The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2.C. Large Scale Mineral Extraction Ordinance Update 4 ROSEIvtOL[NT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 5, CITY COUNCIL City Council Work Session Meeting: April 11, 2012 AGENDA ITEM: Large Scale Mineral Extraction AGENDA SECTION: Ordinance Update Discussion PREPARED BY Eric Zweber, Senior Planner AGENDA NO 2 C • • ATTACHMENTS: March 27 Planning Commission Executive Summary; Redlined Large Scale Mineral Extraction - Ordinance; Dakota Aggregates LLC Comment APPROVED BY: Memorandum°dated March 23; Written Questions from Commissioner Demuth; Excerpt from the Draft March 27 Planning" Commission Meeting Minutes. p hi RECOMMENDED ACTION: Discussion t . ISSUE • The Planning Commission has conducted two public hearings (February 28 and March 27) to review the Large Scale Mineral Extraction (LSME) Ordinance. Following the public hearings, the Planning Commission voted to recommended approval of LSME Ordinance, but the vote failed with 3 ayes and 3. nays. The Planning Commission then voted to table the LSME Ordinance to the Apri124 Planning Commission meeting and directed staff to revise the + Ordinance to add language` to strengthen the connection between the issues identified in the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for the mining proposa1 and the conditions that are placed in the Interim Use Permit and the Annual Operating Permit. SUMMARY The City Council has requested updates on the LSME Ordinance. This Executive Summary will address the three remaining issues of contention regarding the ordinance: the Planning Commission request for additional connections between the EIS and permit connections and the two remaining Dakota Aggregates requests. Following the three to three tie vote for the Ordinance, Chair Powell asked if any of the Commissioners that voted against the Ordinance would state if there were any changes that could be made to the Ordinance that could allow them to vote for the Ordinance. Commissioner Miller stated that he is concerned that a minin permit would not be required to resolve the issues that the EIS identifies. Staff stated that they would identify areas to add additional language to the Ordinance for the April 24 Planning Commission meeting. The March 27 draft Ordinance addresses an EIS in a number of ways. Section D. 2. b. requires that an EIS is conducted that minimizes the adverse impacts from mining. Additionally, Section E. (Application Requirements) lists elements from the EIS that need to be submitted by the applicant and Section H. (Performance Standards) list the subjects reviewed within an EIS and how those issues must be addressed. Staff is working with the City Attorney to develop language that strengthens and clarifies the connection between the EIS and the Ordinance requirements. Dakota Aggregates provided a memorandum dated March 23 that describes their two remaining requests. This memorandum is attached to the Executive Summary. The two remaining issues are the size of landscaping that is to be installed and a request that the Collector or Arterial Roads and Trunk Utilities be adopted into the Comprehensive Plan before notice to reclaim these areas is given to the mining operator. Staff disagrees °with these two requests although the draft ordinance does provide some flexibility in the timing of landscape installation and also reduces standards in areas where the landscaping is °not anticipated as a permanent feature. Staff does not support a reduction in the size of any landscaping that would be installed on berms that are planned to remain for longer than fifteen years. The size of landscaping is described in the Zoning Ordinance as a 2 to 2.5 caliper inch deciduous tree or a six (6) foot tall conifer tree and all developers, homeowners, and business owners need to meet this same standard. Staff does not support holding the mining operators to a lower standard. Further, staff is uncomfortable legislating a reduction of landscape standards by having the applicant install landscaping off site, which may be beneficial to individual property owners but not the public as a whole. The language recommended by Dakota Aggregates envisions the mining operator installing landscaping on property they don't own or control (non- mined) to mitigate mining impacts to individual property owners and benefiting by landscape reductions on the mining site. To provide some flexibility for landscaping, staff will point out two provisions within the Ordinance. First, Section H. 16. b. allows lesser landscaping on berms that would remain for less than fifteen (15) years. Second, Section H. 16. c. was added since February 28 to allow the City Council the ability to stagger the timing for landscaping installation even if the berms are installed. In other words, Dakota Aggregates has indicated that they may install a significant length of berm early in the mining process because they will have ample black dirt. As initially written, the ordinance would have required installation of permanent landscaping on the berms, when installed. Under the new language, the berms can be installed and landscaping installation can be phased over time based upon a plan submitted and approved at the time of the mining permit issuance. Staff is not supportive of any further reduction in,the landscaping standard for the minin operation. Staff is concerned that the mining operation will prevent the orderlydevelopment of the City and in particular to the future development of UMore. -»In discussions between staff and Dakota Aggregates, a verbal agreement was reached to address that concern in which the City can provide two years notice to Dakota Aggregate to make a corridor available for either a road or utility'to go through their mining operations that would support the development of the neighboring property. With the two years, Dakota Aggregates would modify their mining plans, remove as much aggregate as possible within the corridor, and then reclaim the corridor to the reclamation plan grades. Dakota Aggregates would` retain the ability to.mine the areas adjacent to the corridor. Dakota Aggregates has a concern -that a future City Council has the ability to limit their mining operation if that City Council identifies the need for a trunk utility corridor or a collector or arterial road and issues Dakota Aggregates a notice that the mining must be completed in those corridors within twenty four (24) months. Dakota Aggregates requests language that the current City Council must adopt the trunk utilities } 2 r } and collector or arterial roads into the Comprehensive Plan before a future City Council could issue the twenty four (24) month notice at` the time of the initial permit approval. To try and find a middle ground, staff has added language in Sections J.,2. and J. 3. that allows the City Council the option to add a minimum amount of time to mine before a 24,month notice is issued, but staff does not support the language that Dakota Aggregates proposed. The proposed language would lengthen the `time between the identified need to the utility or the road and when the City can begin construction by at least four months, but it could be even longer if the City or Metropolitan Council approval process requires additional time Staff does not support any requirement that lengthens the time between 'the City identifying development infrastructure needs and the construction °of that infrastructure. Additionally, the proposed language may actually result in a less desirable outcome for Dakota Aggregates. The staff proposed language allows a future City Council to work with the mining operator to provide for the utility and roadway corridors while maintaining mining around those corridors. If a future City Council believes that the delay in development caused by the mining operation was unsuitable, that future. City Council would need to consider rezoning the property or revoking the entire mining Interim Use Permit to provide for orderly development. That shut down the entire mining operation and therefore be counter to the current desire of Dakota Aggregates. ADDITIONAL ATTACHMENTS Additionally, staff has provided the written comments from Commissioner Demuth as an attachment to this - Executive Summary. Also attached is the Planning Commission Executive Summary and draft Planning Commission Meeting Minutes that explain how staff addressed these comments. Commissioner Demuth stated that her no vote for the LSME Ordinance was because staff did not address all of her comments in the Ordinance. RECOMMENDATION No action required at this time The item will come before the City Council following a Planning Commission recommendation. R ' t � S G 4 F. 3 d .. � 2 4 ROSR\4OUt\JT EXECUTIVE S UMMARY PLANNING COMMISSION Planning Commission Meeting Dates: February 28 and March 27, 2012 , Tentative City Council Meeting Date: April 17, 2012 AGENDA ITEM: Case 12 -02 -TA Request by Dakota AGENDA SECTION: Aggregates for a Text Amendment to Allow Public Hearing Large Scale Mineral Extraction PREPARED BY: Eric Zweber, Senior Planner AGENDA NO. 5.b. ATTACHMENTS. Proposed Large Scale Mineral Extraction Ordinance; Redlined Large Scale Mineral APPROVED BY: Extraction Ordinance; Large Scale Mineral Extraction Overlay District. Map; Phasing Plan 9/28/2011; City Attorney's E-mail Explaining Interim Uses; George and Alexandria Geogleris Comment Letter; John and Karen Woolery Comment Letter; V. Larry Smith Comment Letter; Notes for City Meeting Submitted by Kris Johnson; Jordan Millington Comment Letter;. Dakota County Comment Letter dated March 19; Written Questions from Commissioner Demuth; Dakota Aggregates LLC Comment Memorandum dated March 23; Modifications requested by Dakota Aggregates dated March 13. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to Recommend that the City Council Adopt an Ordinance Relating to Large Scale Mineral Extraction; Amending Rosemount City Code, Sections 1,1 -1 -4, 11-4 -1 and 11 -10 -4 and Adding New Section 11- 10 -4 -1. SUMMARY The University of Minnesota is proposing to develop the 5,000 acre UMore property (3,000 acres in Rosemount and 2,000 acres in Empire Township) into a mixed use community of up to 30,000 people. Before the development occurs, the University and their partner Dakota Aggregates are proposing to mine the western 1,600 acres of UMore over a 40 year period (25 years in Rosemount and thefinal 15 years`in Empire). The Rosemount Zoning Ordinance does not permit mining in UMore. Dakota Aggregates has requested a Zoning Ordinance Text Amendment to allow mining in the western half of UMore. Staffhas prepared a Large Scale Mineral Extraction Ordinance that would regulate the mining request. On February 28, the Planning Commission' conducted a public hearing for the text amendment proposed to the Zoning Ordinance to.allow Large Scale Mineral Extraction as an interim use within the AG: Agricultural zoning district. Three letters were submitted to the City before the meeting from residents, six residents . spoke at the meeting including one that submitted his written notes, and Dakota Aggregates submitted a comment letter about their concerns with specific sections of the proposed Ordinance. On March 13, the Planning Commission reviewed these comments at the Work Session and provided comments on what sections of the Ordinance to amend. Since the Work Session, Dakota County has submitted a letter containing suggested topics to consider when creating the Ordinance. Staff has made revisions to Ordinance based on these comments and has attached to this Executive Summary the revised Ordinance and a redlined Ordinance that shows the changes that has been made since the February 28 Public Hearing. REVISIONS TO THE ORDINANCE SINCE FEBRUARY,28 As a result of the comments received regarding the Large Scale Mineral Extraction Ordinance, staff has made nineteen different types of revisions to the Ordinance. Attached to this Executive Summary is a redlined version of the Ordinance to call out the specific changes. In the following sections of the Executive Summary, staff explains the comments received and how the comments were addressed. The general topics of the nineteen types of changes are as follows: R • Consistent labeling of the "Annual Operating Permit" • Adding "Haul Road" and "Haul Route" definitions to identify that haul roads are private streets and haul routes are public streets • Labeling all setback and mining project boundaries as the "EIS boundary" • Separating the hydrogeological study and groundwater monitoring plan from the reclamation plan • Removing the timeline requirement for building'removal from the application requirements • Adding stockpiling and machinery used daily as accessory uses • Added language that the ancillary uses can continue when the mining moves into Empire Township • Clarifies that more than one concrete plant can be permitted and that the primary concrete plant can have some outdoor equipment • Added the City Council the option to allow the outdoor casting of oversized concrete products • Clarifies how the ratio of recycle aggregate products to native material is measured • Added the City Council the option to allow stationary conveyors up to 65 feet in height • Clarifies how the landscaping opacity is measured • Added language that a high wind day is defined as a National Weather Service "wind advisory" which is 30 mph or higher for a sustained period of one hour or more • Added the City Council the ability to stagger the timing of the instillation of landscaping • Made the lighting level standard the same as other zoning districts • ,Clarifies that the operator will need to meet requirements of all applicable federal, state, and • county regulations • Clarifies that the annual operating permit would allow for two 80 acre areas for total of no more than 160 acres of mining open at any one time • Added,th&City Council the option to allow the operator a minimum amount of time before a trunk utility or collector or arterial road is constructed through the mining area • Clarifies the types of financial surety 2 s J BACKGROUND Dakota Aggregates is proposing to mine approximately 1,250 acres of the UMore property for sand and gravel, as well as use approximately 200 additional acres for ancillary facilities complementary to the aggregate use, such as a concrete and asphalt plant. About 550 of the 1,250 acres being proposed for mining are located in Rosemount and 160 of 200 acres of the ancillary facilities are located within Rosemount. The ancillary facilities including aggregate processing, asphalt plant, concrete plant, and maintenance facility which are proposed to remain in Rosemount for the entirety of the mine. It is estimated they will be located in Rosemount for 40 years, several years after the 550 acres of mining within Rosemount has expired and mining activity moves south°into Empire Township. The scale and scope of the mine proposed by,the University is significantly more impactful than the current mining activity in the community. The intentions of the University are what prompted the City's assessment of the current mining ordinance and resulted in the ordinance currently before the Planning Commission. LARGE SCALE MINERAL EXTRACTION ORDINANCE Staff prepared a Text Amendment to regulate mining on the UMore,property. Staff has discussed particulars of the potential mining operation with the mining consortium, Dakota Aggregates and the University over the last several years. Much of what appears in the proposed ordinance relates to issues that were raised by the public, staff, the City Council and even the operators themselves. The intent of the ordinance is to permit a large scale mining operation but minimize and mitigate potential off -site impacts associated with the activity. Within the ordinance, staff is attempting to document operational procedures that have already been agreed to by Dakota Aggregates. In some cases the regulations are over and above what Dakota Aggregates is agreeing to and the Planning Commission and City Council will need to decide if the proposed regulation is reasonable or too onerous. While this ordinance is prompted by the University proposal, the Planning Commission should try to evaluate the ordinance on its own merits, not based upon what you know about the proposed mining operation. If the City Council approves this ordinance, the mining permit, specific to the UMore property will be reviewed and analyzed against the adopted ordinance. It is anticipated that permit review would begin in May or June of 2012. Attached to this Executive Summary is the proposed Text Amendment that would adopt the Large Scale Mineral' Extraction Ordinance and modify the existing mineral extraction standards into a Small Scale Mineral Extraction Ordinance. The proposed Text Amendment is twenty one (21) pages. Below, staff will summarize the content and purpose of the various sections of the Text Amendment. Purpose Statement Section 1 of the Ordinance explains the purpose and intent of allowing large scale mining. This section will not be adopted into the ordinance text but would be used by future staff, City Council, or commissions to understand the background of why'the text amendment was approved. Interim Use in the Agricultural Zoning District The text amendment must address what zoning district the mining can occur within and if a.