Loading...
06-05-96 PCLai 76,1k / . ---------------------------- rNorthwest Associated Consultants, Inc. COMMUNITY PLANNING DESIGN MARKET RESEARCH MEMORANDUM TO: Otsego Planning Commission FROM: Bob Kirmis DATE: 28 May 1996 RE: Otsego - Zoning Ordinance - Feedlot Regulations FILE NO: 176.08 - 95.28 Attached please find a revised draft amendment to the Otsego Zoning Ordinance addressing animal feedlots (dated 5/28/96). The revised amendment incorporates changes suggested at the 15 May 1996 Planning Commission meeting. For reference purposes, text taken directly from the Minnesota Rules has once again been shaded while Manure Management Guide text has been underlined. At the suggestion of the City Attorney, the definitions of "animal unit" and "new animal feedlot" have remained unchanged from the previous draft ordinance and are consistent with the Minnesota Rule definition. The draft ordinance is scheduled for Planning Commission consideration on 5 June. pc: Elaine Beatty Andy MacArthur Otsego Feedlot Committee 5775 Wayzata Blvd. • Suite 555 • St. Louis Park, MN 55416 • (612) 595-9636•Fax. 595-9837 William S. RadzwiU lndrew J. MacArthur Michael C. Court May 24, 1996 RAMWILL & CO URI Attorneys at Law 705 Central Avenue East PO Box 369 St. Michael, MN 55376 (612) 497-1930 (612) 497-2599 (FAX) Bob Kirmis Senior Planner Northwest Associated Consultants, Inc. 5775 Wayzata Boulevard Suite 555 St. Louis Park, MN 55416 RE: Draft Feedlot Ordinance Dear Bob: At your request I have reviewed the Draft Feedlot Ordinance. I have the following comments: 1. As far as the definition of animal units is concerned it is my feeling that we should stay with the Minn. Rules definitions. Unless there are specific criteria that could be adopted from MPCA rules or regulations I think the City would not be well served by coming up with their own definition of what number of animal units a young animal constitutes. I can foresee numerous problems arising from such a definition regarding determinations as to when a Conditional Use Permit is necessary, as to what is or is not a change of operation, and regarding allowable units within a designated area. 2. On page 8, 20-38-2, D should be bolded. It comes directly from the Minnesota Rules as cited on page 7. 3. Regarding the definition of new animal feedlots, my opinion is that it should be consistent with the MPCA rules. If you have any further questions please feel free to contact me on or after June 3. Very truly yours, rew J a c"Arthur RADZWILL & COURI cc: -City of Otsego Larry Koshak, Hakanson Anderson V CITY OF OTSEGO COUNTY OF WRIGHT STATE OF MINNESOTA ORDINANCE NO. 96 - AN ORDINANCE ADDRESSING ANIMAL FEEDLOT OPERATIONS WITHIN THE CITY OF OTSEGO. THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF OTSEGO HEREBY ORDAINS: Section 1. Section 20-2-2.F of the Otsego City Code (Definitions) is hereby amended to delete the following definitions: Feedlot, Commercial: The place of confined feeding of livestock or other animals for food, fur, pleasure or resale purposes in yards, lots, pens, building, or other areas not normally used for pasture or crops and in which substantial amounts of manure or related `her wastes may originate by reason of feeding such imals. Section 2. Section 20-2-2.F of the Otsego City Code (Definitions) is hereby amended to add the following definitions: Feedlot Related: 1. 2. 5/28/96 MN Rules 7020.0500 Subp. 4,B,2 3. 4. M ?Q}pnd The total number of animal units subject to permit or registration shall be determined by including operations located within one-half mile which utilize a common area or system for manure disposal. : ecua. t ::::and the livestock operation does not create or maintain a potential pollution hazard or the potential pollution hazard has been corrected to meet MPCA requirements. Commissioner: Tk�ea�ibnex �eW dutis are defined; iii Presotatutes, Secr.an e 1 6.03 a .amended MN Rules 7020.03 Subp. 5 MN Rules 7020.0300 Subp. 6 MN Rules 7020.0300 Subp. 7 MN Rules 7020.0300 Subp. 7a 6. Corrective >or Protective Measures ACbEe MN Rules 7020.0300 structure, condition, »or combination ,;e Subp. 8 ,,,.,... which prevents or reduces the discharge pollutants from an animal feedlot to a level:. conformity, with MPCA rules. 2 Domegt�.c Fes�z.zer. 8. Earthen Basin: A dike or excavated structure, often lined with clay o etic liner, in which manure is stored, The basin is emptied at least once each year, it is desicrned by --a -orofessional engineer or Natural Resources �!onseryation service/soil and Water Conservation 10. 11. 