HomeMy WebLinkAbout04-04-02 CITY OF LAKEVILLE
Planning Commission Meeting Minutes.
APRIL 4, 2002 ,
The April 4, 2002 Planning Commission meeting was called to order by Chair Wulff
in the City Hall Council Chambers at 6:00 p.m.
Flag pledge and roll call of members:
`'Present: Stolte, Michaud, Wulff, Larson, Grenz, Drotning, ex-officio Puncochar.
Absent: Detjen
Staff Present: Daryl Morey,. Planning Director; Frank Dempsey, Associate Planner,
Ron Mullenbach, .Associate Planner; Leif Hanson, Zoning Enforcement
Coordinator; Jay Rubash, Assistant .City Engineer; Andrea Poehler, Assistant City
Attorney; and Penny Brevig, Recording Secretary.
ITEM 3: APPROVAL OF MEETING MINUTES:
The March 21, 2002 Planning Commission meeting minutes were approved as
presented.
ITEM 4: ANNOUNCEMENTS:
Mr. Morey stated that the following items were distributed to the Planning
Commission members and staff before tonight's meeting.
1. April 3, 2002 Parks, Recreation & Natural. Resources committee meeting
minutes. regarding the Lynwood Heights preliminary and final plat and the
River City Asphalt excavation and mining expansion.
2. Letter from City Administrator to Wayne Johansen of HOM Furniture
regarding the open house and silent auction for HOM Furniture.
3. Copy of the original CUP 97-03 for River City Asphalt Company.
Commissioner Drotning requested .that. Mr. Morey show the Planning Commission
members the proposed Central Area Greenway Corridor from 185 Street to 195
Street along Ipava Avenue as it relates to Spring Hill Second and other
developments along Ipava Avenue.
ITEM 5: CONSENT AGENDA
02.34 Motion by Drotning, Second by Stolte to recommend to City Council approval of
the April 4, 2002 Planning Commission Consent Agenda as follows:
Planning Commission Meeting
April 4, 2002
Page 2
A. Approve the application of Country Joe, Inc. for a final plat of 56 single
family lots to be known as Spring Hill Second, located in the southwest
corner of 185 Street and Ipava Avenue.
B. Approve the. request of Amy Smith for athree-year extension of a Special
Horne Occupation Permit to operate a hair salon business out of her home,
located at 16524 Jaguar Avenue.
Ayes: Stolte, Michaud, Wulff, Larson, Grenz, Drotning
Nays:. 0
ITEM 6: HOSANNA! .LUTHERAN CHURCH
Chair Wulff opened. he public hearing to consider the application of Hosanna!
Lutheran Church for an amendment to Conditional Use Permit No. 96-01 to allow
the removal. of an existing detached accessory building and the construction of a
new detached accessory building with an area greater than 788 square feet and a
total height greater than 15 feet, located at 9600 - 163rd Street. Assistant City
Attorney Poehler attested that the legal notice had been duly published in
accordance with state statutes and City Code.
Jim Hayes, Chairman of the Building and Planning Committee at Hosanna!
Lutheran Church, was in attendance at tonight's meeting to answer questions. Mr.
Hayes gave. a short presentation of their application and an update of their
expansion to the church now underway.
Zoning Enforcement Coordinator Leif Hanson presented the planning report. Mr.
Hanson stated that representatives of Hosanna! Lutheran Church have submitted
an application for an amendment to Conditional Use Permit No. 96-01 to allow the
construction of a detached accessory building on the south side of the church
parking lot. Mr. Hanson indicated that an amendment to the original conditional
use permit is required in order to incorporate the proposed changes to the church
site and o allow an accessory building to exceed an area of 788 square feet and a
height of 15 feet in the RM-1 District.
Mr, Hanson stated that the new accessory building would replace an existing
accessory building that will be removed in order to .accommodate the expansion of
the church now under construction. He .stated that the proposed accessory building
will be 1232 square feet in area and 20 feet in height and will include work space
and storage space.. for .furniture, maintenance equipment, construction of drama
props, .and other miscellaneous storage. It will not be utilized for any business and
will not be used .for: vehicle :storage... Also, Mr. Hanson indicated that a trash
Planning Commission. Meeting
April 4, 2002
Page 3
enclosure will be attached to the proposed accessory building to replace the existing
trash enclosure on the north side of the church.
