Loading...
07-14-1986 CC MIN - JOINT e e e REGULAR MEETING OF THE ELK RIVER CITY COUNCIL AND JOINT MEETING WITH THE ELK RIVER PLANNING COMMISSION HELD AT THE ELK RIVER CITY HALL POLICE DEPARTMENT MEETING ROOM MONDAY. JULY 14. 1986 Council Members Present: Mayor Hinkle. Councilmembers Schuldt. Williams. and Gunkel. Councilmember Engstrom arrived at approximately 7:45 p.m. Planning Commission Members Present: Vice Chairman Wilson. Commissioners Morton. Barrett. Temple and Fuchs.. Members Absent: Planning Commissioners Jim Tralle and Tom Warner Staff Present: Stephen Rohlf. Building and Zoning Administrator; Patrick Klaers, City Administrator; and Bob Wuornos. Planning Consultant Also Present: David Sellergren, City Attorney; Terry Maurer, City Engineer; and representatives of NSP. UPA and Anoka County. 1. The meeting was called to order at 7: 30 p.m. by Mayor Hinkle. 2. Agenda COUNCILMEMBER GUNKEL CITY COUNCIL MEETING. MOTION PASSED 3-0. MOVED TO APPROVE THE AGENDA FOR THE JULY 14. 1986 COUNCILMEMBER SCHULDT SECONDED THE MOTION. THE 3. Consideration of 7/7/86 City Council Minutes COUNCILMEMBER GUNKEL MOVED TO APPROVE THE JULY MINUTES. COUNCILMEMBER WILLIAMS SECONDED THE MOTION. o. 7. 1986 CITY COUNCIL THE MOTION PASSED 3- Consideration of 6/24/86 Planning Commission Minutes Vice Chairman Wilson asked that in Item 2, the motion should read "Commissioner Barrett" moved to approve the June 24. 1986 Agenda. rather than "Commissioner Merrick." COMMISSIONER BARRETT MOVED TO APPROVE THE JUNE 24. 1986 COMMISSION MINUTES. COMMISSIONER TEMPLE SECONDED THE MOTION. PASSED 5-0. I PLANNING THE MOTION 4. Consideration of Ordinance Amendment - More than one principal building per lot/Public Hearing City Admnistrator, Patrick Klaers. introduced the ordinance amendment to allow more than one principal building on a lot in R3. R4. Industrial and Commercial zoned districts. Mayor Hinkle opened the public hearing. Mike Harden. a resident on Baldwin Avenue. Elk River. questioned what type of controls would be established. i.e.. setbacks, etc. Page 2 City Council Minutes July 14. 1986. ------------------------- e Building and Zoning Administrator. Stephen Rohlf. explained that the setbacks around the perimeter of the lots would be in accordance with the building code for buildings in each particular zoning district and that the City Council would have the authority to dictate conditions in the conditional use process. COUNCILMEMBER SCHULDT MOVED TO APPROVE ORDINANCE 86-6. AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 900.20 - GENERAL REGULATIONS - SUBSECTION 2 - NOT MORE THAN ONE PRINCIPAL BUILDING ON A LOT. COUNCILMEMBER GUNKEL SECONDED THE MOTION. THE MOTION PASSED 4-0. COUNCILMEMBER GUNKEL MOVED TO AUTHOIZE A $75.00 FEE FOR SITE PLAN REVIEW OF REQUESTS TO ALLOW MORE THAN ONE PRINCIPAL BUILDING ON A LOT. COUNCILMEMBER ENGSTROM SECONDED THE MOTION. THE MOTION PASSED 4-0. It was the consensus of the City Council that the park dedication would stand at $100.00 per unit after the first unit. 5. Site Plan Review for And a Construction Hearing Planning Commission Public Vice-Chairman Wilson introduced the request for Anda Construction for an administrative subdivision and site plan review. e Mr. Mike and 30 street further units. Anda of Anda Construction reviewed their proposal for a 24 unit unit apartment building. He indicated that 1 garage and 1 off- parking space would be provided for each apartment unit. Mr. Anda indicted that it is proposed to have approximately 12 - 3 bedroom 12 1 bedroom units and 27 2 bedroom units. Commissioner Fuchs questioned the number of entrances/exits to serve the 2 buildings. Building and Zoning Administrator. Stephen Rohlf. stated that Fire Chief. Russ Anderson. has several concerns as he has stated in his memo to the Mayor. City Council and Planning Commission dated July 10. 