- separate permit is need to conduct the mining. Section 4 of the Ordinance would add Large Scale Mineral Extraction as an interim use in the AG — Agricultural zoning district. Section 3 removes mineral 3 extraction as a conditional use and Section 4 replaces it with`Small Scale Mineral Extraction as an interim use. If is important that mineral extraction is an interim use instead of a conditional use. Mining is interim because the land will be used for another use following the mining completion. A conditional use could continue forever. Definitions and - Changes to Existing Mineral Extraction Ordinance Section 2 of the Ordinance describes the difference between Large and Small Scale Mineral Extraction and Section 5 makes the revisions necessary to the existing Mineral Extraction Ordinance to make it the Small Scale Mineral Extraction Ordinance. The five existing mines in Rosemount will still follow the same regulations as they do today. Section 6 describes the area in which any new Small Scale Mineral Extraction operations could occur. Overlay District, Review Process and 'Application Requirements Section 7, A through E'describes the area within Rosemount where it is allowed to submit for a Large Scale Mineral Extraction, permit (south of County Road 42, west of Akron Avenue, north of County Road 46, and east of Biscayne Avenue), the specific definitions related to mining, the process for permit review and approval, and the material needed to be submitted to evaluate the permit conditions. Separate Interim Use for Ancillary Uses =Section 7, G describes the ancillary uses that would be allowed (concrete and asphalt plants, equipment repair shop, concrete casting yard, and aggregate processing) adjacent to the mining and the specific standards that these uses must meet. The performance standards for these ancillary uses are different than the mining operation itself and separate permits are required for these ancillary uses. Performance Standards , Section 7, H describes the performance standards the mining operation will need to follow. The issues described here include hours of operations, noise and dust standards, access routes, screening standards, topsoil handling, water protection, and lighting. This section of the ordinance addresses the majority of the issues raised at the neighborhood meeting conducted by the University of Minnesota and Dakota Aggregates. The standards are similar, but not identical, to the standards of the Small Scale Mineral Extraction Ordinance. It can be anticipated that a good portion of the public comments offered at the public hearing will be specific to this section of the ordinance. Reclamation, Restoration, and Rehabilitation Section 7, J describes the requirement that the mining operation must conduct to return the finished mine to a condition that would be suitable for urban development. Staff is particularly concerned with the detail of this section because this section needs to foresee issues that may not arise until 25 or more years from when a mining permit is issued. If these standards are not sufficient, then the urban development that follows may be of a lesser quality than - if the UMore property were developed as it exists today. Annual Operating Permit Section 7, K describes how the ai nual.operating permit would be reviewed and issued. The annual operating permit may be analogous to a liquor license for a bar. The overall Large Scale Mineral Extraction permit will describe the complete mining operation, while the annual permit deals specifically with the area being mined that year Similar' to how a bar could request a liquor license modification for adding an outdoor patio and the Council wduld determine conditions specific to the patio, the annual 4 s , s , permit would allow the Council to evaluate the specific mining areas mined that year. However, the Commission and Council should be aware that any anticipated concerns or regulations should be set' - out as conditions of the mining permit. By being more conservative during the initial review; the City can modify specific standards during the annual operational permit review. Written Comments from Residents Staff has received five written comments regarding the Ordinance proposal. One letter was in support of mining and" one letter was opposition, questioning if there will be a decrease in their property value. The other three letters expressed concerns about the volume of traffic, noise and dust. The Ordinance does not address traffic volume directly but does limit the truck traffic to collector or arterial roads. Noise is addressed in draft Ordinance sections H.2. limitation on the location of accesses; H.6. addressing hours of operation; H.8. stating that noise must be below the PCA and EPA standards; and H.11. stating that the use of explosives are prohibited. Mitigative measures are proposed to address dust associated with the mining activity. These measures are found in draft Ordinance sections H.2. limitation on the location of accesses; H. 3. requiring setbacks to mining activities; H.5. addressing screening and berming; H.9. requiring the first 150 feet of the access road to be paved; H.10. allowing the City to require a dust control plan; H16. requiring land to be vegetated when the mining is complete; and 1.3. limiting the amount of land open to mining to a total of 160 acres. Oral Comments from the Public Hearing Six residents spoke during the public. hearing. A draft excerpt of the Planning Commission minutes is attached to this summary for reference. Beyond similar general comments as those received in the written comments, there were several very specific comments. The residents requested that screening should be measured for opacity in the winter; berms should 20 feet in height instead of 10 feet; landscaping be $ installed on the north side of County Road 42; and that the mining setback from Bloomfield should be 1,300 feet, and also asked about the current noise ordinance. Another resident commented that the current 42/52 interchange could not support the anticipated truck traffic. The following is staff responses to thespecific comments: • Staff does not support measuring the opacity in the winter because there will not be mining in the winter. Measuring`the opacity in the summer would be more appropriate since that is when the mining activity will occur. • Staff believes a berm 10 feet in height measured from the shoulder of the road is sufficient because this will shield all vehicles from view during the mining operation. Additionally, as mining occurs equipment and activity will move lower, as more gravel is removed from the site, further reducing visual impacts. • The City does not have a stand -alone noise ordinance but either uses PCA or EPA standards or limits the noise through hours of operation. To address potential noise impacts during the evening, the ordinance recommends mining must end by 7 pm. • Because the current process is development of an ordinance, it would not be appropriate through the ordinance to require landscaping on property outside of the mining site. This is something that will be discussed further through the permit process, should the ordinance be adopted. 