My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
pm_871104
Roseville
>
Commissions, Watershed District and HRA
>
Planning Commission
>
Minutes
>
198x
>
1987
>
pm_871104
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/17/2007 3:32:51 PM
Creation date
12/15/2004 7:37:43 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Commission/Committee
Commission/Authority Name
Planning Commission
Commission/Committee - Document Type
Minutes
Commission/Committee - Meeting Date
11/4/1987
Commission/Committee - Meeting Type
Regular
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
10
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
<br />Planning Commission Minutes <br />November 4, 1987 <br /> <br />Page 9 <br /> <br />Stokes asked what the EPA standards were with respect to the <br />solvents. A representative from the company that develops the <br />machines for this type of dry cleaning stated that each facility <br />must have an EPA number, and a contract hauler picks up the <br />solvents and processes it into ash. He pointed out this is a <br />much cleaner process than used in the past, and the chemical use <br />is substantially reduced. <br /> <br />Stokes asked why a gallon limitation should not be placed on this <br />project. Cushman replied that a more technical definition may be <br />required. <br /> <br />McClain (the owner of the potential new stores) stated that in <br />his opinion the definition as developed by the City Attorney does <br />meet these concerns. The dry-to-dry statement is the critical <br />element. In addition, limiting the number of employees, as <br />recommended by Dahlgren, is a more acceptable approach to <br />controlling the size of the operation. <br /> <br />Dahlgren <br />however, <br />zones. <br /> <br />replied that it is appropriate to limit employeesi <br />this change in ordinance should not apply to B-1 or B-6 <br /> <br />Goedeke asked about the noise of such a facility. <br />replied that it is not really noisy at all, and <br />compressor and so forth are isolated in separate rooms. <br /> <br />McClain <br />that the <br /> <br />Moeller stated, in his opinion, this is an appropriate approach <br />in that it moves away from the larger, more toxic plants to small <br />operations. <br /> <br />Cushman asked how far this dry cleaning was located from the food <br />store. Sikora replied that it is in the easterly wing, and that <br />Ryden has reviewed this dry cleaning facility and does not see it <br />as a problem. <br /> <br />Berry moved, Moeller seconded, that the C. G. Rein request to <br />amend all business zones by adding "dry cleaning processing" as a <br />permitted use be approved with the following modificiations: <br /> <br />1. That each store be limited to four production employees. <br /> <br />2. That the change does not apply to the B-1 and B-6 zones. <br /> <br />3. That the language under 5.505a, Number 2 in the ordinance, <br />be changed to state that "clothing shall be cleaned by the <br />dry-to-dry method to minimize in-plant cleaning solvent <br />exposure." <br /> <br />Roll Call, Ayes: Johnson, Maschka, Berry, Stokes, DeBenedet, <br />Goedeke and Moeller. <br />Nays: None. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.