12. Feedlot Operator: An individual, a corporation, a group of individuals, a partnership, joint venture, owner or any other business entity having charge or control of one or more livestock feedlots, poultry lots or other animal lots. When required maths ;from; the : date of lSsu3r.�e� identifying the ... necessary corrective measures to abate potential pollution hazards. 3 MN Rules 7020.0300 Subp. 11 MMG Glossary MN Rules 7020.0300 Subp. 3 MN Rules 7020.0300 Subp. 15 MN Rules 7020.0300 Subp. 13 14. manure, Animal !' fecal and urinary excretions nf livestock and ipoultry. anure can include bedding material and water used for livest-ock. 15. 16. 91-010'! • 11• !• ! ! !' • �' - NI - 0 MMG Glossary MMG Glossary MN Rules 7020.0300 Subp. 14 MN Rules 7020.0300 Subp. 16 MN Rules 7020.0300 Subp. 18 MMMEOWRI Leif A. An animal fppcilot whose boundaries floodplain or manure storacTe are located or are a withi located shorpland or an area draining draining to an directly to a sink area with shallo hole a are located within one hundred (1-00) rwAocIr --feet-A waterVF well: B. An animal feedlot or manure storacTe a whose crround construction or operation will al waters of- the state in Pxcpss auplicable limited 7055, standards, to, minnesota during a rainsto= includincr, Rules !-! event - but 1 • �• • ' magnitude than the -ar, 24-hour evenany • will allow uncontrolled seepage llutants into the • - state ground rules, water o 9. Steep Slopes: Land where agricultural activity or development is either not recommended or described as poorly suited due to slope steepness and the site's soil characteristics, as mapped and described in available county soil surveys or other technical reports, unless appropriate design and construction techniques and farming practices are used in accordance with the provisions of these regulations. Where specific information is not available, steep slopes are lands having average slopes over twelve (12) percent, as measured over horizontal distances of fifty (50) feet or more, that are not bluffs. Section 3. Section 20-2-2.P of the Otsego City Code (Definitions) is hereby amended to add the following definitions: Park, Private: A tract of land presently owned or controlled and used by private or semi-public persons, entities, groups, etc. for active and/or passive recreational purposes. A MN Rules 7020.0300 Subp. 20/excluding the following language Park, Public: A tract of land publicly owned and used by the public for active and/or passive recreational purposes. Trailways themselves shall not constitute a public park. Section 4. Section 20-27-4.0 of the Otsego City Code (Farm Animal Regulations) is amended to read as follows: C. Manure application and stockpiling activities shall comply with the applicable provisions of Section 20-38-8 of this Chdpter. Section 5. Section 20-27-4.E of the Otsego City Code (Farm Animal Regulations) is amended to read as follows: E. All regulations imposed by the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) relating to the keeping of farm animals shall be adhered to and animal feedlots shall comply with the applicable provisions of Section 20-38 of this Chapter. Section 6. Section 38 of the Otsego City Code is hereby amended to read as follows: SECTION 38 FEEDLOT REGULATIONS SECTION: 20-38-1 Purpose 20-38-2 Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) Feedlot Permit Requirements 20-38-3 Permitted Feedlots 20-38-4 Prohibited Feedlots 20-38-5 Pollution Control Requirements 20-38-6 Information Requirement 20-38-7 Feedlot Setbacks 20-38-8 Manure Stockpile/Application Setbacks 20-38-9 Conditional Use Permits 20-38-10 Standards for Earthen Storage Basins and Concrete Pits 20-38-11 Facility Closure 20-38-12 Abandonment -38-1: PURPOSE: The purpose and intent of this Chapter is to regulate feedlot operations within the City of Otsego in a manner that is at least as restrictive as existing State regulations, and in many instances exceeding those State requirements, including those regulations related to pollution. These additional controls are needed due to the unique location of the municipality in relation to the Metropolitan Area, and in order to promote the planning process and protect the health, safety and welfare of the residents of the City, as well as to: A. Establish a procedure for the allowance of feedlots within the City. B. Regulate the location, development, and expansion of feedlots. C. Promote best farm management practices. D. Protect valuable groundwater and surface water resources. E. Protect human and animal health. F. Implement specific policies and provisions of_the official City Comprehensive Plan. G. Promote compatibility of uses. H. Coordinate and assist state agencies in the administration of state-wide statutes and regulations governing livestock operations. 