Mr. Hanson stated that the trash enclosure will be attached to the west side of the
accessory building. It will contain dumpsters and recycling receptacles and will not
be roofed. The walls of the proposed trash enclosure are 8 feet in height and will be
constructed of concrete block. Two chain link gates will provide access to the trash
enclosure for waste collection vehicles. The chain link gates must be provided with
slats in order to provide. a minimum opacity of 80 percent.
Mr. Hanson stated that the proposed detached .accessory building will be located
on the south side of the church property along the curb line of .the south parking
lot. Both the storage and work areas of the accessory building will be accessed by a
garage door located on the north side of the building. Mr. Hanson indicated that.
the gates to the trash enclosure will also be located on the north side of the
accessory building.. Mr. Hanson stated that the north side of the accessory building
abuts nine parking spaces. Hosanna! Lutheran Church is proposing to install signs
between the accessory building and the 4 parking. spaces located in front. of the
trash enclosure that state no parking is allowed in those spaces from 6 a.m, to 5
p.m., Monday through Friday. Mr. Hanson indicated that Hosanna! Lutheran
Church officials stated that the location of the accessory building adjacent to the
existing parking spaces will not reduce the parking count on weekends or
weeknights.
Mr. Hanson stated that should the Planning Commission. recommend to City
Council approval of the CUP amendment, Planning Department staff recommends
the 8 stipulations listed in the March 29, 2002 planning report and the Findings of
Fact dated Apri14, 2002.
Chair Wulff. opened the hearing to the public for comment.
There were no comments from the audience.
02.35 Motion by Michaud, Second by Drotning to close the public hearing at 6:20 p.m.
Ayes: Michaud, Wulff, Larson, Grenz, Drotning, Stolte
Nays: 0
Commissioner Drotning asked Mr. Hayes why they are proposing a 20 foot wide
garage door. Mr. Hayes indicated that this willhelp with the construction of large
drama props which they would be constructing in the proposed accessory building.
Commissioner Grenz asked if the new accessory building will have water and
sewer service. 1VIr. Hayes indicated that they want to have a wash basin in the
Planning Commission Meeting
Apri14, 2002
Page 4
accessory building for clean-up purposes, so there will have to be a drain... Assistant
City Engineer Rubash indicated that a sanitary sewer system would have to be
.installed for a wash basin, and a sanitary sewer connection is not indicated on the
proposed plans.
Commissioner Grenz asked if heating was proposed for -the accessory building.
Mr. Hayes indicated that they want to insulate. and heat a portion of the building.
Chair Wulff and Commissioner Drotning commented that Mr. Hayes may want to
reconsider having water service to the proposed accessory .building .due to the
requirement to connect to the City's sanitary sewer system.
The Planning Commission recommended amending Stipulation No. 7 to read the 9
adjacent .parking spaces adjacent to the trash enclosure and detached accessory.
building.
The. Planning Commission also recommended adding Stipulation 9: If water
service is provided to the detached accessory building, .the building shall be
• connected to the City's sanitary sewer system.
02.36 ..Motion by Michaud, Second by Drotning to recommend to City Council approval
of the application of Hosanna! Lutheran Church for an amendment to Conditional
Use .Permit No. 96-01 to allow the removal of an existing detached. accessory
building and the construction of a new detached accessory building with an area
greater than 788 square feet and a total height greater than 15 feet, subject to the S
stipulations. listed in the March 29, 2002 Planning Report, as amended, and
approval of the Findings of Fact dated April 4, 2002.
Ayes: Wulff, Larson, Grenz, Drotning, Stolte, Michaud.
Nays: 0
ITEM 7. LYNWOOD HEIGHTS
Chair Wulff .opened the public hearing to consider the application of Ryan
Contracting Co. and Arcon .Development, Inc. for:
A. Preliminary and final plat of 36 single family lots to be known as Lynwood
Heights, located west of Ipava Avenue and north of 170 Street;
• B. Vacation of a public drainage and utility easement related to the final plat of
Lynwood Heights.
