Laserfiche WebLink
8 I think US97/Old Highway 10 or the cement site are both good choices. The <br />area is already industrial in nature and there are no homes which are that close. <br />Given that the current transfer station is right in town and one hardly knows it's <br />there, maybe look at which one would best facilitate traffic flow. If it turns out <br />that the floodplain issues cannot be worked out in a feasible fashion, I would <br />prefer the cement plant over this one. Otherwise, it's a good site. <br />9 I think that this is a poor location, affecting all who reside in the area and wish to <br />maintain a rural/agricultural lifestyle. The traffic increase would be significant, the <br />distance from the city is exceptional and this is a poor site to choose. I am <br />strongly against it! <br />10 I disagree with this site. I think it's too close to farm and community that at <br />minimum would be impacted by smell. In addition trash typically attracts birds that <br />could be a problem for farmers. <br />11 The site location in a rural scenic area at the start of two scenic drives on 97 and <br />10 seems inappropriate. It will destroy the character of the area. The concrete <br />plant is a better site. It's already impacted and less visible. <br />12 If 97/Old Highway 10 site can be mitigated for flooding, I would suggest that the <br />existing transfer station site be mitigated for flooding. Expand the the existing <br />drop-off area by making it double sided with two entry ramps. Increase, to two <br />sets of entry stations. I think the property could be reorganized in order to <br />accommodate a more efficient site. Thanks <br />13 I like it! <br />14 Please keep the current transfer station for use and develop a new station out <br />on 97. We cannot afford to build a total new facility. <br />15 Hello, It seems the potential retail development of the land which lies downwind <br />of the 97/10 site may be impacted by sight, smell, and litter. I feel the cement <br />plant site is better as it already services heavy commercial truck traffic which <br />includes dust and noise. There would be minimal down wind impact by added <br />activity of this kind at the cement plant site. Thank you for your service and the <br />opportunity for my opinion. <br />16 I believe the 97/10 site and the cement plant site are equally excellent locations. <br />They are far preferable to the Tjossem site due to traffic flow by avoiding the <br />congested south interchange, the comparable productive farm land loss and the <br />exposed view from I90. <br />ResponseID Response <br />3