3/14/1995 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

EXHIBIT 5 (continued) is generally slow-moving, with velocities in the range of five to 50 feet per year. As a result, large amounts of a contaminant can enter an aquifer and remain undetected until a water well or surface waterbody is affected. Contaminants in groundwater, unlike those in surface water, often move in a plume with relatively little mixing or dispersion, so that concentrations remain high. These plumes of relatively concentrated contaminants move slowly through the aquifer and are typically present for years — sometimes for decades or longer — making the resource virtually nonrenewable. There is little opportunity for chemical or biological transformation or degradation of contaminants. Moreover, because an individual plume may underlie only a very small part of the land surface, the plume may be difficult to detect by aquifer -wide or regional monitoring. Groundwater monitoring also is expensive because multiple test wells must be drilled to define the affected areas once a source of pollution is identified. Even after groundwater contamination is detected, successful restoration may be complex, expensive, and unpredictable because of difficulties in containing the contaminants, removing the contaminated groundwater from the aquifer, developing treatment technologies to strip away pollutants, and disposing of contaminants extracted from or left in groundwater that has been withdrawn or treated. March 1991 6-6 Mr, O'Haire maintained that SJRWMD has no expertise in and does not concern itself with groundwater pollution and has no personnel who deal with that issue; it is not their function nor their job. He called the SJRWMD's approval a "snare and a delusion and no protection to anyone." Concerning Exhibit 6, Mr. O'Haire called attention to #26 and questioned what kind of protection a single monitoring well would provide to the neighboring wells of the proposed sand mining operation. .26i..'.' DISTRICT APPROVED., MONITOR .WELL-.* MUST - BE INSTALLED ' PRZOR "TO eE53Nl#iI#��:AiNiH.fi T z-NELBOURH.E rFIELD;; OFn.gF" MifST-8E CONTACTED ONE-WE'EK`;`PR208 TO : WELL::INSUf_L,A'TIONZ ._ Mr. O'Haire summarized that he was speaking to the issues of public health, safety, and welfare and quality of life and stressed that the Zoning Code defined the proposed sand mining operation as an industrial use, which did not belong in the area. He suggested that the PZC had erred and that the Board could be told it would be a garden after the mining was completed, but that had not occurred in any similarly permitted area, and people have invested their lives in their homes there. He maintained that the developer's 51 March 14, 1995 BOOK 94 PAGE 598 11