Planning Commission Meeting
Apri14, 2002
Page 5
Assistant .City Attorney Poehler attested that the legal notice had been ,.duly
published in accordance with state statutes and City Code.
.The developers Tom Ryan from Ryan Contracting Company and Larry Frank from
Arcon Development, and the Project Engineer Ralph Wagner from Probe
Engineeringwere in attendance at tonight's meeting to answer any questions the
Planning Commission or public may have.
Associate Planner Ron Mullenbach presented the planning report. Mr. Mullenbach
stated that Thomas J. Ryan and representatives of Arcon Development, Inc. have
submitted applications for the preliminary and final plat of Lynwood Heights,
which consists of 36 single family lots and three outlots on 25.66 acres of land
located north of 170 Street and. southwest of the Boulder Village townhome
development.
Mr. Mullenbach indicated: that in conjunction with the preliminary and final plat,
the developers are also requesting vacation of existing public roadway, drainage
and utility easements. Mr. Mullenbach stated that the subject property is zoned RS-
2, Single. Family Residential District .and includes one metes and bounds description
parcel owned by Thomas J. Ryan and two platted outlots owned by Arcon
Development, Inc..
Mr. Mullenbach outlined the minimum requirements for development in he RS-2
District.. He indicated that the 36 single family lots meet the minimum lot
requirements of the RS-2 District, subject to a lot line shift between Lots 8-9, Block 4.
Lot 6, Block 3 is proposed to include the. existing single family home on .the Ryan.
property.
Mr. Mullenbach stated that there are three outlots proposed with the Lynwood
Heights preliminary and final. plat. Outlots A and C each contain a stormwater
basin. Outlot B contains an existing wetland, new wetland mitigation, wetland
buffer, and upland for a neighborhood park and .open space. All three outlots will
be deeded to the City of Lakeville with the final plat.
Mr. Mullenbach stated that the Lynwood Heights preliminary and .final plat. will
connect to five existing and planned local street stubs. that were constructed-with
.adjacent developments. He indicated. that Isosceles Avenue, Jackpine Way, Island
Terrace and Island Avenue were stubbed to the Ryan and Arcon Development
properties with the construction of adjacent subdivisions. Mr. Mullenbach stated.
• that the .Lynwood Heights plat extends each street as athrough-street, providing
for interconnected neighborhoods and access to the proposed neighborhood park in
Planning Commission Meeting
Apri14, 2002
..Page 6
Outlot B. Innsbrook Drive will extend east to Ipava Avenue when the adjacent
Halli property is developed.
Mr. Mullenbach indicated that the Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources
Committee .recommended approval of Lynwood Heights at their April 3, 2002
meeting, subject to dedication of the 2.28 acres of parkland and construction of the
bituminous trail within Outlot B.
Mr. Mullenbach stated that the. developer has submitted a complete tree inventory
and preservation plan for the Lynwood Heights development. Significant tree
stands are proposed to be saved within Outlot B and within Lots 6 and 7, Block 4.
He indicated that City staff and the developer agreed on the location of the park
.land dedication in this area to preserve a higher number of trees on the site and. add
a suitable amenity. to the .neighborhood park.
Mr. Mullenbach. indicated that a .neighborhood meeting was held on March 25,
2002. Approximately 20 property owners attended.
Mr. Mullenbach. stated that should. the Planning Commission recommend to City
Council approval of the Lynwood Heights preliminary plan, final. plat and
easement vacation, Planning Department staff recommends the 6 stipulations listed
in the March 29, 2002 planning: report.
Chair Wulff opened the hearing to the public for comment.
There were no comments from the audience.
02.37 Motion by Michaud, Second by Drotning to close the public hearing at 6:42 p.m.
Ayes: Larson, Grenz, Drotning, Stolte, Michaud, Wulff.
Nays: 0
Commissioner Drotning indicated his displeasure that Jay Riggs of the Dakota
County Soil and Water Conservation District went beyond the scope of his review
in commenting on street widths. Mr. Morey stated that he would discuss this with.
Mr. Riggs to prevent such comments from re-occurring in the future.
