CC PACKET 04261983 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

further consideration. The comet mities affected were notified by letter dated December 21 of this decision. 10. On February 4, 1983, the Notice of and Order for Hearing was issued. (WMB Bc. B). On FBbruary 9, a copy was sent to the County and the City. (WMB Bc. II)..'The City of St. Anthony was not on this mailing list. (UMB Rrc. II). 11. On February 17, a display advertisement anno unirg the time place and purpose of the hearing was mailed to the Roseville Sun and the Roseville Review. A similar ad was published in the Minneapolis Tribune on February 20. (wMB R's. MM). 12. On February 25; a press .release announcing the hearing was sent to the St. Paul Pioneer Press, Dispatch; Minhneapols Star and Tribune and other radio and television news media serving the Roseville area. (%MB EK. R3,)., 13. On March 1, the Roseville Review published a display ad for the March 15 hearing. Ch March 2; an article announcing the hearing was published in the Roseville Sun; a brief article announcing the March 15 hearing also ap- peared in the New Brighton Bulletin on March 10. (FRB Ex. KK). 14. On March 4, another news release was sent to Ramsey County media out- lets announcing the Roseville hearing. (FMB Ex. R3,). 15. . Prior to the hearing, the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) prepared and submitted to the We a "suitability report" for the proposed haz- ardods waste processing facility area in Roseville. No field investigations were conducted in the preparation of this report. Instead, available data from the Soil Conservation Service and the U.S. Geological Survey and Mire- sota Geological Survey were used. The suitability report addressed certain environmental factors (such,as soil conditions and the location of the aqui- fers in the area) that should be considered in determining whether a hazardous waste facility could be established in this particular arms. Tie issuance of this suitability report does not mean that arty developer who may desire to locate a facility in this area at some future time will qualify for MPCA per- mits. No conclusion was drawn as to the likelihood of an MPCA permit being issued for any particular type of facility in the area. The conclusion can _...,..., . only be determined through the evaluation of more specific information such as would be required during the permitting process if a developer seeks to estab- lish a facility in this area. (UMB Bt. NN). Description of the Proposed Area. 16. The proposed Roseville area is-a 700-acre area in Roseville, north- west of the juncture of Interstate'35W and Highway 280. The area is generally triangular in shape, bonded on the north by County Road C, on the west by the Hennepin-Ramsey County line, and with the Minnesota Transfer Railway Rine pro- vidirg the third side of the "triangle". The proposed area includes an indus- trial area along Terminal Road. Criteria in Selecting Areas for the Inventory 17. ,Minn. Stat. 4 10A.09; subd. 2 (1982). requires the Board to consider at least the following factors in selecting areas for the inventory: The consistency of sites with state and federal regulations, -3-