5 ` a e 1 • The City and the County have the reconstruction of the County Road 42 and US Highway 52 interchange in our capital improvement plan (CIP) and have supported requests for State and Federal funding. • Per the draft ordinance, a 350 foot residential setback will apply to all residential buildings from the mining activity, including any future residential built in UMore. The City may require a greater setback from the Bloomfield neighborhood as part of the mining permit review'process. Dakota County Comment Letter The Dakota County Physical Development Director provided the City a letter with a number of suggested additions to the ordinance. The letter primarily deals with requirements that are in the County's existing Solid Waste or Hazardous Waste Ordinances or language from a proposed revision to the Solid Waste Ordinance. Staff discussed the letter with David Swenson, Dakota County Water Resources Director. Staff discussed that it may be better that the city reference compliance with the County °Ordinance requirements rather than cite specific, individual standards. This will capture any changes to the County ordinance amendments without requiring the City to modify our ordinance. Mr. Swenson agreed with that strategy and emphasized that the County letter was suggestions. In response, staff added Section H. 19. that states the operator must comply with applicable federal, state, and county regulations. Staff will review the suggestions,in the County letter during permit review to see if any of the specific language should be used within the annual operating permit. Written Questions from Commissioner Demuth Commissioner Demuth provided a letter to staff with some questions about the Ordinance. Many of the questions are similar to those submitted by Dakota County and staff's response is similar. Staff added language that the operator must follow all applicable federal, state and county rules. The result is that if { the federal, state or county government adopts new regulations, the City does not need to revise its. Ordinance. The regulation specific suggestions will be "reviewed during the permit review to determine if specific comments should be incorporated as a condition in the annual operating permit. Commissioner Demuth raised a few additional issues which are included as modifications to the Ordinance. It was pointed out that the hydrogeological study and groundwater monitoring plan were- included under the reclamation plan and that those plans would be used during the operation of the mine and should be separately listed as an application requirement. Staff agrees and made a format change to move the hydrogeological study and groundwater monitoring plan to Section E. 9 of the Ordinance. The only language changes were a refined purpose statement for the hydrogeological study and requiring that all wells within 300 feet of the EIS boundary be included in the study. Dakota Aggregates Comment Letter Dakota Aggregates submitted a letter on March 13 that requested a number of changes that were discussed during the Planning Commission Work Session and resulted in seventeen of the nineteen revisions to the Ordinance. As a result of these revisions, Dakota Aggregates provided a memorandum dated March 23 that describes their two remaining requests. This memorandum is attached to the Executive Summary. The two remaining issues are the size of landscaping that is to be installed and a requirement that the City Council must identify all trunk utility corridors and collector or arterial roadways within the first (initial) permit review and provide a minimum time that mining can occur before the utility or road is constructed., 6 Staff disagrees with these, two requests although the draft ordinance does provide some flexibility in the timing of landscape installation and also reduces standards iriareas where the landscaping is not anticipated as a permanent feature. Staff does not support a reduction in the size of any landscaping that would be installed on berms that are planned to remain for longer than fifteen years. The size of landscaping is described in the Zoning Ordinance as a 2 to 2.5 caliper inch deciduous tree or a six (6) foot tall conifer tree and all developers, homeowners, and business owners need to meet this same standard. Staff does not support holding the mining operator to a lower. standard. Further, staff is uncomfortable legislating a reduction of landscape standards by having the applicant install landscaping off site, which may be beneficial to individual property owner but not the public as a whole.,The language recommended by Dakota Aggregates envisions the mining operator installing landscaping on property they don't own or control (non- mined) to mitigate mining impacts to individual property owners and benefiting by landscape reductions on the mining site. To provide some flexibility for landscaping, staff will point out two provisions within the Ordinance. First, Section H. 16. b. allows lesser landscaping on berms that wouldremain for less than fifteen (15) years. Second, Section H. 16. c. was added since February 28 to allow the City Council the ability stagger the timing for landscaping insfallation even if the berms are installed. In other words, Dakota Aggregates has indicated that they may install a significant length of berm early in the mining process because they will have ample black dirt. As initially written, the ordinance would have required installation of permanent landscaping on the berms, when installed. Under the new language, the berms can be installed and landscaping installation can be phased over time based upon a plan subrnitted and approved at the time of the mining permit issuance. Staff is not supportive of any further reduction in the landscaping standard for the mining operation. Dakota Aggregates has a concern that a future City Coincil has,the ability to limit their mining operation if that City Council identifies the need for a truck utility corridor or a collector or arterial road and issues Dakota Aggregates a notice that the mining must be completed in those corridors within twenty'four (24) months. Dakota Aggregates requests language that`the current City Council must identify all the trunk utilities and collector or arterial roads and provided a minimum amount oftime before a future City Council could issue the twenty four (24) month notice at the time of the initial permit approval. The result is that the City must identify any and all transportation and utility corridors they might need for development in the next 40 years at the first mining operation permit. Even if future Comprehensive Plans designate additional corridors they would not be subject to the notice to vacate the corridor anticipated in the ordinance because they were not noted during the first mining permit issues. To try and find a middle ground, staff has added language in Sections J. 2. and J. 3. that allows the City Council the option to add a minimum amount of time to mine before a 24 month notice is issued, but staff does not support the language that Dakota Aggregates proposed. Staff does not support any requirement that binds the current City Council to identify all development infrastructure needs and therefore takes away authority from a future City Council to plan for the orderly development of Rosemount. Additionally, the proposed language may actually result in a less desirable outcome for Dakota Aggregates. The staff proposed language allows a future City Council to work with the mining operator to provide for the utility and roadway corridors while maintaining mining around 7 h a ' those corridors. If the Dakota Aggregates proposed language was adopted, then a future City Council would need to consider rezoning the property or revoking the entire mining Interim Use Permit to provide ,for orderly development. That would shut down the entire mining operation and therefore be counter to the current desire of Dakota Aggregates. Industrial Zoning versus Interim Use At the February 28 and March 13 Planning Commissioning meetings, Commissioner Miller asked if it would be better to zoning the ancillary facilities Industrial since the concrete plant, asphalt plant, and casting yards are industrial uses. Staff responded that while the uses may be industrial, those ancillary uses are associated with the mining activity and if the City wishes the ancillary uses to be tied to the mining activity an Interim Use Permit is