JerryDieter
JKS
OFFICE
14754
Budd
Rd.
JUN
0
2009
Yorkville,
IL
60560
STATE
OF
IL.LIN
IS
June
3, 2009
Ofl
Control
Board
N
Dear
Pollution
Control
Board
Members:
I am
commenting
on
PBC
$2007-146
(Fox
Moraine
Landfill
Appeal).
I am
a Kendall
County
resident
who
lives
at
14574
Budd
Road,
Yorkville,
IL 60560.
I am
assigned
a
Yorkville
address
and
my home,
for
the
past
twenty-five
years,
is
located
1.5 miles
(as a
crow
flies)
west-northwest
of
the
proposed
Fox
Moraine
landfill
location.
I
attended
a
majority
of
the landfill
siting
hearings
so I
understand
the
facts and
the Pollution
Control
Board’s
process
for siting
a
landfill
in
Illinois.
Upon
listening
to the
testimony
presented
by
Fox
Moraine
landfill
engineers
and
consultants,
I
obtained
a
disc
copy
of the
siting
application
to
review
on
my
own
and
found
how
there
were
few
critical
aspects
actually
being
addressed.
Firstly,
I am
greatly
concerned
that
the geologic
investigation
and analysis
completed
by
the
petitioner’s
engineering
consultants
grossly
ignore
the
potential
that
regional
surface
drainage
infiltrates
into unconfined
permeable
layers
and
said
runoff
becomes
groundwater
which
migrates
laterally
through
and
out
of
the clay
(Lemont)
barrier
layer
which
is
supposedly
protecting
the
deep
groundwater
aquifer.
While
the
spacing
of
the borings
may
meet regulatory
requirements
and
subsequently
the
forty-eight
(48) monitoring
wells
establish
direction
of
the groundwater
flow
towards
the
east-southeast,
I do
not
believe
that
any naturally
deposited
geologic
formation
is
a
uniform
and
permeable
barrier
as
they
claim
the Lemont
formation
to
be.
I personally
feel
that
the
health
of
my
family
as
well
as that
of
my neighbors
has not
been
given
consideration
since we
all
depend
on shallow
groundwater
wells
(generally
between
200-3
00
feet
deep).
All
of these
wells
are
located
near
and
along
Hollenback
Creek.
While
the bedrock
beneath
the
proposed
landfill
may
slope
in
the
direction
that Aux
Sable
Creek
flows,
it is
hundreds
of
feet down
(below
the
shallow
wells)
and when
there
are heavy
rains
the
landfill
will
drain
directly
into
Hollenback
Creek.
I
believe
the
Feb.
20,
2007 EEl
prepared
comments
and
the
subsequent
May
17,
2007
Shaw
responses
do
not
adequately
address
the impact
this project
has
on
Hollenback
Creek.
I
can
find
no
counter
responses
form
the
BET,
which
is
not to
say
that
the
City of
Yorkville
should
not
and
will not
require
a BFE
be
established
for
Hollenback
Creek.
Where
is the
watershed
study?
Why
ahs no
one
required
establishing
a
baseline
assessment
of the
“pre-landfill”
Hollenback
Creek
conditions
in
terms
of the
quality
of surrounding
vegetation
and biological
diversity.
I
live
on
the
Hollenback
Creek
tributary
called
the
landfill
north
watershed
and
can
personally
verify
that
this stream
runs
year
round
and
is
clean
and
clear
flowing.
Will
it
continue
to
be this
way
if
a
landfill
is
constructed
at
its’ headwaters?
I
believe
a
minimal
amount
of
investigation
proves
that
there
are inadequacies with
the petitioner’s
“proof”
that
the
landfill
has
not
affected
a
floodplain,
floodway
or
provided
necessary
storm
water
protection.
If
the very
agencies
which
administer
the protection
of public
resources
see
fit
to allow
the
relocation
of
a jurisdiction
creek
and
wetland,
the
minimum
mitigation
measure
should
be
to
ensure
that
the
downstream
creek
has
established
conservation
corridors
and
wetland
buffers
so
the
authorities
can
monitor
and
protect
the creek
from
further
impacts.
I
attest
that
the
landfill
site
is
directly
in
conflict
with
the regional
resources
including
the
Hollenback
Sugarbush
Forest
Preserve
located
adjacent
to
Route
71
and
across
the
highway
from
the
landfill
site.
