Agenda - Council - 05/31/1983 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

I ! I I i I I I I '! I I I ir~lt~ing stacks with sufficient height to minimize iml~ct on ambient grcur~ level pollutant concentrations. (Ex. 1~, pl~. 4-5). 65. "Protection of agriculture" is arother factor Which the above-cited aukhorizing statute requires the Board to conslaer. ;%gRzDximately o~s-half of this proposed, designated area is presently devoted to agricultural use. Designation would increase the likelihood that part of this area would be re- moved from agricultural production. Alternative to the Proposed Site 66. A citizen (speaking for himself in a non-official capacity) urged consideration be given to reduciilg the area by eliminating portions west of Ramsey Boulevard ar~ moving the north ~ 1300 feet f~urther south along the .remainder of the area. This alternative would' have the following advan- a. It would eliminate nearly all of the area whare there is no in- dustrial development; leaving a site predominantly devoted to co~nercial and industrial land uses. b. It would eliminate n~arly all of the area which has never been and apparently never will be slated for municipal water or sewer service, cluding the portion where the Board Staff testified that the costs of pro- riding such service would be "astronomical". (Afternoon Tr.; p. 47). ~[he Metropolitan ~ouncil has approved such service for most of the area in the remaining site. c. It would eliminate all of the area frc~ the proposed site which is not within one mfle'of a receiving stream. d. The p~ alternative wculd provide a .buffer from the major residential development along the nort~h bDundary of the proposed site, the homes along the west side of Ramsey Boulevard ar~ for the "Hunter's H/ll" residences north and east of the proposed site. e. It would minimize the adverse effects ~f soil and water table conditions by moving potential sites and spills south and east of the shallc~ wells (whare general water table flow is south toward the Mississippi River). It would also eliminate potential impact on the buried bedrock valleys to the north ar~ east. f. It would eliminate nearly a/1 of the lake-wetland cc~plex. g. It would eliminate nearly all of the potential shoreland zoning conflicts wi~h state ar~l local regulatioos. h. Except for a small part of the northernmost portion of the pro- posed alternative, it would eliminate conflict's with the FAA "~nmaginary sur- face'' regulation. i. It would eliminate all of the potential adverse agricultural km- Pacts. Based up~% the foregoing Findings of Fact, the l~e~ring Examiner makes tl%e following ~ 1. Pursuant to Minn. S{at. § 115A.09 (1982), this' hearing was neither a rulemaking proceeding nor a cc~tested case .proceeding. It was ccnducted to