Chair Wulff asked if Lot 14, Block 4 met the side yard setback requirement. Mr.
Mullenbach indicated the building pad location will be modified to meet the side
yard setback requirement.
• Chair Wulff had a concern about Lot 7, Block 4. She uestioned the drains e and
q g
utility easement that only included part of the wetland. Mr. Mullenbach indicated
Planning Commission Meeting
Apri14, 2002
Page 7
that the drainage and utility easement will be expanded to include the. entire
wetland.
Mr. Mullenbach recommended the following additional stipulations for the
Lynwood Heights plat:
7. Shift the shared lot. line of Lots 8-9, Block 4 to provide a minimum lot
area of 18,000 square feet for Lot 8, Block 4.
8. Modify the. building pad location on Lot 14, block 4 to meet the required
15 foot side yard setback.
9. Expand the boundary drainage and utility easement on Lot 7, Block 4 to
include the entire wetland.
02.38 Motion by Stolte, Second by Michaud to recommend to City Council approval of
the application of Ryan Contracting Co. and Arcon Development, Inc. for a
preliminary and final .plat to be known as Lynwood Heights and a .vacation of
public roadway, drainage and utility easements subject to .the 6 stipulations listed
in the March 29, 2002 Planning Report, as amended.
Ayes: Grenz, Drotning Stolte, Michaud, Wulff, Larson.
Nays: 0
Break at 6:55 p.m.
Reconvened at 7:10 p.m.
ITEM S. RIVER CITY ASPHALT COMPANY
Chair Wulff opened the public hearing to consider the request of River City Asphalt
Company for an amendment to Excavation and Mining Conditional Use Permit No,
97-03 to allow the expansion of the existing River City Asphalt Company sand and
gravel mining operation, located west of Interstate 35 and north of 205' Street.
Assistant City Attorney Poehler attested that the legal notice had been duly
published in accordance with state statutes and City Code.
A 5-page list of concerns signed by the Raplingers, Krawzas and Powells was
accepted into the permanent record.
Richard Carron, President of River City Asphalt and Kirsten Rojina, Geologist and
Civil Engineer for Sunde Engineering, Jerry Duffey, Attorney for River City
Asphalt, Todd Wesphalt, Office Manager of River City Asphalt, and Todd Jakwa,
Superintendent at the River City Asphalt plant, were in attendance.
Planning Commission Meeting
Apri14, 2002
Page 8
Ms. Rojina presented the history of this site and went over the project changes that
were proposed for this operation. She indicated:
? River City Asphalt will no longer be operating an asphalt plant on
site consistent with the requirements of the current CUP.
? They are proposing that an additiona19.8 acres of land be mined.
? Awash plant is proposed to be added to the site, using an upper
water table source, not a deep well.
? River City Asphalt proposes to use the existing access onto 205
Street over the adjacent property to .the east but this may change to
an .alternate access onto 205 Street .from the .River City Asphalt
property if a renewed easement cannot be negotiated with Dale
Properties.
? River; City Asphalt is proposing a total of 5 years to complete mining
on the property, but City staff is recommending 3 years. River City
Asphalt has agreed to the 3 year time-frame.
Ms. Rojina stated that at the neighborhood meeting the resident's in attendance.
• expressed concerns about tree preservation, delineation of the wetland, berming
along 205 Street, reclamation, and how much water would the wash plant would "
use.
Ms. Rojina addressed the -concerns listed in the 5-page letter submitted to the
Planning Commission from area residents.
1. Ingressand Egress -
This is still being discussed ..with Dale Properties representatives. River City
Asphalt is proposing to use the existing access onto 205th Street over the Dale
.property. They have identified an alternate access onto 205th Street if the continued
use of the easement cannot be negotiated.
2. Noise -
River City Asphalt agrees with the designated hours of operation for the mining
operation.
3. Water Quality -
The site is inspected on an annual basis. There were complaints in the past regarding
the asphalt plant odor, which were addressed at a neighborhood meeting.. There was
also a complaint that the 100 foot mining setback was infringed upon adjacent to the
. Krawza property. This issue .was addressed as soon as the .City brought it to River
City Asphalt's attention.
