OCT. 17, 1984 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

the geologist and information the State had provided he did not believe that contamination would be an issue. Tilford Bailey pointed out that an overflow from the creek could get into these waters and that the area was in the flood plan. Wendell Thaler then stated that the Board needed to determine whether or not the water would create mn attractive nuisance. Moving on to Item 2, Steve Oschman pointed out the Gaddis property and stated that he felt the use and enjoyment of this property would be greatly restricted by the proposed operation. Wendell Thaler pointed out the history of this mining operation. Steve Oschman pointed out that the property would still be in plain view of this operation. Tilford Bailey stated that he felt all the surrounding property values would be hurt and all of the use and enjoyment of the surrounding properties affected by the noise and dust. Wendell Thaler stated that the actual mining could not be any closer than 70 feet from the creek. Tilford Bailey stated that the noise would affect properties far away from this area. Paul Walters added that values could be effected until the mining operation was completed and that he would not want to buy property located adjacent to this operation. Wendell Thaler said that he had lived in front of a mining operation and didn't know of any particular problems and felt that the property values had stayed constant with people trying to buy property in the area. The Board then discussed the real estate opinions provided and noted the opinion of Jim Arnold that the property values would be effected in a negative manner. The Board then discussed Item 3 with Tilford Bailey stating that he thought the proposed use would meet the criteria set out under Item 3, since most of the area had already been developed and the i~nediate area north was already zoned -2-