1986. Discussion was carried on regarding the concern that traffic may stack up on 5th Street to enter onto Highway #169 if the driveway onto 5th is located too close to that intersection. Vice-Chairman Wilson opened the public hearing. Lyman Marshall. owner of the apartment building adjacent to the proposed apartment buildings. expressed his concern for snow removal with all the added blacktopping of driveways and parking lots. Mr. Marshall further expressed his concern if his driveway were to become a fire lane that residents would not be able to use it for loading and unloading furniture when moving. and also. that sometimes one side of the drive was used for overflow parking. e PAGE 3 City Council Minutes July 14, 1986 e Mr. Mark Harden, resident on Baldwin Avenue, expressed his concerns regarding safety. the condition of Baldwin Avenue. and how the additional traffic which would be generated by the proposed development would affect street deterioration and traffic congestion. Vice-Chairman Wilson closed the public hearing. Commissioner Fuchs asked the Building and Zoning Administrator if the proposed density was within the limits of the City's Zoning Ordinance. Mr. Rohlf explained that given the size of the property. 2.297 acres, 50 1/2 units would be allowed and the developer is proposing 54 units. Commissioner flow between property. Fuchs Ron's suggested the possibility of cutting off the traffic Foods and Main Street through the Liquor Store Further discussion of Highway #169 followed. that at this time, it since the intersection 11169. the traffic stacking potential at 5th Street and The City's Engineer, Mr. Terry Maurer, indicated was his opinion that this would not be a problem, only allows a right turn northbound onto Highway e Discussion was carried on regarding sewer to the property. Mr. Anda indicated that it has not yet been determined which way the sewer hookup would run; either north to 5th Street or east through the neighboring property, by which an easement would be necessary from the owner. Commissioner Temple asked if it was possible to reduce the density with this plan to meet the City's requirements. Mr. Anda explained that the financing has been set up using the 54 units. He further indicated that the reason they had ended up with more units than allowed was due to a prior survey which showed they had more acreage than the more recent survey did. COMMISSIONER FUCHS MOVED TO TABLE A RECOMMENDATION TO THE CITY COUNCIL FOR THE ANnA CONSTRUCTION ADMINISTRATIVE SUBDIVISION AND SITE PLAN REVIEW FOR THE 54 APARTMENT UNITS UNTIr: A NEW DRAWING COULD BE SUBMITTED SHOWING THE FOLLOWING: 1. EXACTLY WHERE THE DRIVEWAY ONTO 5TH STREET WOULD BE LOCATED, DISTANCE FROM THE INTERSECTION OF 5TH AND HIGHWAY #169; 2. WHERE THE SEWER CONNECTION WOULD BE MADE; , . 'mE EXACT NUMBER OF UNITS PROPOSED AND CORRECT ACREAGE OF THE PROPERTY; 4. THE SETBACK FROM THE CENTERLINE OF HIGHWAY #169. OOMMISSIONlR TEMPLE SECONDED THE MOTION. THE MOTION PASSED 5-0. e PAGE 4 City Council Minutes July 17. 1986 e The Planning Commisson also requested Mr. Anda to recommendations made by the Fire Chief. Russ Anderson. consider the Building and Zoning Administrator. Stephen Rohlf. noted that the request of Anda Construction could be heard at the July 22. 1986 Planning Commission meeting. 5. City Council Public Hearing Site Plan Review for Anda Construction and Administrative Subdivision Request Mayor Hinkle opened the public hearing. Lyman Marshal again expressed his concern regarding potential snow removal problems. Mike Harden placed and too great. stated he was concerned where the buildings were going to be that it was his opinion the density of the area would become Mrs. Arlis Jacobson. resident on Baldwin Avenue. expressed her concern for the safety of children on Baldwin with increased traffic flow. as there is a problem with speeding vehicles. She also expressed concern that the value of her home would decrease with 2 more apartment buildings going up across the street. e Mayor Hinkle closed the public hearing. No action was taken by the City Council due to the Planning Commission's decision to table this item until their next meeting. 6. Site Plan Review for Leonard Babinsky for More Than One Principal Building on a Lot - Planning Commission Public Hearing Stephen Rohlf explained the request of Leonard Babinski of 2581 17th Avenue NW. New Brighton. to allow construction of 3 - 24 unit apartment buildings south of School Street. Mr. Rohlf explained that the Fire Chief and Police Chief were concerned about having 3 driveways into the property. and that the developer has agreed to cut that down to 2. Mr. Rohlf indicated that staff recommends approval of the request. Vice-Chairman Wilson opposition of the hearing. opened the public hearing. request. Vice-Chairman No one appeared for or in Wilson closed the public Commissioner Fuchs questioned where the drainage wou~d go. Building and Zoning Administrator Rohlf indicated that the buildings would be bermed and drain away from the building. but he was unsure which way the drainage went from there. Commissioner Temple questioned whether the site was peat or sand. Mr. Rohlf indicated that all the buildings would be on sand. e PAGE 5 City Council Minutes July 17. 