20-38-2: MINNESOTA POLLUTION CONTROL AGENCY (MPCA) FEEDLOT PERMIT REQUIREMENTS : `'7E<`Cti2# A. A: zaz. gedot a szopQs where a feedlot did not previously exist. B. 7 MN Rules 7020.0500 Subp. 1 C. family members included. 20-38-3: PERMITTED FEEDLOTS: Those feedlots which do not constitute a potential pollution hazard and meet the minimum requirements of this Ordinance shall be allowed within the City on the condition that they obtain a certificate of compliance by the MPCA, as required. 20-38-4: PROHIBITED FEEDLOTS: No new feedlots in excess of the following cumulative number of animals units shall be allowed in the City: Maximum Animal Units Existing New Feedlots Feedlots Immediate Urban Service Area 300 New Feed- lots Prohibited Long Range Urban Service Area 600 300 Rural Service Area None* 750 NOTE: See Otsego Comprehensive Plan for service district boundary designations. *A maximum number of animal units may be specified by the City Council as a condition of conditional use permit issuance. 20-38-5: POLLUTION CONTROL REQUIREMENTS: A. Purpose: The purpose of this Section is to provide restrictions on feedlot operations as restrictive as, or more so, than existing State regulations regarding pollution or potential pollution hazards. MMG Page 12 B. General Requirement: C. i� E. F. G. Odors: Feedlot operations shall take responsible measures to minimize odors which have the effect of creating an adverse impact on the environment and quality of life for the residents of the City. 9 MN Rules 7020.0400 Subp. 1 MITT Rules 7020.0400 Subp. 2 MIST Rules 7020.0400 Subp. 3 MN Rules 7020.0400 Subp. 4 MN Rules 7020.0400 Subp. 5 H.l#cer Any >eec�lot may request a variant 'tri MN Rules 7020.09" $Ga'C+O with Sectzar 20 < 5 of this Chagr WeOleg mai x2G d.Tr create azte pCe to :.C4r;G?Q?Ct3 fat ;,created.,..by:.. r 20-38-6: INFORMATION REQUIREMENT: A. g. in icating A :: F?�t�d�,.. 1 7 MN Rules 20.0500 0 ��mensions of feedlots all existing Subp. 2 (partial) homes .buildings t :>`s, ponds. water dry MMG Page 14 courses wetlands runs. rock outcroppings. roads. contour and surface water drainage encompassing the maximum setback distances of Section 20-38-7 of this Chapter. B'. A description of the geological condition, soil types and seasonal high water table. C. A plan indicating operational procedure, the location and specifics of proposed animal waste facilities. The quantity and type of effluent to be discharged from the site. D. Method/plan for disposal of dead animals shall be consistent with the Minnesota Board of Animal Health regulations. E. Manure Utilization Plan which will include MMG the location of all manure application sites, crop types, application rate in gallons/acre or tons/acre, and the resulting application rate of N, P and K in pounds/acre. Manure application shall not exceed agronomic rates or to build N, P and K levels beyond the soil capability of holding and utilizing them for crop use, for the prevention of leaching and potential non -point pollution problems, as determined by the Wright County Extension Educator and the Minnesota Extension Service. F. Land spreading agreements shall be provided MMG if the applicant does not own the minimum acreage to apply animal waste and the land application agreement must be signed by all owners of the property. G. Methods used to control or mitigate odor impact upon neighboring properties. 10 H. Any other additional information as contained in the application and requested by the City or MPCA. I. A plan for proper closure of the facility including an estimated cost of the same. 20-38-7: FEEDLOT SETBACKS: A. Existing Feedlots: Lawfully established feedlots existing prior to (effective date of ordinance) may be continued in the location existing on such date and are exempt from the setback requirements of this Chapter. Expansions to existing feedlots shall be in compliance with the setback provisions for new feedlots as established by Section 20-38-7.B below. Legal, non- conforming feedlots may be expanded provided the degree of setback non -conformity is not increased and all other applicable standards of operation specified in this Chapter are satisfactorily met. B. New Feedlots: All new feedlots shall comply with each and every one of the following setback requirements: 1. Shorelands. No new feedlot shall be located within the Shoreland Districts of the City of Otsego as defined by Section 20-71 of this Chapter unless otherwise permitted by the MPCA. 2. Floodplains. No new feedlot shall be located within the one hundred (100) year floodplain area based on flood insurance rate maps and the flood insurance study for the City of Otsego. 