Commission discusses revenue options for closed FM‑812 landfill; staff cite infrastructure limits
Get AI-powered insights, summaries, and transcripts
Subscribe
Summary
Commissioners explored potential revenue-generating uses for roughly 100 acres of the closed FM‑812 landfill, including a city-operated C&D recycling facility and a solar RFP at nearby FMA‑12; Austin Resource Recovery leadership cautioned that water, wastewater and other infrastructure are limited and said other projects (solar RFP, storm-debris staging, fleet service center) are higher near-term priorities.
The commission opened a discussion about future uses for the roughly 100 acres of available land at the closed FM‑812 landfill, focusing on options that could generate revenue to support department operations.
Chair Ali Acuna framed the discussion around turning nonperforming assets into revenue-producing sites to support equipment and labor needs. "My goal would be to take those nonperforming assets and turn them into performing assets which bring in revenue to the city," Acuna said.
Richard McHale, director of Austin Resource Recovery, said the property is under closure and that ARR has several higher-priority projects in the near term. McHale noted an active RFP for a solar project at nearby FMA‑12, plans for storm-debris staging on part of the property, and fleet department interest in locating a Southeast service center on the site. He cautioned that critical infrastructure such as large water and wastewater systems are not currently present, which would raise development costs and lengthen payback periods for intensive industrial reuse.
Commissioners asked for historical tonnage and rate data to better evaluate past performance and potential returns. McHale said ARR's highest C&D tonnage year was about 33,000 tons (circa 2004) and that earlier operations processed larger volumes when municipal solid waste was accepted at the site. ARR staff agreed to provide historical volumes, rate history, and acreage breakdowns for future consideration.
Next steps: commissioners asked staff to keep the topic on a future agenda and to return with historical data, infrastructure assessments, and a clearer picture of acreage availability versus proposed solar or other uses. No decisions were made at the meeting.