Laserfiche WebLink
concerns of the citizens and the City Council. It was stated that the project should be reviewed so <br />the things there is most concern about won't happen. The mai, or concern seemed to be with the <br />odor and on that basis Mayor Reimann suggested giving the project a chance to go through thc full <br />cycle of opexation and then review it again and have Waste Management apply for another CUP at <br />this time. He assured City Council that Waste Management was comfortable with those options. <br />however, his concern after the meeting is if Ordinance g90-5 is applied to this CUP, the)' have to <br />come in and go through the process of amending the Zoning Ordinance which would involve a <br />public hearing, and also make application for another CUP which would.involve another public <br />hearing. He stated it would be time consuming for all interested parties. He suggested extending <br />the time permit and still after 20 months, a performance review could be set up to hear from Waste <br />Management and also from the citizens. This would determine how well Waste Management is <br />living up to the conditions promised. He offered to answer any questions the Council may have. <br /> <br />Mayor Reimann asked for discussion from City Council. <br /> <br />Councilmember Peterson stated he was willing to go along with Staff recommendation. <br /> <br />Mayor Reimann stated that his concern is with changing the term of the CUP from three weeks ago <br />when the same people are not present that were present at that meeting. <br /> <br />City Attorney Goodrich stated that the legal requirements had been fulfilled by having the public <br />hearing and that the Council doesn't legally have to have another public hearing because of the <br />change. <br /> <br />Mr. Otto pointed out that what they are exempting Waste Management from (in Option 3) are <br />provisions which would prohibit that particular use from that location and still after 20 months they <br />would have to have a new CUP. They would go through the process and if the performance <br />review is satisfactory, a new CUP would be granted. By taking action now, the City Council is <br />not guaranteeing that this operation would be allowed to continue if the performance review was <br />unsatisfactory.. <br /> <br />Mayor Reimann asked if Waste Management would have to go through another public hearing. <br /> <br />Merland Otto answered yes, after 20 months. <br /> <br />Ciy' Attorney Goodrich stated they wouldn't have prohibition of that ord/nance. <br /> <br />CouncYlmember DeLuca stated except for the four provisions. <br /> <br />Mayor Reima.nn suggested going along with Staff recommendation because Waste Management <br />would still have to come back for a public hearing and address any concerns ',.he citizens or Council <br />may have. <br /> <br />Doug Fountain stated Waste Management should be exempt from the conditions of the new <br />ordinance, the)' should be given a hearing process at the end of the 20 months and that would <br />allow the newly elected Councilmembers a chance to act on their campa/~ prom/scs. <br /> <br />Motion by Couneilmember Peterson and seconded by Councilmember Pearson to modify CUP <br />approved Oztober 23, 1990 to exempt the Permit Holder from Ordinance #90-5, Section 6e, <br />ix, x for a per/od of 54 months from date of issuance of the original CUP and to amend the <br />Findings of Fact #0282 to include reference ro the sequen:e of application and adoption of <br />Ordinance #90-5 (to inzlude #'s 55.56, 57 and 58). <br /> <br />City' Council/November 15. 1990 <br /> Page 3 of 15 <br /> <br /> <br />