3. Wells. No new feedlot shall be located within the following distances of private wells, other than those of the feedlot owner or operator, and public wells. 11 Immediate Urban New feedlots New feedlots Service Area prohibited prohibited Long Range Urban Service Area 500 feet* 2,500 feet Rural Service Area 500 feet* 2,500 feet * Setbacks may be reduced with written permission of the private wells operator. NOTE: See Otsego Comprehensive Plan for service district boundary designations. 4. Steep Slopes. No new feedlot involving open lots or partial confinement buildings shall be located within three hundred (300) feet of the crown of a steep slope as defined by this Chapter. 5. Public Parks. No new feedlot shall be located within one thousand (1,000) feet of a public park. 6. Drainage Ditches. No new feedlot shall be located within three hundred (300) feet of a County, City or private drainage ditch. 7. Private Residences. No new feedlot shall be located within the following distances of any residence other than the feedlot land owner or operator. 12 Immediate Urban Service Area Long Range Urban Service Area Rural Service Area New Feedlots Prohibited 500 feet* 500 feet* * Setbacks may be reduced with written permission of the residents or owner. NOTE: See Otsego Comprehensive Plan for service district boundary delineations. 8. Church, School or Similar Facilities. No new feedlot shall be located within one thousand three hundred twenty (1,320) feet of any church, school or similar public facility. 13 20-38-8: MANURE STOCKPILE/APPLICATION SETBACKS: The following manure stockpile and application setbacks are required for all new and existing feedlots: 14 MMG Page 38 Manure Application Category Stock Surface/ Irrigation Applied Incorporated or Infected Piles Public lake. river. 300 feet 100 feet -lake 300 or stream 50 feet- river/stream feet Public streets* 25 feet- 10 feet 25 surface 300 feet - feet irrigation Platted 300 feet- 300 feet 300 Subdivisions** surface 1.000 feet - feet irrigation Municipal wells 200 feet 200 feet 300 feet Private wells 200 feet 200 feet 200 feet Public or private 300 feet 100 feet 300 ditch feet Residence other 300 feet- 300 feet** 300 than landowner or surface** feet operator 1,000 feet - irrigation *As measured from the outer boundary of the right-of-way ** These separation distances shall only apply if the occupants of the residence specifically request it in writing of the operator. 14 MMG Page 38 -38-9: CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS: A. Requirement: A conditional use permit shall be obtained in a manner described in Section 20-4 of this Chapter whenever: 1. The proposed expansion, or modification of an existing feedlot is located within a Shoreland, Floodplain, or Wild and Scenic District. 2. A new feedlot exceeding three hundred (300) animal units is proposed. 3. The expansion of an existing feedlot is proposed where the cumulative total exceeds three hundred (300) animal units. 4. A lagoon system, an earthen basin or any other outdoor liquid storage structure is proposed for the storage or treatment of animal waste. B. Standards for Conditional Use Permits: To protect public health, safety and welfare, the City shall impose (but not be limited to the following conditions: 1. Trees and/or shrubs are planted, as determined necessary by the City Council, for use as a wind break but not so as to interfere with the design and functioning of the feedlot operation. 2. All provisions of the Manure Utilization Plan as outlined in Section 20-38-5 of this Chapter are satisfactorily met. 3. All pollution control measures outlined in Section 20-38-5 of this Chapter are satisfactorily met. 4. As required by State regulations, the applicant shall provide adequate security to ensure compliance with any or all conditions of the permit, proper handling and storage of manure, 15 and proper closure of the facility. The amount of said security shall be contained in a written agreement between the permittee and the City. 5. All applicable setback requirements of Sections 20-38-7 and 20-38-8 of this Chapter are satisfactorily met. 6. All feedlots shall be operated in a nuisance -free manner consistent with the regulations of the city and Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPGA). 7. Approval of the conditional use permit shall be contingent upon the successful acquisition of a Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPGA) permit. 8. The use is consistent with applicable provisions of Section 26, 27 and 51 of this Chapter. 