1986 e Commissioner Fuchs suggested leaving it up to staff to address the drainage. COMMISSONER FUCHS MOVED TO RECOMMEND TO THE CITY CUNCIL THAT THE SITE PLAN FOR LEONARD BABINSKY BE APPROVED SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: 1. THAT THE BUILDING AND ZONING ADMINISTRATOR APPROVE THE DRAINAGE PLAN. PLANTINGS AND TRASH CONTAINMENT; 2. THAT THE $75'.00 SITE PLAN REVIEW FEE BE PAID; AND. 3. THAT THE PARK DEDICATION FEE BE PAID. COUNCILMEMBER BARRETT SECONDED THE MOTION. THE MOTION PASSED 5-0. City Council Public Hearing - Leonard Babinsky Site Plan Review Mayor Hinkle opened the public hearng. Don McRae. member of the Lion's Club questioned' whether or not it was planned to have a road go through the proposed development into Lion's Park. Mr. Rohlf stated that there were no such plans. e COUNCILMEMBER ENGSTROM MOVED TO ACCEPT THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S RECOMMENDATION TO APPROVE THE SITE PLAN FOR LEONARD BABINSKY WITH THE CONDITIONS AS STATED IN THEIR RECOMMENDATION. COUNCILMEMBER GUNKEL SECONDED THE MOTION. THE MOTION PASSED 4-0. Councilmember Schuldt questioned which driveway was to be eliminated. Mr. Rohlf explained that the most easterly driveway in the plan has been taken out. Councilmember space between garages. Williams expressed his concern that there should be more the off-street parking in front of the buildings and the 7. Site Plan Review for Country Chrysler - Planning Commission Public Hearing Building and Zoning Administrator. Stephen Rohlf. explained the request of Country Chrysler to allow a second principal building on their lot southeast of Highway #10 to build a body shop. Mr. Rohlf indicated that he felt a separate detached facility for this type of operation was much more desirable than attaching it to the existing showroom buildng. due to the hazardous nature of such an operation and recommended approval of the reques t . Vice-Chairman Wilson opened the public hearing. opposition of the request. Vice-Chairman hearing. No one appeared for or in Wilson closed the public e PAGE 6 City Council Minutes July 17, 1986 e COMMISSIONER BARRETT MOVED TO RECOMMEND' THAT THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVE THE REQUEST OF COUNTRY CHRYSLER TO CONSTRUCT AN ADDITIONAL BUILDING ON THEIR SITE, SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING CONDITONS: 1. '!'HAT A DRIVEWAY BE LEFT OPEN AND MAINTAINED THROUGH THE CAR LOT TO THE PROPOSED BUILDING; 2,. THAT THE REQUIRED 5 PARKING STALLS BE PROVIDED. ONE BEING HANDICAPPED. AND THAT THE BUILDING IN ITSELF BE HANDICAPPED ACCESSIBLE; 3. THAT THE LOT BE LANDSCAPED WITH GRASS SUITABLE TO THE TYPE OF SOILS PRESENT; 4. THAT THE DRAINAGE BE APPROVED ADMINISTRATOR; BY THE BUILDING AND ZONING S. THAT THE TRASH RECEPTACLES BE SCREENED; 6. THAT THE $75.00 SITE PLAN REVIEW FEE BE PAID; AND, 7. THAT THE COUNTRY CHRYSLER SHOWROOM AND BODY SHOP CANNOT BE SOLD SEPARATELY WITHOUT A FORMAL LOT SPLIT. COMMISSIONER MORTON SECONDED THE MOTION. THE MOTION PASSED 5-0. e City Council Public Hearing - Country Chrysler Site Plan Review Councilmember Gunkel questioned what authority was responsible for monitoring the safety of the body shop operation. such as adequate ventilation of painting areas. disposal of fluids. i.e., solvents. oil, brake fluid, transmission fluid. etc. Mark Cory. representative from Country Chrysler, stated that the PCA and MPCA licenses and monitors this type of operation and periodically makes inspections. COUNCILMEMBER GUNKEL MOVED TO APPROVE THE SITE PLAN REVIEW FOR COUNTRY CHRYSLER SUBJECT TO THE CONDITIONS ESTABLISHED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION IN THEIR RECOMMENDATION. COUNCILMEMBER WILLIAMS SECONDED THE MOTION. THE MOTION PASSED 4-0. 