the zoning mechanism to use. If the property was rezoned to Industrial, then the ancillary facilities could continue forever, even after the mining had expired. Attached is an e- mail from the City Attorney confirming this analysis. Staff continues to recommend that the ancillary uses be defined as interim uses in the Large Scale Mineral Extraction Ordinance and does not recommend rezoning any land used for the mining operation as Industrial. NEXT STEP: ORDINANCE ADOPTION IS NOT A MINING PERMIT , If the City Council adopts the proposed Text Amendment, that does not give Dakota Aggregates a permit to begin mining. Following the adoption of the ordinance, Dakota Aggregates will need to submit for the Large Scale Mineral. Extraction permit. That review will require a public hearing in front of the Planning Commission in which the public can provide comment specific to the mining operation proposed and the Planning Commission can recommend conditions dealing specifically with the concerns raised. Following the initial permit being issued, annually Dakota Aggregates will need to request renewal of the Annual Operating Permit. The Annual Operating Permit will require its own public hearing in front of the Planning Commission and the Planning Commission can recommend specific conditions at that time that would address the concerns raised at that time. The tentative schedule for mining review is: Large Scale Mineral Extraction (LSME) TextAmendment Public Hearing: February 28 LSME Text Amendment Planning Commission Work Session: March 13 LSME Text Amendment Public Hearing: March 27 LSME Text Amendment City Council Work Session: April 11 LSME Text Amendment Approval: April 17 LSME Permit Public Hearing: May 22 LSME Perinit Planning Commission Work Session: June 12 LSME Permit Public Hearing :: June 26 LSME Permit City Council Work Session: July 11 LSME Permit Issuance: July 17 CONCLUSION & RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Planning Commission recommend the City Council adopt the Large Scale Mineral Extraction Ordinance. { 8 CITY OF ROSEMOUNT COUNTY OF DAKOTA . STATE OF MINNESOTA ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE RELATING TO LARGE SCALE MINERAL EXTRACTION,''AMENDING ROSEMOUNT CITY CODE, SECTIONS 11 -14, 11 -4 -1 AND 11 -10-4 AND ADDING NEW SECTION 11- 10-4 -1 THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROSEMOUNT ORDAINS as follows: Section 1. Purpose. The purpose of this ordinance is 1. To provide for the economical availability and removal sand, gravel, rock and soil vital to the growth of the city and the region; 2. To establish regulations, safeguards and controls in the city regarding noise, dust, traffic, drainage, groundwater quality and other factors that will minimize the environmental and aesthetic impacts on mined or adjacent property; 3. To reduce the potential for pollution caused by Wind and soil erosion and sedimentation; _ _ 4. To establish the locations, orderly_ approval process, and the operating conditions under which large scale sand and gravel, extraction and processing will be allowed in the city; and to establish conditions that insure the restoration of mined areas consistent with existing and planned land use patterns; 5. To regulate and ensure that mitigation - measures are implemented on large scale mineral extraction operations that have completed their environmental impact statements and /or other appropriate environmental review; 6. To establish a large mineral extraction- overlay district-as the only location where large scale mineral extraction operations will be allowed, e pursuant to City Council approval of an interim use permit and annual Council approval of annual.:xcavation operating permits. Section 2. The Rosemount City Zoning Code, Section 11 -1 -4 is amended by adding, the following definitions LARGE SCALE MINERAL EXTRACTION: Mineral extraction at a scale that would require a manda o' ` environmental im.act's at-ment as describ -d in Minnesota Rules P rt 4410.4400 Sub.. 9 Non Metallic Mineral Mining. SMALL SCALE MINERAL EXTRACTION: Mineral extraction at a scale less than would require a mandatory environmental impact statement as described in Minnesota Rules, Part 4410.4400 Subp. 9 Non Metallic Mineral Mining. Section 3. The Rosemount City Zoning Code, Section 11 -4 -1, paragraph D is amended by deleting mineral extraction as a conditional use as follows: 1 D. Conditional Uses: v � Section 4. The Rosemount City Zoning Code, Section 11 -4 -1, paragraph E is amended as follows: E. Uses By PUDlnterim Uses: ar■e Scale Min-ra1 Ex :a. tion and -lated A censor U es wi h in th- Lan - Sca1- Mineral Extraction Overly District described in Section 11- 10 -4 -1. Large Scale Mineral Extraction Ancillary Uses as defined in ection 11 - 4 - 1 Small S Extraction and related Accessory Uses within the Small Scale verl Oa y District described in Section 11 -10 Section 5. The Rosemount City Zoning Code, Section 11-10-4;-paragraph A is amended as follows: 11 -10 -4: SMALL SCALE MINERAL EXTRACTION: A. Permit Required: It shall be unlawful for any person, firm -or corporation to remove, store or excavate rock, sand, gravel, clay, silt or other like material in the city, or to fill or raise the existing surface grades, without receiving a permit for mineral extraction. Such permitsPermits for small scale mineral extraction under this Section may only be issued in thea zoning district.whcnwhere mineral extraction is listed as an interim use Furthermore, Small scale mineral extraction shall n etmay be allowed only within the Small Scale Mineral Extraction Overlay Districtso as not to - - - - - - - - - .rowth and expansion of public utilities. Permits: for mineral extraction within the Large Scale Mineral- Extraction Overlay District may be issued only under Section 11 -10- 4 -1. P r Exceptions: An extraction permit shall not be required for an of the following: 1 - Excavation for a foundation cellar or b emen of • •uildin• if a building permit' has been issued. 2 - Excavation by state county or cite authorities in connection with construe ion or maintenance of roads, highways or utilities. 3. Curs cuts utili - hookups or street o. enin • s for which another • ermit has been issued by the city. 4. Excavation less than one hundred 100 s.uare feet 'n are or one foot 1' i `de th. `5. Excavation or gradin for agricu lturaTrposes Ord B 9 19 19891 9 f 'J • Section 6. The Rosemount City Zoning Code Section 11 -10 -4, paragraph B is amended as follows: { • - ,s-: :. .— •. :. :worm.. - :...... : has been issued. issued by the city. �. - n B. Sm,11 cale Mineral xtr.ction Ov-rla Dis ict: he small cale miner 1 extra tion .verla district i established. The b.undai of he distric is a lin- on hs1 1 e nor h o sun State Aid •Hi • hw 42 he municipal b. uns a to the ea t a lin - one half 1 2 mile so h of Counir Stat- Aid Hi•hwa 42 and S Hi: wa 52 ts the west.'' Section 7. The Rosemount City Zoning Code is amended by adding new Section 11- 10 -4 -1 as follows: g g 11 10 - 4 - 1: LARGE SCALE MINERAL EXTRA TC ION: A. • Permit Required: It shall be ul for any person firm or corporation to remove, store or excavate rock, sand, gravel, clad silt or other like material in the city, or to fill or raise the existing surface grades, in the Large Scale Mineral Extraction Overlay District established in this Section without receiving a permit for large scale mineral extraction. Such permits may only be issued in a,zoning district where large scale mineral extraction is listed as an interim use and in the large scale mineral extraction overlay district. Permits for mineral extraction within the Small Scale Mineral Extraction Overlay District may be issued only under Section 11 -10 -4. Initiallarge scale mineral extractio . -rmit a..licati.ns for a ser *t under this Sec'ti.n shall be submitted with and considered simultaneously with an application for an interim use per ' t under Section 11 -10 -:. No . -rmit will se e.uired for an of the followin•: 1. Excavation fora foundation, cellar or basement of a building if a building permit has been issued. 2. Excavation by state, county or city authorities in connection with construction or maintenance 'of roads, highways or utilities. 