9. The provisions of Section 20-4-2.F of this Chapter are considered and determined to be satisfied. 10. All conditions of approval of the conditional use permit shall be recorded against the property. 20-38-10: STANDARDS FOR EARTHEN STORAGE BASINS, LAGOONS AND OTHER MANURE STORAGE AREAS: Earthen basins, lagoons and other manure storage areas shall be constructed in compliance with Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) requirements. 20-38-11: FACILITY CLOSURE: A. Responsible Parties: The landowner, owner and operator of any animal feedlot shall be responsible for the ongoing management of manure and the final closure of the facility include the cleaning of buildings and the emptying and proper disposal of manure from all manure holding facilities. 16 B. Environmental Financial Assurance: Financial security shall be posted with the City in the form of escrow, bond, or letter of credit in an amount established by State Rules or Regulations, or as amended, in order to assure proper closure of the facility. C. Closure Plan: If a permitted feedlot operation using a manure storage system ceases operation, the owner shall submit to the City and MPCA a closure plan. 1. The plan shall be submitted at least sixty (60) days prior to the final day of operation of the manure storage system. The plan shall be prepared by a professional engineer registered in the State of Minnesota, or a person recognized as qualified for such work by the MPCA. 2. Closure of the operation may be postponed for a period of twelve (12) months if the property is posted for sale. 3. Manure storage system closure shall include the removal of the sludge in the facilities and its disposal by proper land application at agronomic rates or by other legally permissible method. 4. Manure storage system closure shall also include filling in a basin with material from the dikes or other earthen material that may be available. Only material allowed to be buried under federal, state and local regulations may be used as fill. It is necessary to fill in the basin to prevent it from being a safety hazard when it fills in with rain and snow -melt waters. 5. All wastes from the feedlot operation and its waste control system shall be removed and disposed of on land or in some other manner which is legally 17 permissible as soon as practical, but no more than six (6) months, and in accordance with the approved plan in order to promote and protect public health. 6. Each time ownership to the facility changes, the new owner must notify the MPCA and the City in writing within sixty (60) days of the transfer of ownership that the approved plan has been read and is understood and that all provisions of the plan will be implemented. The new owner must also provide the City with written assurance that they have assumed all obligations undertaken by previous operators or owners, including posting of any necessary security. 7. If the new ownership is to continue to operate the facility, closure shall not be necessary. 20-38-12: ABANDONMENT: Owners and operators of feedlots, either at the time of abandonment or after, shall have joint and several liability for clean up, closure or remediation of abandoned feedlot sites. Section 7. Section 20-51-5.D of the Otsego City Code (A-1 District Conditional Uses) is hereby amended to read as follows: D. Animal feedlots as regulated by Section 38 of this Chapter. Section 8. This Ordinance shall become effective immediately upon its passage and publication. ADOPTED by the Otsego City Council this day of 1996. CITY OF OTSEGO By: ATTEST: Norman F. Freske, Mayor By: Elaine Beatty, City Clerk/Zoning Administrator 19 Hakanson Anderson Assoc., Inc. May 22, 1996 Ms. Elaine Beatty City of Otsego 8899 Nashua Avenue NE Otsego, MN 55330 RE: Alden C.U.P. Dear Ela;.^.e: 1 I _ 3601 Thurston Avenue Anoka, Minnesota 55303 612/427-5860 Fax 612/427-3401 We have reviewed Mr. Kirmis's comments dated 5/13/96 on the above mentioned C.U.P. and have the following comments and concerns: • Drainage Issues: A field tile constructed a number of years ago helped drain some wetland areas east of the property in question for farming. When Quale Avenue was constructed the tile line crossed under the new road. Ultimately the tile broke on the west side of the street in the Alden property causing washouts and sink holes. The City was asked at least twice to review the damage caused by the broken tile. The Council based on recommendation by the Attorney and myself determined that the problem was not a City problem but a landowner problem. The City told the landowners to get