Planning Commission Meeting
April 4, 2002
Page 9
•
4. Sand and Gravel Washing -
Aggregate Industries washed up to 100% of the aggregate they mined. River City
Asphalt is proposing to wash only 10% of the material mined from the site and
recycle the wash water, rather .than discharge off-site.
300 gpm of water is needed to operate the wash plant. It will operate 14 hours per
day during warmer months. The wash plant is powered by .electricity. It produces
low noise levels and is monitored by inspecting agencies.
Water usage is about .77 acre per day and the pond volume is 9 acres. The pond is
.maintained by removing the sediment periodically. There is no "grizzly" at this site.
The gravel will be transported to and from the wash plant by loaders and off-road
trucks.
5. Rock Crushing Hazards -
This site is regulated by many inspection agencies and .there are permits. that are
issued.. River City Asphalt meets the standards of previous inspections. The testing
that they do for air quality is done more for. the workers on the site who are in close
proximity to the rock crusher.
6. Rock, Gravel, and sand movement in the mining operation -
• The material will be brought to the crusher-using loaders and. off-road trucks.
7. Setbacks, berms, and fences -
The berms along 205th Street will be re-established during reclamation.
8. Extension of Conditional Use Permit -
The applicant has the right to come back and ask for another extension to the gravel
mining operation in conformance with City Codes.. River City Asphalt does not
anticipate the need to extend mining past the 3 years requested.
9. Maximum. Mining Depth -
The mining depth is consistent with Aggregate Industries to the east.
10. Noise Level Reports -
There have been no noise complaints associated with the gravel mining operation.
The rock crusher will be located in the pit in order to confine noise to the site.
11: Mining Restoration -
Has been put on hold until the proposed permit extension is considered. There is a
bond of $1,500 per acre in favor of the City to .ensure completion. River City
Asphalt has one year to complete the restoration after the mining has ceased.
Associate Planner Frank Dempsey. presented the planning report. Mr. Dempsey
stated that River City Asphalt, Incorporated is requesting an amendment to the
Excavation and Mining Permit/Conditional Use Permit approved by the City
Council on February 3, 1997. He indicated that the River City Asphalt sand and
Planning Commission Meeting
Apri14, 2002
Page 10
gravel .mine is located west of Interstate 35, north of 205 Street and west of the
existing mine currently under reclamation by Aggregate Industries. .The permit
approved on February 3, 1997, allowed River City. Asphalt to mine a 20 acre area
for a period of 5 years ending on February 3, 2002.
Mr. Dempsey stated that River City Asphalt is requesting an expansion of the
mining area into an additional 9.8 acres of their property to the north and west of
the existing mining operation.
Mr. Dempsey reviewed .the applicant's Excavation and Mining permit which was
outlined in the March 29, 2002 Planning Report.
Mr. Dempsey indicated that after ongoing complaints from property owners in the
vicinity. of the asphalt plant, and staff discussions with River City Asphalt, Inc.,
RCA has agreed to relocate the asphalt plant off the site. The future location of the
asphalt plant has yet to be determined, but if it is located in the City of Lakeville, it
will be restricted to an area that is zoned Industrial, located outside the current
. Metropolitan Urban Service Area (MUSA) boundary and east of Interstate: 35 and
south of County Road 70 and will only be allowed to operate within the timeframe
.allowed for River City Asphalt's expanded gravel mining operation.
Mr. Dempsey stated that since 1997, he had received numerous phone calls and e-
mails .from neighbors with complaints regarding the emissions from the asphalt
plant. Twice the City initiated inspections from the Pollution Control Agency
(PCA) to inspect the asphalt plant for air quality standards and those inspections by
the PCA indicated that the plant was in compliance with the approved permit.
Mr. Dempsey indicated that River City Asphalt installed a new burner and made
some changes to their smoke stack to try to alleviate the emissions complaints. At
times the emissions seemed to improve, but at other times it did not. As such, the
asphalt plant is not included with the gravel mining extension..
