Laserfiche WebLink
April 29, 2002 <br /> Page 4 <br /> <br />Discussion and Recommendations <br /> <br /> While a noise hamer would provide a noticeable reduction m noise levels at ~wo homes m the <br /> !nd Addition development, ehe sho~' tenth of a pot~n~al hamer and ~ gap <br /> 156~h Lane limit a potential bamer's effecnveness ~o ehese ~o homes. Noise levels <br /> Addition will be below sram' ~ime smn~r~ ~d would not be percep~bty de,re, ed by a <br /> noise hamer. B~ed on the Iimited ¢ff~c~ven~ss of potenaal aols¢ b~em at the 2nd ~d 3r4 <br /> Addiaons of ¢he Wildlife Sancm~ d~velopmen~, noise ~2gation is not cansid~red <br /> and [s ao~ mco~end~d. <br /> <br />T~s lc=er should be submi~d to the MPCA ibr ¢oncu=¢nc¢ on the canclusion that <br />relegation ~s ao~ reasonable a~ ~s development. <br /> <br />S inc~rely, <br /> <br />S~ CONSULT~G GaOUP, ~C. <br /> <br />~omas G. ~ills~om <br />Associate <br /> <br />TG~smf <br /> <br />A~achmen~ <br /> <br />-193- <br /> <br /> <br />