3. Curb cuts, utility hookups or street opening for which another permit has been issued by the city. 4. Excavation less than one hundred (100) square feet in area or one foot (1') in depth. • 5. Excava on or •radin. for a.ricultural our.ose . i- B. Large Scale Mineral Extr •verla Distric The 1 roe scale mineral extraction overlay di is esta Th bounda of the dis trict is CSAH 42 to the nor h Akron Avenue to the east CSAH 46 to the south and Biscayne Avenue to the west 1 C. Definitions: For the purposes of this Section, the following definitions shall apply: As • <lt Plant - is a facili - u ed to an factur- as'halt or other for s of c• ted road stone• sometimes know as blacktop This facilit; all ows the combination of a number of aggregates, sand, and filler, in the correct proportions, heated and finally coated "with a binder. Increa in • 1 ' ' P rec cled as. hal or a • • re • ate . ro. ucts a e us -d ts 0, `of the mix. Berm is a level space shelf, or raised barrier separatin,� two areas Bathvmetric or Hydrographic Charts - are charts that show lake bottom relief or terrain as -con our lines alled d-.th contour or iso.ath and sele ted de. s soundin's . Con rete - is a mix re of aste and • • r • a es sari. and • ck ' The • s ste c •m. osed of c-ment and wa er oats le urfa - of the f i n e sand an. coar e a• •r- •ates rocks and binds them together into a rock -like mass known 'as concrete. Con ruction ' • • re • a es • r `<A • • re • e" - is s . ro d ca e. • of .arse • rticulate material us -d in c•nstru tl•n includin• sand •ravel = sh= • �st•ne sla• and rec rcled concrete. Co ve in• _ •nve or - is a common .iece o mechanical handlin• equipment that moves materials from one location to another. Crushing /Crushing Plant - is a machine or - plant designed to reduce large rocks'into smaller rocks or gravel. Di Minin • - is minin • and excavation tha tak- s .lace above the 'round water table. Floatin• Dre. :e are. sin: i n a tivi of mining that is carried outundenvater`with a machine e.ui• •ed to exc vate ma er'al from u derwater and brine it to shore where the can be processed into'constructionrade a�grates Haul Road — is an internal private road used to transport material. Haul Route — is an external ublic road used to trans .ort ateri 1. Min-r<1 Ex c on - is extraction of 'nor•anic materials such as .re 'ravel or sand. Minin• B ffer etback - is the dista ce a struc re or activi mu t be from the ed•e of a lot EIS boundary line. Portable Processing• Equipment - is equipment designed on a skid or axel assembly that can move from point to point allowing for shorter travel times and reduced emissions. P Cast Concrete Products - are products such as bridge beams or plank, concrete pipe or culverts that are cast at a facility and later transported to a specific construction site after a proper curing time has been achieved. Read Mixed Concrete P1 nt "' is a facili r that anufactures s ecificall •desi• ned `concrete for delivery to''a customer's construction site in a freshly mixed or plastic unhardened state. 4 Reclamation /End Use - is the process of creating useful landscapes that meet a variety of i :pals. It i cludes all as.e is of this work inclu..n• material placement s abilizin• ca. pin: regrading, and placing cover soils, re- vegetation, and maintenance.. Rec. ycled Asphalt and or Aggregate Produ (RAP) - are left over or demolished concre or asphalt products. These products are recycled (reproduced) and reused in production of new products Or road base products used on construction sites. Screening /Screening Plant - is a machine that takes granulated material and separates it into multiple grades by particle size. 'in. - i - tin• up of e. i.men or a truck fleet`in .re.arition fir a d, ' tr i Stockpile - is a pile or storage location for bulk materials, forming part of the bulk material handling process. Stockpiles are normally created by a stacking conveyor. Strip pin: - is rernovin• ..soil black dir cla timber br sh an. waste • •re•ate .r•ducts fr.m the to. of he minin• deposit to expose th- •uali an. and •rav -1 needed in the production of high quality construction aggregates. Ton of Material i a U:S. shor to 2 100 sou .s of m, ter al - Topsoil - is the upper outermost laver of soil, usually in the top 2 to 8 inches: It has the highest concentration of organic matter-and is where most of the earth's biological soil activity occurs. Truck Scale - is a latform device hat 'a truck . ill drive • nto f• r wei • hin • to insure that_the truck is of legal weight and or dime sion: Wet Mining - is minin• and excava on irea tha will take la e below the 'roune water table. Washing /Wash Plant - is a machine into which sand and gravel is conveyed, separated by size, washed, dewatered, and then sent to stockpiles for load out D. Review Process: 1. Public Hearing A public hearing will be conducted for consideration of permit applications. -The public hearing, public notice and procedure requirements for the permits shall be the same as those for amendments as provided in ection 11 -10 -11 of this chapter. 2. Criteria for Permit Approval: The following factors will be evaluated when determining whether to approve a large scale mineral extraction operation. The approval or denial of a permit shall include, but not limited to findings on the following factors. a. Consist-nc r with i Plans and Policies: The ro.osed la•e scale mineral extraction permit is consistent with the comprehensive guide plan and the location is -suitable in that the excavation "minin • roces in • stock p ilin • or hauling of sand and gravel deposits will not tend to create a nuisance or unreasonabl advers- land use im acts or °exc-ed local sta e or federal afe and environmental standards on the adjacent properties. The applicant for a permit, at the applicant's sole cost, shall provide information to help s , 5 determine the suitability, including but not limited -to a completed zoning �, P g a -ndment a..lication• -xhibits ill stratin• ad cent and on- i e buildin• s and land uses; existing elevations and percent of slope within and 300 feet beyond the perimeter of the EIS boundary. and an environment impact statement. b. Environmental Impacts: An environmental impact statement (as defined by Minnesota Environmental Quality Board`Rules) shall be completed for each largee s calee ravel mining nro� proposed The p o£ se roiect sl all'be so d-si• -d and o.er t-d as to • 'z- adv -r e im.a is id-ntifi -. in "'t e environmental im.a statement. The enviromm-n al im. ct s a emen shall be considered by the Ci r Council prior to any final action ` "on a large scale n ral extrac on . -rmit r-.uest. The a..lication for •e`sc,le mi -ral extraction permit shall not be considered complete until the time as final comment h, . ee receiv- d on the de. ua • the env enmental im t statement. c. Large Scale Mineral Extraction Overlay District: ° The boundaries of the ro .osed lar• sca - mineral ex ac 'on o•- ation hall be c•m.let -1 wi hin the large scale mineral extraction overlay district. E. A .lication Re. uirements: The a. plication for al • e scale mineral extraction per 't hall include the following: 1. The correct le • al des ri don of the land u. on which excava 'on is proposed. 2. The name and address of the applicant, the owner of the land and the person or corporation conducting the actual removal operation. 3. The names and addresses of all adjacent landowners within one - fourth 4. The .0 - . .s= of the .ro posed excavation. 5. The estimated time re. uired o com.lete the proposed excavation and rehabilitation. 6. '= The names of the highways, streets or other public roadway s within the city upon which the material shall be transported. 