8. Variance Request by Gerald McChesney - Planning Commission Public Hearing Mr. Mike Leary of New Creations, explained the request of Mr. McChesney to obtain a 30 foot encroachment on the 50 foot front yard setback in an 1-1 zone. Mr. Leary stated that the terrain of the lot is such that it would be very difficult to meet the required setback and further. that Mr. McChesney would like to keep the new building in line with the other buildings in this area. e PAGE 7 City Council Minutes July 14. 1986 e Vice-Chairman Wilson opened the public hearing. No one appeared for or in opposition of the variance request. Vice-Chairman Wilson closed the public hearing. COMMISSIONER FUCHS MOVED TO APPROVE THE VARIANCE FROM THE CITY'S ZONING ORDINANCE TO ALLOW A 30 FOOT ENCROACHMENT ON THE REQUIRED 50 FOOT FRONT YARD SETBACK AS REQUESTED BY MR. GERRY MCCHESNEY. COMMISSIONER TEMPLE SECONDED THE MOTION. THE MOTION PASSED 5-0. Building and Zoning Adminstrator Rohlf indicated that Mr. McChesney's request meets the five standards for a variance request. City Council Public Hearing - Varinace Request by Mr. McChesney Mayor Hinkle opposition of hearing. opened the public hearing. the variance request. Mayor No one appeared for or in Hinkle closed the public COUNCILMEMBER SCHULDT MOVED TO MCCHESNEY. COUNCILMEMBER GUNKEL 4- o. APPROVE THE VARIANCE REQUEST BY MR. SECONDED THE MOTION. THE MOTION PASSED 9. 1986 Equipment Certificates e COUNCILMEMBER GUNKEL MOVED TO APPROVE RESOLUTION 86-40. A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING ISSUANCE. AWARDING SALE PRESCRIBING THE FORM AND DETAILS AND LEVYING TAXES FOR THE PAYMENT OF $105.000 GENERAL OBLIGATION EQUIPMENT CERTIFICATES. SERIES 1986A. COUNCILMEMBER WILLIAMS SECONDED THE MOTION. THE MOTION PASSED 4- o. 10a.ROF Proposal The attached list of concerns regarding the ROF processing plant and burn unit were discussed. Following is an informal list of comments and discussion. Discussion was carried on regarding the likelihood of transfer stations. Item 1a. - Water table is at approximately 10 feet. b. - Ground would be covered with concrete and asphalt where equipment would be located. c. - Holding tank. would be installed using state and federal guidelines and treated for corrosion prevention. Discussion of how hazardous waste water would be. Item 2a. - NSP would test waste water. b. - Proposed to transfer waste water to City's treatment plant if tested out and found to be nonhazardous. c. - NSP will visit plant to determine if feasible to dispose of waste water there. e - e e PAGE 8 City Council Minutes July 14. 1986 Item 3a. 9 ton road will be built into plant - County working on this. b. - MuDOT aware of proposal. up to them to address. Item 4a. plant would have negative impact on image of progress. should be dealt with as industrial for City. - Gunkel - doesn't feel Elk River. sees as development - positive Hinkle - image is what we want it to be. Discussed difference between RDF and mass-burn. RDF - presorted. more uniform combustion. efficient. material burns at hotter temperature. emmissions lower. material prepared for burning comes out fluffy. low moisture material. Mass-burner - no presorting. everything burned. burns at lower temperature. Red Wing Mass burner. 100 ton per day. City of Red Wing also has own mass burner. steam heat for tannery. Red Wing reduced amount of raw garbage dumped into landfill from 25.000 tons to 2.500 tons. Item 5. No more than any other industrial type facility. Truck traffic already exists. just goes to landfill now. Areas would be fenced. clean-up crew on duty to clean up site and any debris on and near 165th. Item 7. All material would arrive in closed containers. Handling of material would be done inside enclosed building. Item 8a.- Planned for 70% operation. material would be transferred necessary. to landfill. 30% shutdown. to Red Wing If major shutdown. or Wilmar. or if b. - Recycling market not good. Item 9a. - NSP would have to obtain hazardous waste generator permit. Burn Unit Williams - expressed concern for health hazard. emissions. UPA Not convinced scrubbers needed. Will meet any requirements MPCA and PCA has. Cost 6 to 7 million dollars to install scrubbers. plus operation and maintenance costs. Scrubber designed to reduce amount of acid gases. PCAS has limits on sulphur dioxide. no standards for hydrogen chloride. Sherco 3 plant will generate 100 times more sulphur dioxides even with a scrubber than the RDF plant will. RDF will emit more hydrogen chlorides. e e e PAGE 9 City Council Minutes July 14. 