pf09-010 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

�.. � For instance, the proposed asphalt plant in the CUP was nzarketed to the city and public as a"warm mix asphalt" facility. Yet, the company in its a��Plication and nairative does `� not really say it's a warm mia plant. but rather that the "plant will be capable of production of warm mix asphalt." (page 2) Later, the document says "The plant will utilize technolog�� allo�vving the production of warm mix asphalt.'' (page 6) 1�larm mix was presented as being more environmentally friendly� than hot mix. The application says tlYat warm mix allows for reduced energy consumption, lo��ered emissions, and the elimination af visible smoke and odor. (page 6) In Bituminous Roadways testimony both to the Roseville City Council (May 18, 2009) and to the Public Works, Em�ironment, and Transportation Co�nmission (May 26, 2009) it almost exclusively emphasized the warm mix nature of the proposed plant, Yet, the EAW circulated during the sunmier of 2010 describes the plant as a"hot mix" plant at pages 3 and 4 of the EAW. 1t is impossible not to conclude that the application and narrative document submitted for the CUP in 2009 is misleadin�. The City Council cannot be expected to approve an application �vhen it contains such a fundan�entai misstatement as even to the natare of the plant itself. This should lead the Council to turn down the CUP application. If the company should decide ro attempt to move the proposed plant forvvard, the Council should require a new CUP application. �'' Item 2. CUP Application Narrative discussion on Impact on Traffic The� "data" presented in this section of the CUP narrative is seriously discrepant fi•om that presented in the EAW. The CUP narrative indicates, "A peak day will generate approximately 250 round trip truck visits." (page 4) Further, that same section indicates that, "averaged over the 8 month construction season, the facility will generate approximately 120 truck round trips per day." (page 4) In the EAW circulated ul the summer of 20l 0, the "Standard Production Scenario" is said to generate 594 truck trips per day. (page 18) The "M�imum Production Scenario" is indicated in the EAW to generate b74 vuck trips per day.(page 18) So, the standard production scenario will not be 1?0 truck trips, but nearly 600 truck trips. The Peak Day, or Maximum Production Scenario, will i;ot produce 250 truck trips per day, but nearly 700 truck trips These are serious misstatements. These are not rounding errors, but rather are errors of more thaTi 100 percent in each case. ...