Mr. Dempsey stated that River City Asphalt is proposing a gravel washing plant on
the site to meet certain asphalt production requirements from their contracts. The
project engineer has provided detailed information on the proposed wash
operation.. The neighbors asked questions at the neighborhood meeting regarding
the design of the gravel washing plant and what the water source and .water
quantities would be. As the project engineer has indicated, they will not tap into the
Prairie. du Chien -Jordan Aquifer.
Planning Commission Meeting
Apri14, 2002
Page 11
On February 20, 2002 River City Asphalt hosted a neighborhood meeting, which
approximately 25 residents attended. Issues discussed at the neighborhood. meeting
included .were truck traffic to and from the site, access to 205 Street, clean up, rock
crushing noise, front-end loader noise, the proposed wash plant and the potential
impact to area wells with the wash plant, and the new sunset date. associated with
the amended permit. Some concerns about the continued operation of the mine
were discussed, but Mr. Dempsey stated that the vast majority of those in
attendance were not opposed to the proposed expansion and favored the asphalt
plant being removed from the site.
Mr. Dempsey stated that. River City Asphalt, Inc., is proposing a total of 5 years to
complete mining on the property if the permit to expand is approved. City staff is
recommending a maximum of 3 years from the date of approval of the amended
Mining and Excavation Permit consistent with the amount of time it has taken to
mine the current 20 acres.
Mr. Dempsey stated that the 1997 Mining and Excavation Plan:. included the
dedication of a conservation easement as a means of protecting .the property
outside. of the approved mining area. The conservation easement was to expire
following completion of mining and restoration of the property. River City Asphalt
has submitted an amended legal description of the easement to allow the expansion
of mining into the proposed 9.8 acres. He indicated that the remainder of the area
not being mined would remain within the conservation easement.
Mr. Dempsey. stated that should the Planning Commission recommend to City
Council approval of an amendment to the River City Asphalt Inc., Excavation and
Mining Conditional. Use Permit, Planning Department staff recommends the 25
stipulations listed. in the March 29, 2002 Planning Report and the draft Findings of
:.Fact dated April 4, 2002.
Chair Wulff opened the hearing to the public for comment.
Lane Leipold,10928 West 203rd Street
Mr. Leipold's concerns were:
¦ Odor from the asphalt plant was never addressed. Neighbors were told
there would be no odor.
¦ The trees along I-35 are nearly dead.
¦ The plastic orange. fence was not properly installed and is falling down.
¦ .Truck noise.
Planning Commission Meeting
Apri14, 2002
Page 12
¦ Rocks from the trucks left on 205th Street.
¦ Vibration.
Rich Storlie, 22393 205th Street West
Mr. Storlie's concerns were: '
¦ Where will the driveway be if they are unable to use the Dale property?
¦ Who upgrades the roads that are damaged by the trucks?
¦ Will there beanything else besides washing and crushingon the property?
¦ There needs. to be more enforcement of the stipulations by the City.
Bob Powell, .11774 205th Street West
IVIr. Powell's concerns were:
¦ Would. like to see the berm on 205th Street match the berm on the Dale
property.
¦ He felt that a time frame needed to be stated for .how often 205th Street
would be swept.
¦ Hours of operation. Preparation time prior to starting time should be
prohibited.
¦ They were led to believe that the mining would be over in five years.
John Raplinger, 11897 210th Street West
Mr. Raplinger reiterated the points contained in the letter that was distributed to
the members of the Planning Commission and City staff before tonight's .public
hearing.
Mike Dunham, 11513 205th Street West
Mr. Dunham didn't have a problem with River City Asphalt. He noted that
residents honk at the buses picking up kids, and drive by on 205th Street at 55 mph.
He-felt the greatest noise in the area comes from I-35.
Marilyn Raplinger, 11897 210th Street West
Ms. Raplinger's concerns were:
The trucks wake her up and they start up prior to 6:00 a.m.
¦ She. felt that Mr. Dunham stands to profit from this operation when he sells
his property and that's why he wasri t making any complaints. Mr. Dunham
expressed disagreement with this statement..
Planning Commission Meeting
Apri14, 2002
.Page 13
02.39 Motion by Michaud, Second by Drotning to close the public hearing at 8:40 p.m.
Ayes: Drotning, Stolte, Michaud, Wulff, Larson, Grenz.