1986 NSP Emissions will be checked. Equipment installed to monitor temperature combustion efficiency. carbon dioxide. etc. Before RDF plant can start operation. testing is done at different level loads and under various conditions. by independent testing lab. check criteria and noncriteria pollutants. Check for correlation between their daily monitoring and independent testing results. If abnormality in daily testing instrumentation. alarm goes off. PCA checks their records. results sent to PCA quarterly. Instrumentation is also checked periodically. Roh1f- Spoke with PCA. noncriteria pollutants have no standards yet. he feels that doesn't necessarily mean they are not harmful. When data available to PCA showing them harmful. then they will do something about it. Gunke1- Scrubbers are latest feels scrubbers should to protect environment. technology. designed to remove pollutants. be required to insure every effort is made UPA Referred combination. collected in gases. to study done in Quebec. RDF with scrubber/baghouse Author has since stated that 99% of pollutants were baghouse. Scrubber reduces the temperature of flue Project cost 29 million. cost of approximately 20%. scrubbers 6 million. Hink1e- Asked NSP if installation of scrubbers is possibility. NSP Feels money could be better spent for pollution control elsewhere. that baghouse would be effective for the RDF. Gunke1- Concerned that landfill would by used by others for ash disposal UPA - Responsible for deposit of ash. Hink1e- Would like incorporated into community would be responsible Elk River Landfill would not get conditional use permit that each for own percentage of ash. so that it all. Hink1e- Who monitors ash? UPA They would have independent testing agency monitor. Take mixture of fly ash and bottom ash. determine toxicidy of ash. NSP Do not know at this time whether or not ash will go to Elk River Landfill. Fuchs- Concerned about health hazard. e e e PAGE 10 City Council Minutes July 14. 1986 NSP PCA will determine if there is health hazard. what is acceptable risk. Must pass extensive testing criteria to obtain permit from PCA. Olmsted County near Rochester has obtained mass-burn permit from PCA. Red Wing. Wilmar. mass burn. City of Red Wing has mass- burner. PCA required electrostatic precipitator. NSP Will send information to City regarding combustion controls. gases and particulates. etc. Discussion carried on regarding dioixides. furons. are they gases or particulates. It was the consensus of the City Council that they would like more information from UPA and NSP. and also to meet with the City consultant. Also they were waiting for the final EIS Report which is to be out approximately July 21st. 10E.Deerfield 3rd Addition Mayor Hinkle explained that the Deerfield 3rd final plat had been denied because the northern access has not been obtained. Mayor Hinkle further explained that since the improvements for Deerfield 3rd had been planned as part of the upcoming bond issue. it must be determined whether or not to scratch the project from the bonds and start over with a new bond issue. City Attorney. David Sellergren. explained that if the City decided to go ahead and include the Deerfield 3rd project in the bond issue. 5% of the dollar amount must be used within 6 months on the project. and 70% used within 3 years. Councilmember Gunkel stated that she was not in favor of allowing the developer to do the project in phases. She explained that it has been determined that it is not financially feasible to do the improvements in phases. and further that the Council has made a decision to not allow construction until the access is acquired. Councilmembers Schuldt and Engstrom expressed their agreement not to go ahead with the project until the access is secured. COUNCILMEMBER GUNKEL MOVED TO EXTEND THE CITY COUNCIL MEETING PAST THE ESTABLISHED 12:00 MIDNIGHT MEETING DEADLINE. COUNCILMEMBER SCHULDT SECONDED THE MOTION. THE MOTION PASSED 4-0. COUNCILMEMBER GUNKEL MOVED DROPPED FROM THE BOND ISSUE. THE MOTION PASSED 4-0. THAT THE DEERFIELD 3RD ADDITION PROJECT BE COUNCILMEMBER ENGSTROM SECONDED THE MOTION. e e e PAGE 11 City Council Minutes July 14. 1986 COUNCILMEMBER ENGSTROM MOVED THAT THE MEETING BE ADJOURNED. COUNCILMEMBER SCHULDT SECONDED THE MOTION. THE MOTION PASSED 4-0. Respectfully submitted. j)~ ~~ A:>I Deborah Kleckner Recording Secretary