5.3. PCSR 02-09-2010REQUEST FOR ACTION
'~ item ur~~r
Planning Commission 5.3.
ends ecti~n ~etin ate reared ~
Planning February 9, 2010 Rebecca Haug,
E nvironmental Admin
Item escripti®n viewed
Request by Elk River Landf ill to amend Conditional Use Permit Lori Johnson, City
and Solid waste Fac' 'ty License Administrator
Peter Beck, City Attorney
cti®n eue~t_
Staff recommends approval of the amendment to Elk River Landfill's ~ERL} Conditional Use
Permit SCUP} and Solid Waste Fac' 'ty License ~SwFL} with modifications. The City Code of
ordinances requires that all Solid waste Fac' 'ty Licenses in the City expire every two years from the
date of issuance, The City has always amended both the CUP and License every two years since
much of the language is the same in both. The current CtJP and SwFL for the ERL expires on
February ~7, 200 and that is the reason for this request.
eneral nf~rr~ati~n
piicant Elk River Landfill
ay ule The application has been deemed complete as of
December ZS, 2009. The City must approve,
approve with conditions, or deny the project by
February Z 6, 20 ~ 0
eueste cti~n Amend CUP ~ SwFL
®cati~n and ie 22460 Highway 169
L®cati~n xistin Land se Land se ian
esinati®n uurent
®nin
Property in
Question Solid waste Fac' 'ty Landfill A~ ~ME} SwF}
NorCh Livonia Township NIA NIA
South Mineral Excavation ~~
g A~ ~
~ }
East Highway 169
Case File; CU X0.02
Page ~
ERL CCJP
City of Ells River
West Agriculture/Open Space Rural Residential Al
I~~~nrl'~r~~nn
The Elk River Landfill is requesting an amendment to their existing Conditional Use Permit and
Solid Waste Fac' 'tyLicense. The applicant and staff have agreed on most of the recommended
revisions to both the CUP and SWFL. There are three revisions requested by the applicant which
staff is not recommending.
The City Code of ordinances requires that all Solid Waste Fac' 'ty Licenses in the City expire every
two years from the date of issuance. The City has always amended both the CUP and License every
two years since much of the language is the same in both. The current CUP and SWFL for the ERL
expires on February 17, 2010 and that is the reason for this request. This amendment would then
expire on February 17, 2012.
t.ch~~s
.
Location map
Site Map
ERL application
The current CUP for the fac' 'ty
The current SWFL f or the f ac' 'ty
Letter from Jack Perry dated January 28, 2010
Letter to Deb Walters dated February 3, 2010
aca~~e ~ u~~®~~
Standards for Issuance of a Conditional/ Interim Use Permit Section 30-654}
A Conditional Use Permit can be issued only if the use at the proposed location:
]. Dill nat endanger, i~ ju~~e ar detrimelata]ly affect t1~e T~se a~~d enjoyrne~~~ of a~]~er ~ra~ery in the i~nmedia~e
vicinity or the public ]~eal~I~, safey, morals, ca~nfa~~, convenience argeneral Welfare of tl~e neig]~barl~aod or the
~y,
Z. dill be consistent ~itl~ floe comprehensive plan.
3. lY~ill not impede t]~e na~nal and orderly devela~ment and i~npravement of sure°ounding vacant~ropery.
4. dill be served adequately by and mill not adversely affect essential public facilities and services including
streets, police and~re protection, drainage, refuge disposal, ~vater and seer systems, ~ar~s and scboals; and
~vill not, in ~a~~icular, c~~eate tra~c congestion or interference pith tra~c an adjacent and neigbbaring public
tl~araughfares.
Z:IPLANNING MAIN1Case FileslCUP1CtJ ~0-02 ER I,andfilllStaff report to PGCU ~0-02.doc
Case File. CU 1~-Q2
Page 3
ERL CUP
City of Elk River
5'. dill rat involve uses, activities, processes, mate~~als, equipment and conditions of operation that gill be
detrime~atal to any persons or property because of excessive tra~c, raise, s~no~e, fumes, glare, odors, dust or
vibratio~as.
6. l~lill not result in the destruction, lass or damage of a natural, scenic or ]~istoric feature of major importance.
7. mill f illy ca~~ply ~itl~ all atl~er ~°e~uireme~zts of this Code, including any applicable ~°eguirements and
standards for the issuance of a license or permit to establish and operate the proposed use in the cif.
zf denial of such a permit should occur, it shall accompany recommendations or determinations by
findings or a report stating how the proposed use does not comply with the standards set forth in
Section 30~b54.
In reviewing the standards for approval of a CLTP, it appears that operation of the Landfill pursuant
to the conditions recommended by staff in the attached proposed CUP and SWFL would be
consistent with all of these standards.
sus
Staff and the Applicant have proposed some changes to the existing CUP and SWFL. Many of the
changes are considered housekeeping and are highlighted in the attached document. Here are some
of the more significant changes to the CUP and SWFL:
Con.d~txonaZ t~se Permit ~CUP~
1. Demolition I~eb~~~s. The Applicant and staff have agreed to remove the sections that
relate to demolition debris, as the areas of the landfill which accept demolition debris are
all located in Livonia Township,
2. Pa~a~raph 3 ~uffe~r ~o~ae/Sc~eenin~ -- Paragraph 3 of the CUP currently reads as
follows; "A Buffer Zone shall be established within the perimeter of the Landfill
Property around the waste disposal areas of not less than 200 feet, except on the north
side. within this Buffer Zone, no waste disposal may occur. The Landfill shall develop
an inventory of signif icant trees within the buf f er zone. The pres ervation of trees within
the buffer zone shall be included in plans for construction, operation, and closure of the
Landfill. Said plans shall be in compliance with the screening plans dated, May 28,1999
and, which are incorporated into Sherburne County's license for the Landfill.