Nays:.. 0
.Break at 8:40 p.m.
Reconvened at 8:50 p.m.
Chair Wulff asked Mr. Dempsey to summarize and address the concerns of the
residents.
¦ Road repairs on 205 Street are made by the City.
¦ Inspections of the mining operation are done periodically throughout the
mining season. :The .residents who live in the area can assist staff with
enforcement of the stipulations for the mining operation by contacting staff if
they observe a violation. The City has in the past and will continue to
respond immediately when contacted by residents.
¦ Concerns about the crystalline silica. in the air were brought up in 1997 and
• the City was informed by the PCA that this measurement is taken outside
the property boundaries. The measurements are taken by the PCA on-site
for the safety of the. workers in the mine.
¦ The dead buffer yard trees located on the property must be replaced this
summer.
¦ The reclamation and re-establishment of the berm along. 205 Street must be
addressed.
¦ The March 29, 2002 Engineering memo addresses the comments from the
Dakota County Soil & Water Conservation District.
¦ Mr. Dempsey stated that he stands by .his .interpretation that there was no
consensus of opposition .expressed by the public at the February 20, 2002
neighborhood meeting.
¦ Mr. Dempsey stated that periodic inspections of River City Asphalt are done
by himself and the Assistant City Engineer. He indicated that he performs
unannounced visual inspections 3-5 times. a year.
Mr. Dem se invited River Ci Asphalt to comment on any other concerns that
p Y ty
had not yet been addressed.
Planning Commission Meeting
Apri14, 2002
Page 14
Ms. Rojina responded to a question regarding weight limits of 205 .Street at the
possible new driveway. access. She indicated that the weight limit is the same in
.this area of 205 Street.
Ms. Rojina reiterated that the City is responsible for maintenance of 205 Street.
Ms. Rojina stated that only materials mined from the site will be crushed on site.
There will be no recycling of concrete on this site.
Ms. Rojina commented on the volume of water proposed to be used for the wash
plant. She stated that most of the 300 gallons of water per minute use for the wash
plant would be recycled and used again for gravel washing operations. Ms. Rojina
.stated that the wash pond will be sized to maintain sedimentation efficiency. It is a
- self-regulating system, so when the volume of the pond' is decreased enough to
create a problem with the efficiency of the sedimentation, the operator cleans out
..the sediment to .ensure clean recycled water necessary for the gravel washing.
operation.
Jerry Duffy, attorney for River City Asphalt, stated .that the question regarding
crystalline silica in the. air is a regulation issue for the employees. This plant was
.inspected inthe fall of 2001 and there were no problems at time.
Mr. Duffy state that River City Asphalt never promised, in 1997, that they would
not come back and apply for an extension of their permit.
Commissioner Puncochar asked if River City Asphalt has a schedule for cleaning
205 Street. Mr. Carron indicated that they clean 205th Street adjacent to their
access twice a week when they have truck traffic.
Commissioner Puncochar stressed that if a resident has a complaint regarding the
mining operation, they should be sure to bring it to the City's attention so the City
can address it. Commissioner. Puncochar challenged River. City Asphalt to be a
good neighbor.
Commissioner Stolte had questions -regarding the water usage, the upper level
water .table, drainage, the conservation easement, fencing, and the .berm and
landscape screen.
Commissioner Michaud had concerns .with the trucks being used to transport the
• rock and gravel He also questioned the fence issue with the Krawzas.
Planning Commission Meeting
Apri14, 2002
Page 15
•
Commissioner Larson had questions regarding how the berm would be maintained
with future development and how it will be restored when mining is done.
Commissioner Grenz had questions about the MLJSA line in relation to the subject
property and the restoration plan. Ms. Rojina indicated that to stabilize the site,
they will backgrade so there will not be .any steep slopes and seed the property to
prevent erosion. The maximum depth of the mine is at an elevation of 1,030 feet.
Mr. Rubash noted that there is a mining and phasing plan. River. City Asphalt is
required to maintain and restore as they continue their operation.
Commissioner Drotning discussed the zoning around River City Aslphalt's
property.