7. A ma of the .ro •sed sit or excavation area to a scale of one inch equals 200 feet showin• the resentl excavated area the area .ro osed to be excavated duri • the permit period and the minimum and maximum elevations of the area and showin• a minimum of 300 feet of the adjacent land on all sides of the proposed excavation area. 6' 8. A rehabilitation recl ma :. n and restoration .1 n p rovidin ' for the orderl and con *nuin' rehabilitation of all excav ted land. S ch plan shall illus ate u. in• appropriate photographs, maps, and surveys drawn to a scale of one inch equals 200 fee nd with 1 five-foot con our interval s tisfacto o th - - n ' ineer the f.11owin' : a. The removal or planned contours of the land when the mine ial removal operations are completed. b. The e • a ed per od of time that he .it will be o.er -. and a chedul- se tin. forth the • etabl- for excav tion nd rehabilitation of lap. 1 in• within the active, inactive and restoration areas. c. Those areas of the site used for storage topsoil and overburden. d. The depth of all.water bodies, the slopes of all slopes after rehabilitation to a d of the type Ind q tlty of nhntings where re - ve is to be established. e. The five foot contours s hall extend at least 200 feet beyond the boundary of the operation_ or beyond the adjoining right of wav , whichever is more inclusive. f. Ancillary accessory use rehabilitation, reclamation, and restoration plan. g. The maximum slope of the reclamation area that is developable shall be - at no steeper than five 5 feet horizontal to one 1 foot vertical. The maximum slope of the reclamation area that is undevelopable, such as the �� area between a water body and a right -of -way line shall be no steeper than two (2)' "feet ho to o ne (1) foot vertical. An slope greater than three (3) feet horizontal to one (1)' foot vertical_shall be designed by a licensed engineer and approved by the City Engineer. h. Adjacent to Water Bodies: For manmade groundwater lakes the bottom contour shall be .raduall slo.in• from the shoreline to the dee est ortion of the water body at a maximum slope of ten feet horizontal to one foot vertical (10:1) from at least ten (10) feet upland from the proposed shoreline to at least fifty (50) feet from the proposed shoreline toward the center of the water body. Beyond fifty (50)'feet in horizontal distance, the slope of the bottom contours may be no steeper than 2:1. 7 9. When minings proposed within the groundwater or within twenty (20,1 vertical feet of a historic groundwater measurement elevation, then a hydro eg ological study shall be sup mitted. The h dr. • eolo • ical stud hall include the full•win• : a. Description of each groundwater excavation ize shape and location . b. Descri. 'on thel. ation and con tructi•n lo. 'nformation of all -lls wi hin three hundred 310 feet of e E .ounda c. Descri. 'on of the .ro.os -. fill ac 'vi •r in size . * stri.u'on .uantis and placement procedures). d. Description of the aquifer characteristics in the area of each groundwater excavation to be affected by proposed fill activity (aquifer thickness and • eneral • eolo • ical ettin e. Description" of the impacts of the proposed fill activi on groundwater flow ' regimes. f. Groundwater monitoring plan: g. Such other information as the city may from time to tune require. 10. L. cation of an - and all exis 'n• wells and the size and depth thereof. 11. Such other infrmati•n as t e ci ma from time to time re.uire including, but not limited to the location or antici at-d location of all stockpiles of a• •re•ate -based construction debris material on the land for which the - permit is desired. F. Accessory Uses: Within a large scale mineral extraction operation, the following uses are c stomar incidental to its o.eration and do not re• uire a se arate . ermi or a. royal. These accessory uses must meet the same performance standards as the large scale mineral extraction operation. 1. Gra Cr ushin g. 2. Gravel Washing. V 3. Offices associated with the miningQperation and ancillary uses. 4. Truck Washing, 5. Minor Vehicle and Minin• F•ui ment Maintenance. 6. Stockpiling. 7. Stora• e of Machines used dail - in the ex raciion area. 8 l nd, use G. , Ancillary Uses: There are a numb of uses a nd p roduction facilities that either use signifi of aggrega resour o r be efit from close proximity�o liar don e scale mineral -xtra •n operation bu also •enerate i ues nui an es nd a.ver e land u e im.. be • d he co. - of he o.ei-ation it elf.. The f•llowin• re•ulati.ns ..1 to th-se ancilla , uses to a large scale mineral extraction operation. 1. Separate Interim Use Permit Required:' To addres th e iss nuisances and adverse a im g enerated by anci u ses sepa i nter im use permit as p rovided in sect 1:1 10 8 of this chapt shall be appli ed for and approved for . ea an c ill ary use The listing of a use in 'the followi su bse ct ion doe not m ean that the use will be approved within the large scale mineral extraction operation or that the use will be allowed during the entire duration of the operation., The decision whether to grant, grant with conditions or deny an Tnnlication``for such' an ancillary use is within the discretion of the City Council. 2. Associat Wit Mining Ac 'vi ' An ancillary u e may be a llowed tl provided that any of the following conditions are meet: - , a. On a site that has an approved larg scale min extraction pe in c ompliance with this section. , r b. In con'unc on with L r' e cale mine -al ex action occurrin• within the approved EIS boun provided the adjo ining munici Ili ha a rove the large scale mineral extractio and provided the ancillary use facility was - originall a i im n ter u` sepe o rmit in cnjunction with lar scale mineral extraction in the City'of Rosemount. 3.. Ancillary Uses Considered: The following is a list of ancillary uses that may be I considered in association "with a large scale mineral extraction operation and the issues and performance standards that shall be addressed within the interim use permit. 1 a. oncrete Production: A .lant for the roduction of concrete ma be =, allowed on a site that as an .. •ved large scale mineral - xtraction .ermi -in compliance with this section. In addition the followin. performance -__ -; standards shall apply: 1) Location: The plant shall be located in such a way as to minimize its visibili it from an . d' acent residential use or a . ublic ri • ht • f wa This may be accomplished throw• h to. o ra. h lands a.in. exi tin - ve• etation bermi • or setb, ck. The setback from any EIS boundary line shall .e tivice the height of the plant or applicable setback under thi code, wh ichever is greater. u,. 2) Multiple Ready Mix Concrete Plants: If a facility is-to have multiple concrete plants, each concrete plant shall have its own separate interim use permit. The primarv'readv`mi_x concrete plant shall have the eaut_�__.T ent exce for si los an the conve that transport materials , 9 r _ in • the buildi • enclo -d within a buildi One or more seconda concrete plants may be permitted if an active interim use permit for the primary concrete has been approved that includes a requirement that the •rima c•ncret- slant .uils'n' .e com.letedwithin -ishteen 18 months of approval. 3) Plant Hei'h : he maxim m heiih of anT concr- e s1a shall • - one hundred and five feet (105'). 4) Material Stockpiles: associated with these uses shall be limited to a height of sixty feet (60'). 5) Outdoor Storage: There shall be no outdoor storage of finished material or products. All equipment and raw material associated with the cement or concrete plant must be screened from view from an adjacent residential use or public right of way in conformance with section 11 -2- 9 "Outdoor Stora • e" of thi title. 6) .H_ urs of Operathe hours of operation shall be lted to 7 a.m. to 7 p.m. Monday through Saturday- unless special perthission is grail b r the City Council within the interim use s ermit. The extra hours • f operation may be conditioned on more restrictive performance standards to address the additional adverse impacts resulting from the- extra hours. 