My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
City Council Minutes 1983 07 19
PORTAL
>
CITY COUNCIL RECORDS
>
MINUTES (45.090)
>
1970-1999 City Council Minutes
>
1983 City Council Minutes
>
City Council Minutes 1983 07 19
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/11/2021 2:31:21 PM
Creation date
7/7/2009 4:09:21 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council Records
Doc Type
City Council Minutes
Signed Date
7/19/1983
Original Hardcopy Storage
7C3
Supplemental fields
Test
CCMIN 1983 07 19
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
36
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
<br />Page -4- <br /> <br />The DRCOG study states that either the Bennett <br />site or the Arsenal site (ignoring the clean-up <br />costs) could be financed with Airport revenue <br />bonds. They realized any other site than the <br />Arsenal site would be less convenient for <br />the residents of Louisville, Boulder and those <br />who live south, north and west of Denver. <br />That is why the metro-study total costs over <br />a 30 year period are higher for any site other <br />than the Arsenal. other costs that have not <br />been assessed are increased noise impacts, <br />increased air pollution, of the safety risks <br />to which the residents will be exposed - these <br />are very real costs for the people of Adams <br />County, Commerce City, Brighton, Montbello, <br />Park Hill and many other communities. <br />Mr. Cutler stated that no one was certain if <br />the Army would make the Arsenal land available <br />for the airport expansion. No one in Washington <br />will make this commitment. The most the Army <br />has said thus far is that the earliest possible <br />date for Arsenal availability would be 1986 <br />and this has been revised to 1988. The Army <br />cannot release the land until the new facility <br />has been built in pine Bluffs, Arkansas. <br />The House of Representatives has refused to <br />fund that facility for the past two years. <br />The Army's own regulations prohibit it from <br />making the land available unless it is cleaned <br />up. Another reason is that it maybe impossible <br />legally to write an impact statement for con- <br />veyance and use of the Arsenal which would <br />comply with the Environmental policy Act,be- <br />cause for 25 years no records were kept as to <br />where chemical wastes, biological warfare <br />material wastes were buried, spilled and dumped. <br />Another factor is that the Army by Federal law <br />cannot give up its liability contamination <br />risk entirely. Since no records were kept of <br />the disposal of highly hazardous materials <br />and weapons over the Arsenal's 17,000 acres <br />with many surface basins and lakes and under- <br />ground water systems, those activities re- <br />sulted in contamination more extensive <br />and more varied than anywhere else in the <br />united States. Many of these contaminants <br />are military unique with no public standards <br />and no proven methods of clean-up. Various <br />estimates have been made as high as 6 billion <br />dollars. Numerous questions remain regarding <br /> <br />7/19/83 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.