together and fix the problem. In my discussion with Mr. Alden about the addition of the garage he was told that I could not recommend to the City to allow further construction on the lot until the tile line was repaired permanently. Any further erosion on the Alden lot caused by the broken tile would cause concerns due to lose of soils structure. It would be difficult to allow placing additional structures on the lot with this type of potential soil failure. The bluff line of the wetland is also close to the proposed structure and therefore construction, if approved, would need to follow strict erosion and sedimentation control practices. The City could not be a party to the construction and ownership of the tile and the landowner will remain responsible for the the maintenance. Engineers Landscape Architects Surveyors Ms. Elaine Beatty May 22, 1996 Page 2 The traveled street is not located in the center of the street as it should be. The Street was constructed prior to the Township becoming a City. The County had control of the plating at that time. It is unfortunate since the Alden house is placed closer to the R.O.W. than required current setbacks require. To my knowledge there has been no petition for street improvement by the landowners for relocation and paving of the street. The City Council normally will not act on improvement unless petitions are received for residential improvements. It would be my recommendation that when the property to the east of Quale Avenue develops the should City consider relocation the street and R.O.W. at that time. • Site Drawing The landowner must provide a survey drawing showing the field located features on the lot including house, proposed garage, street, well and septic tanks/drainfield and reconstructed tile line. The drawing must be completed by a professional surveyor who can certify to its accuracy. The owner should locate the present and an alternate drainfield area on the property. VVe also need the background data on the present septic system; date of installation, any upgrades down since installation and any problem with the present system. We recommend the owner be granted a variance to set back for the garage with the satisfactory completion of the about and other staff concern. '17 Anderson Assoc., Inc. Ms. Elaine Beatty May 22, 1996 ,'age 3 If you have any questions, please contact me. Sincerely, HAKANSO,W ANDERSON ASSOCIATES, INC. L r nce oshak, PE a kas cc: Bob Kirmis, NAC Andy MacArthur, Attorney Jerry Olsen, Building Inspector ot2152.eb 7 Hakanson Anderson Assoc., Inc. Hakanson 1 Anderson Assoc., Inc. May 22, 1996 Elaine Beatty, Clerk City of Otsego 8899 Nashua Avenue Otsego, MN 55330 RE: Mining Permit No. 5 -VFW Site Dear Elaine: 3601 Thurston Avenue Anoka, Minnesota 55303 612/427-5860 Fax 612/427-3401 Hakanson Anderson Associates, Inc. has reviewed a permit application for a proposed mining activity in Otsego, Minnesota. The application was submitted by SM Hentges & Sons, Inc. The Owner is the Elk River/Rogers VFW. SM Hentges & Sons, Inc. will be the operator of the mining activity. With regards to the application and associated submittal documents, we offer the following: 1 . The application lists the legal description as follows: " That part of the NW'/4 of the SWY4, Section 26, Township 121, Range 23, Wright County, Minnesota, which lies westerly of the Right of Way of State TH 101.11 The accompanying documents depict the property in a similar fashion to that described above. Our understanding is that the VFW split this land and zoned the west half INS, Institutional and the east half remained A-1, Agricultural. The submittal documents must be revised to show this land split. Mining is listed as a conditional use in the A-1 district. Mining is not listed as a conditional use in the INS district. Any mining activities must be limited to that portion of the VFW site that is zoned A-1 agricultural. 1. 100 year flood elevations, floodway, and flood fringe areas are not shown. A review of the FEMA maps indicate that this area is out of any known flood related areas. Engineers Landscape Architects Surveyors Elaine Beatty Page 2 May 22, 1996 2. Wetlands have not been delineated. A review of NWI maps indicate that no wetlands exist on this site. The Owner must have a Wetland Delineation performed and file a "No Loss" form with the City. 3. A certificate of survey was not provided. The boundaries of the site are depicted on the site plan with bearings and distances. A legal description must be submitted for inclusion into a findings of facts. 