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.