at the meeting. There was no negative statement against having a viable profitable company that supports the community in many different ways. The disagreement and frustration comes when a company has been told there is a problem by being the loosing party in a related law suit. To then continue to process compost in a similar method instead of changing to a proven alternative process that is used by several compost companies, including a local competitor that does not produce the offensive odors. The actions of Cedar Grove Compost in creating these odors off hours make it harder to identify and correct the problems of the processes of production and reporting. The timing of the post card postmarked
RESPONSE SUMMARY REVISED DRAFT ORDER OF APPROVAL NO. 10052 Comment Period – September 13 – October 28, 2010 Commenter Comment Synopsis 10/15/2010 was viewed as a tool to try to derail or soften the attitude of people in the community and prevent them from testifying against Cedar Grove to have them then say later “we really don’t see a problem.” Cedar Grove seems to be thumbing their nose in the direction of the complaints similar to what an adolescent would do to a parent that is trying to steer them in a more positive direction. Their actions are being felt and impacted very negatively at the root of our own being our children during the days at Maple Hills Elementary where my child attends. At a recent visit to Maple Hills Elementary walking from my car to the building the stench was so great it almost caused me to gag and nearly vomit. I understand that food scraps that have now been added to the recycling list maybe the source of the increased odors and should be managed out of the production process. To me the process that is employed is getting closer to that of a rendering operation than that of a compost operation. I know there is a landscaping company near Jones Rd and Hwy. 169 and they don’t seem to have an odor problem. We all know where the source is emanating from. We as citizens of King County with the up coming election are all being asked to approve Charter Amendment No.1 which includes, an amendment to the preamble “To Preserve a Healthy Environment”. How is this preserving that to our community? I do additionally thank the more pro active folks of our community for posting the signs around alerting us of the meeting and applaud the gentleman that attended the meeting that is employed by Newport High School for giving such a very thoughtful and thorough testimony about the problem and solution as well as others who testified about this issue. I am very proud of the community that I live in and confident that if we remain steadfast the implementation of a corrective action will quickly follow. Catherine Avila (Written 10/27/2010) I spoke at the October 19th meeting about revisions to the Cedar Grove Composting permit, and I would like to add three points to the public record: Firstly, I am very happy about the condition that "air contaminant emissions from Cedar Grove shall not result in Level 2 odors or greater beyond the facility property boundaries." Am I correct in reading this as saying PSCAA will no longer be required to have me sign a complaint in order to impose a fine against Cedar Grove? I know on a number of occassions I had been kept up all night with the smell and
Page 1 and 2: RESPONSE SUMMARY REVISED DRAFT ORDE
Page 27: RESPONSE SUMMARY REVISED DRAFT ORDE
Page 43: RESPONSE SUMMARY REVISED DRAFT ORDE

Additional Comments Summary Response to Additional Comments

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?