Laserfiche WebLink
<br />Public Hearing Case <br />CU94.32 Continued <br /> <br />Page3 <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />excavation overlay. Both of these parcels are zoned AlIAgricultural <br />and account for only a small portion of Mr. Plaisted's boundary. <br /> <br />4. <br /> <br />Access <br /> <br />The final reclamation plan shows 3 proposed access points to the <br />property. The first access point is on the east side of the site onto <br />Highway 169, where there is a current access, and crossover between <br />the northbound and southbound lanes of the Highway. The second <br />access point is on the south side of the property onto County Road 33. <br />This access will be used during the mining operations for the truck <br />traffic to and from the pit. Staff is recommending that Mr. Plaisted's <br />haul route is County Road 33 from the location of this access, to and <br />from Highway 169, except for localized jobs. The last access point is on <br />the north side ofthe property onto 213th Avenue. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />The County is exploring a possible east/west corridor that would run <br />through approximately the center of Mr. Plaisted's property. This <br />east/west corridor is identified on staffs attached map #2, by dashed <br />lines, and is labeled "Old 33". Mr. Plaisted's contours adjacent to <br />Proctor Avenue would make this alignment difficult. <br /> <br />The numbers on map #2 represent the locations of houses in or <br />adjacent to Mr. Plaisted's site. House numbers 2 and 10 are owned by <br />Mr. Plaisted and are proposed to be eliminated (their locations can be <br />noted on the interim reclamation plan). If houses number 3 and 4 are <br />eliminated in the future, Proctor Street and 213th Avenue between <br />points A and B (shown on map 2) could be vacated by the County, <br />accommodating the elevations needed to accomplish the County's <br />proposed road corridor. If houses 3 and 4 remain where they are <br />located, Proctor Street could be eliminated between point A and house <br />3 and still accomplish this road corridor. Bottom line, Dave <br />Schwarting, County Engineer, indicated that Mr. Plaisted's proposal <br />will not eliminate this corridor. <br /> <br />5. <br /> <br />Slopes <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />Mr. Plaisted is requesting 3:1 slopes on his reclamation plan versus <br />the City's normal 4:1, or shallower. His rationale is that 4:1 slopes <br />accommodate walk-out houses but do not readily accommodate the <br />construction of industrial buildings. Mr. Plaisted's property is zoned <br />Industrial. Therefore, a 3: 1 slope reduces the amount of property that <br />cannot be re-developed after mining. <br /> <br />cc-94-32/cQuncil <br />