Laserfiche WebLink
I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br /> <br />per~dtteO so ~ch vol~ before it vii1 ~ clo~. It l~ diffic~t ~ <br />esti.ate m closing ~ ~use tt &p~ on ~e ~ily ~l~ ~en tn at ~ <br />st~; ~ere ~y ~en ~ a z~ue~on in ~e &ily ~1~ ~' ~at d~pi~ ~s~ <br />viii ii~ d~ ~ lul, ~ ~ S~te sur~ar~s. <br /> <br />{~r. Ouo~rie~ state~ that be will also reo~rmen~ t~ ~il, If ~e ~ni~ <br />~it ts a~ov~, ~at ~e fi~ re~lution i~l~ ~at ~en ~ ~e <br />~t of minin9 o~ fill ~e Ci~ ~mi~ Mu~ ~g~nt ~~ ~at ~8 <br />~ ~ on ~e ~isti~ site, in mv~ ~e~ ~is ~mit 9r~tM~ <br />~ag~nt ~er~ ~ ~ion of ~is site. <br /> <br />Discussion ensued regarding grantir~, the minir~ permit for a limited ~ount of <br />time, 5 years for instance, ar~ a review and reapplication of the case at that <br />time. <br /> <br />Oumissioner Bendriksen reiterated that 15 years is a lon9 period of time for <br />a temporary use and the criteria for same states that the activity cease <br />before there is an adverse affect on the property. <br /> <br />Mr. Otter noted that just vith the Oounty ordinance on closure/post closure be <br />is tied to a minim~n of l0 years which exter~]s way beyond the 5 years the <br />Oumission is discussing. <br /> <br />Cu~dssioner Demer stated that the Commission is discussirg a mining permit <br />for a reasonable ~0ount of time for ever), day operation of the landfill until <br />it's v~l~0e capacity; at that time a t~nporary mining permit could be issued <br />for shorter periods of time, ~ay 3 %~_ks a year, for closure/post closure <br />requi r a~ents. <br /> <br />Oo~ssion consensus is to r~ that Oouncil, if they approve the mining <br />pemit request, set up the ~inir~] permit for a 5 year ti~ fz~e; that ffnile <br />the Ouumission understands that Waste Management is tied to a need for fill <br />for a ~Linim~n of 10 years, 15 years seres to be ~ore than t~porary. <br /> <br />)ir. Ooodricb pointed out that the O=~ission is not relating the request t~ <br />~ine with the lanclfill; it is legitiuate that the C~ission feels the City <br />should be able to review what is happening on the Tri-Oo property 5 years fro= <br />l~OW. <br /> <br />Oxm~ission consensus is that Oouncil al~o a~oept ~11 r~~tio~ m~ ~ <br />~e Ci~ ~i~r in his let~r &~ ~v~r 30, 1984 r~ar8i~ W~ <br />~a~t r~t for a ~ni~ ~t; ~at W~ ~9~t ~ply wi~ <br />~a~ 70 of ~e Onifo~ B~ldi~ ~; ~ ~at fill ~d ~t ~ <br />tr~r~ ~er ~lic ~ro~far~; ~at ~urs of ~ acUvi~ ~1 ~ <br />fz~ 7:00 a.m.-5:00 p.m. on ~~s, ~:30 a.m.~:00 p.m. on Saturns, ~ m <br />S~ys. <br /> <br />Br. Ooo~ric~ state8 that be is not sure the City can restrict Waste Hana~ <br />fro~ transporting fill over pablic U~roughfazes; they own the property and <br />the fill is on it. <br /> <br />Commissioner l)c_-uer stated that if Waste {la~i~ent is willing to sion the <br />agrea~t with that condition, then it is leo~l am] binding on both parties. <br /> <br />Pa~e 7 of 10 <br /> <br /> <br />