Chair Wulff indicated that street access, the berm around the Krawza's property,
noise,. street clean up, and the sunset date still need to be addressed. -She felt the
berm on 205 Street should be restored at this time, 205 Street should be cleaned
up everyday, and. vehicles shouldn't be started up before the permitted hours of
• operation.
Mr. Karawza indicated .that he didn't feel he needed a fence with the mntial
application because the operation was far enough away from his property. -They
are quite close now, so he may want to consider having a fence because of the'steep
drop off.
Commissioner Michaud asked if River City Asphalt thought they might come back
in three years with another .application. Mr. Duffy indicated that depending on
supply and demand, legally they could come back if they need. more time to mine
the property.
City Administrator Robert Erickson addressed the Planning Commission.. He had
some historical comments to help clear up some of the remaining issues. He stated
that Aggregate Industries has finished mining their .site, which is positive for the
area residents. Mr. Erickson explained that Mr. Dale wants to continue to use the.
existing. building on his site for storage purposes. Mr. Dale's position maybe that if
he can't continue using his building, River City Asphalt wori t be allowed to use his.
205 Street driveway access. Mr. Erickson stated. that Mr. Dale's building has a
sump pump and a holding tank for human waste. There is also a well on the
property. This could adversely impact the surrounding resident's wells.
Planning Commission Meeting
April 4, 2002
Page 16
•
Mr. Erickson indicated that Mr. Rubash will determine where the 205 Street berm
will ultimately be located in relation to the. ultimate. 205 Street right-of-way and
design..
Mr. Erickson stated that the City's three year extension of the River City Asphalt
mining operation is also recommended by staff due to the surrounding residential
:development that will occur beginning in 2002 with the proposed Allen Homes, 113
unit townhouse development across 205 Street to the south.
Mr. Erickson indicated that he has heard very few complaints about the gravel
mining operation from the residents in attendance at tonight's meeting.. However,
that may have been based on their expectation that mining would end. River City
Asphalt has the right to make application to mine their. property provided they
meet all of the City Code and Zoning ordinance requirements for. this .type of
operation.
Break at 10:45 p.m.
Reconvened at 10:50 p.m.
Commissioner Drotning thought a limit should be put on outside aggregate
material being brought in. He stated that if this were to become a recycling center,
it could extend the life of the mining operations. Mr. Duffy indicated River City
Asphalt. prefers to use virgin material, not recycled material for. their operations.
Mr. Morey .listed the. stipulation, modifications and additions being recommended
by the Planning Commission as follows:
Stipulation 5. Add the following; The new driveway access shall be paved 400 feet
north of 205 Street by June 1, 2002.
Stipulation 12. Add the following; ...hauling operations, including, daily start-un
preparation, shall be
Stipulation 14. Add the following; The roadways shall be watered daily, unless a
sufficient amount of rainfall occurs to control dust.
Stipulation 18. It shall read along 205 Street shall be maintainedoutside of the
ultimate ROW dedication during and after...
Stipulation 23. It shall read... The paved 400 feet of any access road shall be swept
• weekly when mining activities are taking .place to keep gravel off of 205 Street, or
more frequently if directed by staff.
Planning Commission Meeting
Apri14, 2002
Page 17
The following two stipulations shall be added:
26. The type of fence on or adjacent to the Krawza's property, if any, .shall be
determined by the Krawza's prior to City Council consideration of the Mining
& Excavation Permit -amendment.
27. Concrete recycling shall be prohibited.
02.40 Motion by Stolte, Second by Drotning to recommend to City Council approval.of
an amendment to the River City Asphalt Excavation and Mining Conditional- Use
Permit No. 97-03 to allow the expansion of the existing sand and gravel mining
operation, subject. to .the 25 stipulations listed in the March. 29, 2002 Planning
Report, as amended, and the addition of 2 stipulations listed above.
Ayes: Stolte, Michaud, Wulff, Larson, Drotning.
Nays:. Grenz
Commissioner Grenz indicated the reason for his negative vote was that he would be willing
to give River City Asphalt one year for mining, but not for three years.
There being no further business, the. meeting was adjourned at 11.:25 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Penny ig, Recordin ecretary
ATTEST:
ii
Wendy Wulff, hair