Laserfiche WebLink
<br />Page 2 <br /> <br />City Council Minutes <br />February 9. 1987 <br /> <br />e <br /> <br />5.1. Conditional Use Permit Request by NSP/Public Hearing <br /> <br />Mayor Gunkel <br />matter because <br />approved by the <br /> <br />noted that no action was required from the Council on this <br />the conditional use has already been considered and <br />City Council at its December 1. 1986 meeting. <br /> <br />5.2. License Request by NSP/Public Hearing <br /> <br />The <br />solid <br />plant. <br /> <br />Building and Zoning Administrator noted that NSP is requesting a <br />waste facility license to operate a refuse derived fuel processing <br /> <br />Peter Beck. Assistant City Attorney stated that the license basically <br />covers the same topics as the conditional use permit and requires <br />additional regulations for operation of NSP's RDF plant. Mr. Beck <br />briefly went through the license for the RDF plant. <br /> <br />Mayor Gunkel opened the public hearing. At this time she stated each <br />person wishing to speak may address the City Council for a maximum of <br />five minutes and requested the public to stay on the subject. <br /> <br />e <br /> <br />Tom Woods stated his opposition as to how the meeting was being <br />conducted. He felt people should be able to discuss the pros and cons of <br />the RDF issue. <br /> <br />Mr. Al Fisher stated the City is noted as becoming the garbage city of <br />the area. He stated he would like to see the pros and cons and also that <br />he would like to see the cost benefit to the City; specifically. what are <br />the revenues to the City as opposed to the revenues to UPA and NSP. <br /> <br />Dr. Bob Swan stated he felt the two new Councilmembers should have the <br />right to hear the information that has been presented to the other <br />Councilmembers and proceeded to speak regarding the pros. cons and health <br />affects of RDF. <br /> <br />Mr. Dave Sipe stated he felt the public is not aware of the RDF issue. <br /> <br />e <br /> <br />Mr. Dan McConnon of UPA stated that MnDOT refused the cross over on <br />Highway 169 but agreed on the right out to the southbound lane on 169. <br />Mr. McConnon stated that the proposed access to the UPA site would be <br />via Highway 10 to Main Street to UPA Drive. He indicated that this was <br />originally proposed by former Mayor Hinkle and Mr. McConnon stated he was <br />surprised to see the Planning Commission vote against this route. He <br />stated the Planning Commission's opposition was mainly to safety concerns <br />and aesthetics. Mr. McConnon stated they had done a survey regarding the <br />amount of truck traffic and vehicular traffic on this intersection and <br />stated the results showed that 5% of the vehicular traffic at the <br />intersection of Highway 10 and Main Street was truck traffic. He stated <br />with the 54 RDF trucks per day. this would only increase the total truck <br />traffic amount one half of one percent. He stated that the small <br />