4. Location of temporary or permanent fences and gates is not shown. Ingress and egress to and from the mining site will be limited to the Highway 101 Right of Way. Access from 72nd Street NE and Quaday Avenue NE is prohibited. Leaving the site unfenced should not pose a public safety hazard. 5. Permanent or temporary structures, parking areas, and vehicular circulation plan not shown. All staging, parking, facilities, etc, will be in the Highway 101 Right of Way. Traffic generated from the mining activity will be to the Highway 101 Right of Way. No parked vehicles stored equipment or facilities will be permitted on this site. All equipment must be stored on the Highway 101 Right of Way when not in use. 6. Screening is not shown. The work will be performed in conjunction with, and adjacent to, the Highway 101 project. Closure of the mining site will be performed in conjunction with Highway 101 site restoration. The mining operation should not significantly increase the visual impacts caused by the Highway 101 work. IHakanson Anderson Assoc., Inc. Elaine Beatty Page 3 May 22, 1996 7. Cross sections shown in one direction only. Cross sections were shown in the east/west direction only, and conform to the Highway 101 sections. This appears adequate to view the final product. The proposed grading appears to blend in with the surrounding grades. 8. Traffic control plan not submitted. Traffic will flow to and from the Highway 101 Right of Way only. No access to other public streets will be allowed. 9. Right of Entry not submitted. The narrative indicates a Right of Entry will be submitted upon approval of the Mining Permit. This must be made a condition of issuing the permit. 10. Agency comment letters have not been received. Comment letters must be received as portion of this project. Although no negative comments are expected, the courtesy should be extended to the agencies listed in the ordinance. 1 . The site is adjacent to the Highway 101 Right of Way. An approximate 600 foot wide buffer exists between Quaday Avenue and the limits of the mining activity. The mining activity extends south to 72nd Street. The construction should blend into Mn/DOT's construction on 72nd Street. 2. Land associated with mining permit #4, owned and operated by Ed Dauphinais, is located directly south of the land involved with this permit. There have not been any known negative impacts resulting from the land use itself. No trucks will haul on public roads. Truck hauling generally poses a significant impact to roadways. Permit #5 avoids this impact by hauling to the Highway 101 Right of Way. 3. Erosion control measures are not shown in the 72nd Street ditch. We assume this is due to the Mn/DOT work, and that Mn/DOT will protect this area. Hakanson Anderson 1111 Assoc., Inc. Elaine Beatty Page 4 May 22, 1996 4. The area of drainage will not change significantly as a result of the mining operation. Short term drainage is addressed by temporary drainage ponds. The final grades will be significantly reduced. This will reduce the runoff and runoff rate from the site. 5. The mining permit considered future work to be completed by Mn/DOT on Highway 101 and 72nd Street. The mining permit conforms to grading proposed by Mn/DOT. 6. The existing access to the VFW site, and the extent of the access should be shown on the plan. This will aid in verifying that access to the mining site cannot be gained from Quaday Avenue. 7. A NPDES permit must be obtained, as the area disturbed exceeds five acres. 8. A letter of credit to the City must be deposited by the Owner. The letter of credit must be adequate to guarantee yardage fees and also site closure. 9. The mining site will access the Highway 101 Right of Way. Any accesses to Highway 101 must be obliterated after completion of mining activities. 10. A review of the VFW site plans indicate that the mining activity will not affect site grading proposed by the VFW. The proposed VFW on-site septic system should not be affected by the mining activity. 