Laserfiche WebLink
9:05 a.m. Held a Board of Equalization meeting <br /> 9:12 a.m. Adjourned the Board of Equalization meeting and returned to the regular meeting. <br /> 3 PUBLIC PARTICIPATION - Chairman Arnold called for public participation and no one <br /> responded. <br /> 4. COUNTY ATTORNEY— DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE ACTION ON CONDITIONAL USE <br /> PERMIT APPLICATION OF WATERS VIEW INCNONTZ PAVING, INC. <br /> County Attorney Jack Zitterkopf stated that this was under the county attorney by default. He <br /> was not involved in the negotiations and asked Chad Nabity to address the issue. <br /> Chad Nabity has the corrected resolution. He stated he had numerous e mails and <br /> conversations and they have worked out conditions. There will not be an asphalt plant and they <br /> will not ask for a plant, they will put up berms and there will be decibel limits at the property <br /> lines. It is 65 when he is talking, it is at 77 decibels when a passenger car is at 75 mph and <br /> mining and safety use 80 decibels. And it typical to have conditions that limit how close they are <br /> to the property lines. <br /> Hopefully this will move this forward to use the resources that are available in the county but will <br /> not end up with uses that cross purposes. Spring migration is the nature centers concern that is <br /> their season February to mid-April and Vontz agreed to minimize use at that time. They hope to <br /> end up with something that is a benefit to Hall County for everyone. <br /> Schuppan stated that he made a motion at the last meeting and stated that the motion still <br /> stands and Lanfear seconded the motion and he also agreed. <br /> Ann Bohan from Wood River requested to speak and stated that this is a very emotional issue. <br /> She read a statement. She noted that there was contaminated water at 9124 Schaupsville <br /> Road where 3D Investments was located and noted a report from EPA that this was a site for <br /> cleanup. This property was eventually transferred to the Nature Center. She explained <br /> information regarding contaminated wells. She also noted that some states require <br /> environmental impact studies for permits. This is adjoining property and she asked if it was <br /> clarified that this was an EPA cleanup site, who is liable the County Board or Vontz. Everyone <br /> has a right to clean water and she also noted that CAAP contamination. She is requesting that <br /> this site not be permitted at this time until there is an EPA study done. <br /> She stated she has a petition with over 100 signatures of people requesting that an EPA study <br /> be done on this site before it is approved. The petition was not submitted to the county board. <br /> She also noted that if there is pollution in the water the cattle will not drink it. She hopes they <br /> will not fail in preserving our ground water. <br /> Arnold noted that there was no reference to this specific copy in the past. Mr. Quandt asked to <br /> see the copy. <br /> Lancaster noted at the CAAP contamination issues and the agreement with the army is that no <br /> wells can be developed. She asked Mr. Zitterkopf if there could be potential liability. <br /> Schuppan noted that any irrigation well that is not used for a while will be bad when it is first <br /> pumped. It may be just oil drip from the pump and may not be necessarily contaminated. <br /> 3 <br />