Silver
Springs
State
Park
is
about
3
miles
north
of
the
landfill
site
and
is
considered
a regional
amenity
to thousands
of
people
in
and around
the
Chicago-land
area.
Similarly,
Kendall
County
Forest
Preserve
has
worked
for
several
years
to acquire
large
tracks
of
agricultural
land
along
the
Fox
River
which
is
also
about
3 miles
west
of
the landfill
site.
So, how
much
sense
does
it
make
to
have
all
this
natural
unspoiled
beauty,
which
has
taken
years
of people’s
dreams
and
dollars
to
create,
be
ruined
in
an
instant?
This
project
should
be
held
to the
rules
put
forth
by
the
JEPA
including
the
750
setback
from
IL
State
Route
71.
Although
it
doesn’t
exist
at
this
time,
Kendall
County
and
other
similar
collar
counties
will
inevitably
form
a
groundwater
protection
coalition.
It’s
already
begun
since
both
Yorkville
and
Oswego
municipalities draw
from
the
deep
sandstone
aquifer
at
unsustainable
rates.
It
doesn’t
sound
like
an
ideal
solution
to
risk
contaminating
the very
water
source
that
the
area
relies
on.
The
publics’
health
and
the welfare
of
Kendall
and
Grundy
Counties
depend
on
the
boards’
decision
to
deny
this
appeal.
This
landfill
is
the
wrong
location
and offers
more
negatives
than
positives
for
all
of the
reasons
I’ve
taken
the
time
to share
above.
Thank
you
for
your
consideration
in
this matter.
Sincerely,
Jerry
Dieter
USGS
IL
StrearnStats
Page
1
of 1
cco.
61
w
-
oe
t
http ://streamstats.usgs.gov/ilstreamstats/printPage.asp
5/27/2009
-U
7;
U,
•0
CD
-n
0
Ci
vi
n
“I
(n
CD
3
0
(I,
Pt
(I
O
a)
a)
CD
CD
a)
a)
CD
3
CD
C,)
I
0
0
CD
10
0
N
0
Ui
Co
N
6
U)
CD
a)
3
C)-)
0
-D
CD
C-.
0
a)
D
0
U,
CD
0
0
CD
CD
3
CD
‘1
0
w
In
n
ID
In
rP
n
Ifl
Ci
m
,_
CD
0.
>g
J
UI
.
.
i)
•
0
Ico
1
0
0
-.Ui0
I-’
N
U
UL,
04D.
N
U’
U
0
-v
7;
7;
7;
7;
Lii
I-
Li)
l’J
)-
CD
00
U,
0
00
-
w
N)
N)
I—
N)
N)
Co
-C
Co
I-.
--
—
Ui
p-)
si’
C’.)
Co
CD
In
In
C
CD
C-P
CD
0
-v
CD
c-C
CD
D
0
-o
CD
D
a)
CD
x
CD
Ci
-I
Ci
CD
CD
-I
CD
CI
x
(‘I
i-p
Ci
‘-p
In
‘-p
n
-n
0
I,)
In
CD
(0fl
-I
no
‘-I-
fli
%__
-I
-I
0
-I
rn
<.0
CD
0.0(0
-‘C
‘-p
0
n
a)
CD
C
I
c
H
0
I
I
0•
co
p
C))
N
0-)
p
Lii
co
p
p
LU
0
I-.
C))
C))
Ui
I—
U,
‘-.1
-
USGS
IL StreamStats
Page
1 of 1
South
watershed
S.R, 71 culvert
PINn
Y/
fr
/
/ —
—
GHWAYS
F
i
1
4
i
1)
1?
http
://strearnstats.usgs.gov/ilstreamstats/printPage.asp
5/27/2009
eWrq.)
11’)
r1
tP
7
J1
i-
u,
r’
i-
C
C
C
U
C
ID
.
CC
-n
CD
3
CD3O
CD
n
m
3
U,
0
Er
3
C
t%JW
(fl
CD
j
-D
W
D
C
U)
Oo,W—r.j
l
-
>
o
(0
U,
Ej
jW
%J
z
—
0
C
=
w
I,
CD
—‘
0
CD
-
co
—.nr’.)
