Resolution 655 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

1 5. That expanding development results in additional hard- cover increasing the necessity of the natural filtrative and retention of storm water runoff provided by the existing marsh- lands and wetlands. 6. That increased traffic resulting from the operation would add to the existing hazardous traffic conditions. on the high speed, heavy traveled Highway No. 12. 7. That the access to the property is located danger- ously near the base ofja dip in the highway. 8. That the more hazardous traffic conditions would con- tribute to the danger of the children in the nearby school. 9. That the property is.presently being used for residen- tial purposes and the 'raising and grazing of horses. 10. That the proposed use is commercial -industrial in nature and not compatible with other uses in the area. 11. That the proposed landfill conflicts with Ordinance No. 125. 1 • 12. That the proposed landfill would place artificial obstruction restricting the path of floodwater. 13. That the Fish and Wildlife Service recommends this proposal be denied. 14. That the Pollution Control Agency, after their finding of facts, concluded their approval should in no manner be con- strued as limiting the City of Orono in its approval, denial, or modification of this proposed landfill. 15. That the Pollution Control agency, in their findings of facts of May 23, 1975, stated the owner had voluntarily closed the landfill operation in 1970 as he felt he could not economically operate under Minnesota Pollution Control Agency regulations. 16. That a letter from the City Building Inspector of the City of Orono to the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District dated April 11, 19.72, states that the owner closed his operation say- ing it was impossible to comply,with the conditions in the time allotted. 17. That the Hennepin County Department of Public Works, after reviewing the application, stated they are not prepared to recommend a license because of environmental concern. 40