Staf f is recommending that paragraph 3 be amended through the italicized changes, to
read: "A Buf f er Zane shall be established within the perimeter of the Landfill Property
around the waste disposal areas of not less than 200 feet, except on the north side.
within this Buffer Zone, na waste disposal may occur. The Landfill shall develop an
inventory of significant trees within the buffer zone. The preservation of trees within
the buf f er zone shall be provided for during the construction, operation, and be included in tl~e
end use plan to be submitted for approval by December 3 ~, 20 ~ ~ by the Cif. "
z:IPLANI~IING MAIN1Case FileslCUP1CU 10-02 ER Landfilllstaff report to PGCU 10-02,doc
Case File: CU 10-02
Page 4
ERL CUP
City o~ Elk River
As you can see, Staff's only revision is to incorporate a ref erence to the end use plan,
which is discussed below. The Applicant has requested, in a letter from its attorney
dated January 2S, 2010, and in an email dated February 3, 2010, that the CUP be
amended to allow the Applicant to fill within the buffer zone, apparently up to the
property line. According to the January 2S, 2010 letter, this would constitute a 1,b71,
300 cubic yard expansion of the landfill, Although one schematic drawing showing such
an expansion was submitted with the January 2S letter, the Applicant has submitted none
of the other plans and materials which would be required for the Cityto review, evaluate
and act on the proposed expansion. For this reason, staff sent a letter to the Applicant,
dated February 3, 2010 advising the Applicant that, to the extent the January 2S letter
constituents an amendment to the pending application, it is incomplete for failure to
provide the required application materials. A copy of this letter is attached.
The 200 foot buffer zone provided for in paragraph 3 is required not only by the CUP,
but also by State Regulation (Muinesota Rule 7035.2815, Subp. 5), which requires that
any new fill area at a land disposal facility must be located at least 200 feet from the
nearest property line unless otherwise approved by the State, through the MPCA's
issuance of a variance.
Because the Applicant has submitted nothing to indicate that it could fill within the
buffer zone under its state approvals, and because the Applicant has not submitted the
required plans and other materials detailing an expansion of the landfill into the buffer
zone, staff is recommending that paragraph 3 remain in the C[JP, as proposed by staff.
3. Para~~aph 4 (29} Ce1117 - Staf f is recommending a revision to paragraph 4 ~29} which
would require Applicant to submit a modif ied development and closure plan f or Cell 17.
Applicant has objected to this revision, stating that it has an approved construction plan
for Cell 17.
However, the only construction plan f or Cell 17 on f ile within the City assumes that the
landfill will expand to the south, into the Tiller property. Because applicants request to
expand the landfill into the Tiller property has been denied, a new development and
closure plan for Cell 17 needs to be submitted. For this reason, staff recommends the
Commission approve the revisions to paragraph 4 ~2q} as proposed bystaff.
4. Paragraph 4 (30) Alternative Cover -Staff agrees with the Applicant's request to allow
alternate cover and recommends adoption of paragraph 4 (30) as proposed.
5. Paragraph 4 (31) End Use Plan -The Applicant has objected to paragraph 4 (31) as
proposed by staff on the grounds that the Landfill has an approved end use plan.
However, this is not the case. Although the Elk River Park and Recreation Commission
reviewed proposed End Use Plans for the ERL in connection with the proposed
expansion into the Tiller property, and they made recommendations to the City Council
on proposed end use plans as they relate to Park and Recreation use, the City Council
has not approved an end use plan for ERL. Staff is proposing that an End Use Plan be
submitted to the CitybyDecember 31, 2011 that indicates passive recreational use of the
ERL property within the City limits following final closure of the Landfill. If the
z:1PLANNING MATN1Case FileslCUP1CU 10-02 ER Landfilllstaff report to PGCU 10.02,doc
Case File; GU 10-OZ
Page 5
ERL CUP
City of Elk River
Applicant has an alternate end use to propose, the Commission could consider that at
this time or any time before the landfill closes.
Solid waste Facili~_Licen~e ~SwFL~
The Applicant's SwFL does not include a section on buffer zone/screening, but does include
sections on Cell 17, Alternative Cover, and End Use Plan. Staff recommends the same revisions
made on those items in the CUP be made in the SwFL.
In addition, the SwFL includes a section Section 1 ~g}} an Dust, Noise, and odor. Staff and
the Applicant have agreed to add language to that section related to odor to include: "The
Permitee agrees that it will use best management practices to control against odors. The
Environmental Administrator may make recommendations regarding possible odor controls. If
a verif ied odor problem is ongoing, both parties agree to institute goad f aith negotiations to
minimize the odor problem. If in the event that the City receives ten or more complaints within
a six-hour period relating to a single odor description and this actor complaint has been verified
by bath City and Permitee and identified as coming from the Fac' 'ty, the Permitee shall cease
such activity~s} that are the direct cause of the odors}. Normal activity~s} shall not resume until
the Permitee has, to the satisf action of the City, fully mitigated against such ador~s},"
®r~rehensive_la~
Assuming the continued inclusion of the present buffer area requirement, proposed use of the land
would be consistent with the 2004 Comprehensive Plan.
ec~n~menata~n
Staf f supports a recommendation to approve amendments to ERL's Conditional Use Permit and
Solid waste Fac' 'ty License with the revisions recommended by Staff, The amended CUP and
SwFL would then expire on February 17, 2012.
~a,nnin ®n1~S~d®n Ct~~n Motion by~ Second by._. Vote
~I~~
z:1PI,AI~INING MAIN1Case FilesICLJPICU 10-02 ER LandfilllStaff report to PGCU 10-02.doc