I-
0
fl
o
%j-,
0i
—‘I-’
--
-
0
CD
CD
w
—
—
W
C
D
C
N)
—
(fl
D
Co
Co
2
-
-
-
-
C
CD
N)
CD
-
0
CD
-
tDfl
—
CD
w
-Ia.
-
no
E
CD
0
efl
0)
-‘
EN)
o
Di
CD
-‘
C
j
L
-.J
C
CD
_
u,
m
0.0
CD
C)
C
N)
CD
x
-V
CD
—
0
x
r-t.
Øgp
19
E
9Ov
R
1\
-
-
0
-—‘
‘S
c
I
h3L
)
I.,, i’
-
;;:i4?(
(___ -
A
c\
.
2
\.._.
‘4
\ 1’
:
,
—7
(
I-.
/
N••;
fi%’sr?
--.-“-—/ (_
,./_
L
- j)
•
\_—2
.-—-
•
JN%
(
I
— rci--
,((_
W%/-%
\/)
,J
Cqj
__1
\
2
—
!‘
‘—‘i
1.
- /
6OO’
--
0
1/
USGS
IL StreamStats
_______
:
y:i
,uc-
=
J
..
.‘..
-.—-.I
.:.1ç_____
..
aj
\_
I_
—
‘I.iC
LWVik
I__
tia
1
Combined
Hollenbeck
Creek
FVatershed
@
BiidTk
ii%
fbox
cialveri
tWC$.
-
——
--
Legend
_
*
Point
D.Iir,.atlon
‘J
rL
Puce
Names
HIGHWAYS
—
Nqlmey.
Smendy R..dn
Gray
30M
Relief
IOOK_DRG
1
cAH
1
1
.?
0
.t—_
I.
&JM
Gi1JL’
(1
http://streamstats.usgs.gov/ilstreamstats/printPage.asp
‘flI
P,sre,be
Li,
Lt
a,
i,_)
_I
(l
C
a
C
C
I
cx
I-I
—
a)
I..
0.
c
a)
U
a)
.
0
c
“
a)
00
—
>
U
a)
LII
I
0
I
I.
UI
.1..’
0
U
.a)
I
0.
0
U.
U
U,
0-;
(I,
a)
E
a)
Ca
:3
0
Li,
‘cC
a)
a)
0
113
‘13
rJ
I-’)
a)
‘V
3
0
-c
a)
Li,
0
-D
‘a
1
a)
0.
0
U,
2
113
a)
LiD
ci
C
a)
:3
113
>
2
0
a)
-o
N
cv’
C•
C
(0
a)
LI
c
C
‘a
a)
.0
a)
z
a)
Ca
C
13)
0.
C
C
a)
C.)
a)
4)
z
>
4)
a)
E
I
0.
La
—
cv)
cv’
N
N
cv’
(N
a-
a
cO
c-I
cO
IN
cv’
Lv’
Lr
La
---J
-
Li,
C
C
C
C
cv’
N
La
m
La
C
c-I
OD
.-1
.-l
-
.-4
C
C
C
Li,
C
C
C)
U
.
c-I
Li,
-1
U
s
Q_
a_
aa
a
-.
U
-4.’
V)
I
w
I
.
U
0
LI
0)
0.
N
E
In
r-.
U-I
N
C
0
a)
0
0
-l
Il)
U
.4.’
In
4.’
4.’
0
E
0)
4.’
U
VI
In
0
LI.
a)
Suite11-500
ILLINOIS
n
,
4:-
Ofltrol
8
oard
Chicago,
1L60601
\
L-’
RE:
PCBCASE
#2007-146
(Fox
Moraine
LLC
v.
United
City
of
Yorkville)
This
letter
is
written
in
support
of
the
decision
made
by
the
City
of
Yorkville,
IL,
to
deny
the
FOX
MORAINE
LANDFILL
application.
I
attended
every
session
of
the
public
hearings
and
listened
to
all
testimony
presented
and
the
following
are
several
reasons
why
the
United
City
of
Yorkville,
City
Council
DENIED
the
application
for
the
Fox
Moraine
Landfill,
the
decision
of
the
Council
was
not
unfair;
there
was
due
cause
to
deny
Fox
Moraine’s
application.
