CORRESPONDENCE_1971-1981 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

p Garr, continued sanitary land fill operation is conducted in the correct manner, 160 acres will last for 30 years for a sanitary land fill, without a resource recovery operation® regarding the wells in the area, the water is deep enough that there is no danger of contamination. All soil not to be used will be spread, compacted on subject property. The method of operation will allow people to bring their material to the building (which will be a pole building that could be ex- panded as required) , the material will be processed (never stored in the building) , and traniferrod to the Lovelace site. PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED In answer to a question, Mr. Michael stated that they are not inter- ested in operating a facility for the general public. DISCUSSION AND FINDINGS: Commissioners McComb, Boyden, Barrows, Waidhofer and Barrows spoke on this issue and in their comments the following findings were made: For Acorova1: - *.'here is a real necessity for this type of operation. - The remarks by the League of Women Voters and the Ecology Coalition were appreciated. - In favor of the concept as outlined, but not in this location. - Concept is faultless. - The building proposed is quite small and could be placed almost anywhere; it would be well located in the City, in an industrial area; and that the materials which are not recovered could be hauled away to a sanitary land fill site. - We need this project; it must start somewhere; if it means we should sacrifice 160 acres, then we should do that; we must make a start to reclaim this material. For Denial: - .. This is not the proper location for the proposed use. - All of the arable land should not be developed. - If the farmers in the area are correct in the amount of sugar beets which can be grown on this land, then the land should 'remain in agriculture . - Agriculture is needed for food production. - This is agricultural land. MOTION: Moved, seconded (Barrows-Donald) and carried by a majority roll call vote to deny the permit. Comm. Boyden Voted no.