1 1 . Any changes to the permit, plans, or narrative must be approved by the City. • SING1� 1. Yardage Fees Yardage fees for the first phase mining activity must be guaranteed. The submittal narrative indicates that the first phase of mining will generate 100,000 CY of material. The City's fee is $0.05/CY. This equates to $5,000 to be guaranteed by the mining site owner. IHakanson '■■ Anderson Assoc., Inc. Elaine Beatty Page 5 May 22, 1996 2. Site Closure Fees The City must be protected against failure of the Owner to close the site. This also protects the City if the Owner abandons the site. Our estimate of this potential cost to the City is as follows: Grading $9,000 Revegetation 6,000 Engineering 1,500 Legal 1,000 Administrative 500 Total $18.000 Section 20-4-2.F of the Zoning Ordinance directs the Planning Commission and City Council to consider seven possible adverse effects of the proposed conditional use. The seven effects and our comments regarding them are: a. The proposed action's consistency with the specific policies and provisions of the official City Comprehensive Plan. Mining is conditionally permitted in the A-1 Zoning District. The mining operation is a temporary use. As such, closure of the mining site will allow the area to resume agricultural activities. b. The proposed use's compatibility with present and future land uses of the area. The land adjacent to the site to the west is zoned INS, Institutional. The Owner of that property is also the Owner of the mining property. Adverse effects on the INS property would be self imposed. Other uses surrounding the site area are primarily agricultural and should not be adversely affected by the mining operation. The mining Ordinance sets standards for fencing, appearance and screening, noise, hours of operation, dust control, air and water pollution, and other such standards which must be complied with. These standards must be implemented the mining site. This should aid in protecting adjacent landowners. Hakanson Anderson Assoc., Inc. Elaine Beatty Page 6 May 22, 1996 C. The proposed use conforms with all performance standards contained herein (i.e. parking, loading, noise, etc.). Conformance with the performance standards of the Mining Ordinance, except a modified by the Planning Commission, should be required of the applicant. d. The proposed use's effect on the ar-a in which it is proposed. The effect on the surrounding area should be temporary. The performance standards of the Mining Ordinance must be complied with to insure the effects will be minimal. e. The proposed use's impact upon the property values of the area in which it is proposed. The Closure/Rehabilitation Plan details the future grading and vegetation proposed for the site. The proposed grading should blend with the general topography of this area. f. Traffic generation by the proposed use in relation to capabilities of streets serving the property. Traffic will not be generated by this activity onto City or other public streets. No negative impacts to public streets should result from this activity. g. The proposed use's impact upon existing public services and facilities including parks, schools, streets and utilities, and its potential to overburden the City's service capacity. The mining use should not burden any existing public services or facilities. The confined nature of the operation will limit possible impacts to public services or facilities. We recommend approval of Mining Permit No. 5 with the following conditions: le -S-1 Hakanson Anderson Assoc., Inc. Elaine Beatty Page 7 May 22, 1996 1. A legal description of the property is submitted and that the plans and narrative are revised to depict the correct boundaries and zoning of the mining site and adjacent VFW site. 2. All mining activities and peripheral activities are conducted on the portion of the site that is zoned A-1, Agricultural. 3. A statement in the narrative indicating that t his site is not in any known flood -plain is provided. This must be substantiated by the Owner's Engineer. 4. A statement in the narrative indicating that this site does not contain any WCA Wetlands. This must be substantiated by the Owner's Engineer. A Wetland Certificate must be obtained by the Owner from the City. 5. The location of all existing and proposed features of the VFW site be included in the plans. . 6. A written Right of Entry is submitted. 7. Agency comment letters are received and any comments on these letters be adhered to by the Owner. 8. A NPDES permit is obtained by the Owner. 9. A letter of credit in the amount of $23,000 is provided by the Owner to guarantee mining fees and site closure. 10. All fees currently due the City are paid by the Owner. 1 1 . Any accesses to the site from Highway 101 are obliterated after mining activities are completed. 12. Any changes to the permit, plans, or narrative are approved by the City. Hakanson Anderson Assoc., Inc. Elaine Beatty Page 8 May 22, 1996 If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me. Sincerely, HAKANSON ANDERSON ASSOCIATES, INC. -4�c-vm__�f�_>> Kevin P. Kielb, PE Jig cc: Lawrence G. Koshak, PE Elaine Beatty, Clerk Andy MacArthur, Attorney Bob Kirmis, NAC Elk River/Rogers VFW SM Hentges & Sons, Inc. John Oliver & Associates, Inc. OT901 .eO 1 ■■■ Haka n ,■. Anderson Assoc., Inc.