TRAFFIC
—
Fox
Moraine’s
traffic
expert
used
obsolete
numbers,
incorrect
speed
limit
information
and
had
nothing
in
their
plan
to
provide
routes
that
would
not
add
extremely
high
levels
of
additional
traffic
to
the
alreadyover
burdened
and
inadequate
roads
of
State
Route
47,
34
and
71.
The
excessive
traffic
a
landfill
would
bring
to
this
community
and
the
dangeroussituations
it
would
create
werenever
given
any
significance
in
Fox
Moraine’s
presentation.
The
City
of
Yorkville,
City
Council
had
to
deny
the
application
based
on
the
lack
of
proof
that
the
traffic
situation
would
put
a
burden
on
the
community
and
endanger
the
safety
of
this
community.
There
was
no
fundamental
fairness
involved
in
their
decision
to
deny
the
application.
LANDFILL
DESIGN
—
When
Devin
Moose,
of
Shaw
Engineering,
gave
his
statement
(underoath)
he
testified
that
this
was
the
best
and
safest
designand
would
provide
thegreatest
safetyto
the
people
of
this
community.
It
was
brought
to
the
attention
of
Shaw
Engineering
and
entire
group
representing
Fox
Moraine
that
their
design
wasflawed
because
their
design
would
not
provide
any
monitoring
wells
in
the
most
significant
areas
of
monitoring
until
twenty-five
(25)
years
after
the
landfill
would
be
operational.
This
was
a
deliberate
action
on
the
part
of
Fox
Moraine
and
Shaw
Engineering
because
this
could
save
them
a
lot
of
money;
evidentially
Shaw
did
not
think
thiswould
be
noticed
by
any
of
the
peopleconcerned
about
their
community.
The
City
of
Yorkville,
Council
members
had
to
deny
on
the
basis
ofdesign,
this
design
could
contaminate
the
water
of
this
community
and
no
one
would
be
aware
OPERATIONS
-
When
we
listened
to
the
statement
of
Ron
Edwards
of
Peoria
Disposal,
the
operators
who
would
be
running
the
Fox
Moraine
landfill,
his
testimony
was
refuted
by
Joyce
Blumenshine
(under
oath)
Mr.
Edwards’s
testimony
was
notcomplete
and
it
proved
to
be
less
thanaccurate.
The
City
Council
of
Yorkville
denied
based
on
the
statements
that
were
refuted
andon
the
record
of
Mr.
Edwards
operational
experiences.
Marcia
Ludwikowski
11261A
Legion
Road
Yorkville,
IL
60560
Re:
Case#PCB—2007—146
Fox
Moraine
Landfill
I
Rt.
71
I
Yorkville,
Ii.
Dear
Sirs:
We
are
sure
you
are
aware
that
the
above
mentioned
property
is
currently
being
operated
as
a
Yard-Waste-Compost
Site.
You
must
know
that
the
‘nausiating
stench’
from
this
site
is
so
unbearable
that
we
cannot
open
our
windows,
sit
on
our
deck,
entertain
outdoors,
dry
our
laundry
outdoors,
or
even
tolerate
the
odor
when
mowing
our
lawn.
A
‘Landfill
Site’
will
create
an
even
worse
stench,
which
will
never
go
away,
day
or
night.
There
are
several
existing
rural
subdivisions,
such
as
ours,
that
are
within
the
1-1/4
mile
radius
of
the
proposed
Landfill
Site.
Every
existing
property
will
severely
decrease
in
value,
will
also
lose
the
natural
well-water
supply
to
contamination,
andLandfill
Truck
Traffic
will
totally
dc-valuate
this
entire
area,
as
well
as
ruin
our
roads.
We
have
been
through
the
‘Siting
Process’
and
have
learned
that
the
run-off
from
this
proposed
Landfill
Sitewill
also
contaminate
streams,
tributaries,
creeks,
the
Fox
River
and
its
wildlife
habitats,
and
wildlife
specieswill
become
extinct.
Garbage
and
Greed
have
compromised
this
‘Pristine
Area’,
the
survival
of
it’s
people,
and
it’s
wildlife
inhabitants.
We,
as
citizens
and
taxpayers,
object
to
the
proposed
‘Landfill
Site’.
Thank
you
for
allowing
us
to
submit
our
final
comments
and
concerns.
Sincerely,
Randy
and
Nancy
Scott
45
Highview
Dr.
Yorkville,
Ii.
60560
