08/07/84 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

I I I I I I I I I f) Tha~ a lora~in dequate access roads, on-site parking, on-site g andunloading berth~ and drainage have been or will vided. No Commission comment. g) That adequate measures have been taken to provide ingress an~egress so designed as to minimize traffic congestion on public roads. N° Corn Dission comment. h) Th&t ~he use will conform to all applicable regulations of th6 d~strict wherein proposed. No Co~mission comment other than Chairman Peterson pointing oUt t~at Waste Management would have to be licensed by all o~her Iregulatory agencies that would govern them. CommisSioner Deemer referred back to item (g) under Criteria for ApproVal [and stated that southbound turn lanes and northbound passin§ l~nes would be desirable. CommisSiio~er Hendriksen stated that with the possible exception of tr~kslhauling leachate, he does not feel there will be a significadt change in traffic patterns and with all the concerns brought o~t, traffic is the least of problems. CommisSioner Deemer stated that traffic is currently illegally using ~ik~ lanes to facilitate traffic flow. Mr. Otteristated that one of the findings of this Commission could~Se ~hat if traffic does become a problem, turn lanes could be Snstalled. Mr. Otter also noted that there have not been a~y ~ccidents at that intersection in the past 14 years. The cO~m~iSsion proceeded to review Performance Standards. 1. Fire ~rotection. No C°~mission comment. 2. Electrical Disturbance. No Co~mission comment. 3. Noise~ COmmiSsioner Zimmerman stated that noise is a problem as state~ by Mr. Bjorklund at the June 25, 1984 public hearing; no further testing is required to find that fact out. C°mmi~sioner Hendriksen stated that Mr. Bjorklund's determination of negligible value reduction was based on a~num~er of stipulations~ Mr. Bjorklund did not say what the s~tuation would be if these stipulations were not acted P & Z/July 3 1984 Page 11 of 19