7) Haul Routes: Traffic generated by this use shall utilize haul routes approved by the city and other agencies as required. The plant owner shall be responsible for road 'msrovement nd easements needed for gress'and egress subject to approval by the city. The haul routes may re. ire`Dakota C•un Hi•hwa D- sartment or he Mi nesota D of Transportation approval as well. b. Asphalt Production: A plant for the production of asphalt may be allowed on site that has an as .roved lar'e scale mineral extraction ermit in compliance with this section. In addition the following.performance standards shall apply: 1) Location: The asphalt plant and all equipment associated with it shall be located a minimum of six hundred sixty feet (660') from any non- _ F agricultural zoned land. 2) Setback and Buffering: The plant and all equipment and materials associated with it shall be set back a minimum of sevenfv five feet (75) from any property EIS boundary line and screened by natural features including perming or vegetation. Y ear roun orie hundred percen (100 %) o�que screening with earthen berms and landscaping shall be required from ground level to the first thin sercent 30° o of the overall height and fifty percent (50 %) opaque to fifty percent (50 %) of 10 x the overall heiiht°of the plant as viewed from eve' level from surroundin g '-g r ht of way or roadways. i 3) Haul Routes: Traffic generated by this use shall utilize haul routes approved by the city and other agencies as required. The plant owner shall be res. onsbl- for road im rove ents and - asements eeded for ingress and egress subject to approval by the city. The haul routes may require Dakota County Highway Department or the Minnesota =_ Department of Transportation as well 4) Access: Traffic generated by this use shall enter onto streets consistent with - city access and design standards. The owner of these'uses shall be r responsible for all costs associated with road imprivements required to serve the use. 5) Material Stockpiles: Stockpiles associated with these uses shall be limited to a hei• t of six feet 1' . 6) Outdoor Storage: There shall se no outdoor tora.e of finished ma erial or . r. ducts. All e. ui o men Ind raw material as ociates wit he as . ha t .lan must be sc •e-ned fro view -fro n ad'ace t re iden 'al use or public right of way in conformance with section 11 -2 -9, "Outdoor Storage" of this title. 7) Air E sion : A halt o. -rations hall com.1 with Minne ota Rules Part 7011 for testing, monitoring and 'operational requirements. 8) Waste Byproducts: This use shall operate so as not to discharge onto the soils.within the EIS boundary, across the boundaries of the EIS boundary - line or through percolation into the subsoil withinthe EI b oundary or beyond the EIS boundary line where such use is located toxic or noxious matter in such concentrations as to be detrimental to or endanger t public health, safety, comfort or welfare, or cause injury or dama•e to .ro.er or business. 9) Odors: This use shall operate so as to prevent the emission of odorous matter of such quality as` to be detectable beyond EIS boundary line. 1 0) Surety Bond: This use shall comply with the applicable operating, special requirements and bonding for restoration standards for mineral extraction specified in subsection K4 of this Section. 11) Hours of Operation: The hours of operation shall be limited to 7 a.m. to 7 .m. Monda throu.h aturda unless special ermission is rante. by the City Council within the interim use permit. The extra hours of operation may be conditioned on more restrictive performance standards to address the adverse impacts caused by the extra hours. • 11 c. Maintenance Facility: A facility for the "repair of trucks, other vehicles and eauinment used in a mineral extr operation may be allowed on a site that has an approved large scale mineral extraction permit in om liance with thi section. The construction and de i' n • f the maintenance facili shall comply with site lot and building standards within Section 11 -4 -16 Paragraphs F and G. d. a tin. Yard: A facili for the manufacturins of 'recast concrete .r..ucts may be allowed on a site that has an appro� ved large scale mineral extraction permit in compliance with this section The casting of the concrete products shall occur within a building while the curing of the products May occur outdoors The City Counci may approve the ou cas of o ve r sized concrete products provided that the oversized products are to be used in a construction project that the operator has been awarded and the outdoor oversized product casting ceases when the construction is finished. he constructi•n and desi' of a ca 'n• ar. that w'll exist ion. -r than ten (101 years shall comply with site lot and buildin standards within Section 11 -4 -16 Paragraphs F and G. e. Aggregate Processing and Recycled Aggregate Products Production: The conveying, crushing, mixing, screening and washing of aggregate and rec clin • c • ncrete and as. h It rria be allowed . n a site that has an a _ roved lar e scale mineral extraction permit in compliance with this section. In addition the followin' . - rf•rmanc- standards shall a. 1 : 1) Location: The plant shall be located in such a way as to minimize its visibili from n ad re id-ntial use or a public ri.ht of wa This ma be acc•m h hed thr.u'h t..o•ra h r landsca.in• existing vegetation, berming or setback. 2) Material Stockpiles: Stockpiles associated with these uses 'shall be limited to a height of sixty feet (60'). 3) Hours of Operation: The hours of operation shall be limited to 7 a.m. to 7 n .m. Monda through Saturd unless s p ermission is gran bv_ the City Council within the interim use permit. The extra hours of uperation maybe conditioned on more restrictive performance standards to address the adverse impacts caused by the extra hours. 4) Rati_ o of Aggregate Pr_ ocessing to Recycled Aggregate Products Production: To maximize the use of mined aggregate material and minimize im.ortin' of re Tcled material transported from outside the associated !ravel mine a ratio of a• • re. ate roce sin! to rec Tcled aggregate product processing shall be established within the interim use permit. The ratio shall have a *nimum of seven ercent 70°0 a:.re• ate roc-ssin• and a maxi um of thir percent (30 %) recycled a' . re s ate .rod ct . r• cessin' . The ratio hall be based on tonna • - sales and the actual tonnage sales shall be reported to the City on an annual 12 basis. The City Council may limit the area in `the aggregate process facility in with the recycled aggregate products may be stored. H. Performance Standards: 1. Boundary: Extraction operations shall be conducted within the confines of the excavation site described in the permit. 2. Access Extraction operations shall only be allowed on sites that have d'rect acce s to a princi.al arterial minor arterial, or collector street as designated in the ci '`of Rosemount comprehensive guide plan. A local street may be used if approved by the City Council. x 3. Setbacks:, Setback boundaries shall be as follows. Where setbacksare measured from zoning district boundaries that occur along a °public street right -of -way. the z • nin • di •ict bounda i assumed to be the c - nterline • f th, t . ublic right -. f - -wa a. Residential Zoning District: 350 feet b. Industrial Commercial or Institutional Zonin "g District 150 feet c. Agricultural Zoning District: 30`feet d. Inhabited Residence not in a Residential Zoning District: 200 feet e. Right -of -ways or Streets: 75'feet"° f. Pre - existing Water Bodies: 150 feet 4. Height: a. The hei. ht • f all e. ui. men stock L files and all • ther o. erations exce . those described insubsection b and c below, within the permitted mineral ex eratio shall n ot ex ceed si (60) feet This standar does not a..1 - to the . ncilll facilities covered p a se p ara e interim use • rmit. b. The City_ Council may approve a limited number of stationary convenors to a hei•ht no taller han six five 65) feet provided that all practical means of screening and setbacks are employed into the conveyors construction and installation. c. The floating dredge shall not exceed seventy' five 75 feet in hei. t. 5. Appearance, Screening, and Berming: The mining shall be screened from any public right -of -war or urban development throu.h a combination of existin• stands of trees, berming and installed landscaping. a. Existing Tree S 'an. s: The »referred method of screening the mining operation is the maintaining existing stands of trees that would provide a level of at lea t nine 7 percent 90% o.aci . If t e stand of trees does not r•vide nine .ercent 90° o o aci then additional landscaping of berming sha be installed to provide nine ercent 90° o • .aci An annual o ac audit of the tree stands shall be conducted and dead vegetation shall be removed and additional landsca in. or bermin. shall be installed maintain ninety (90 %) opacity. The m etho dolo gy for the o aci measure shall be taken during full leaf growth from the shoulder of any public road or 13 nei • hborin • 'rope s to . etermine o. aci , in a band five 5 'feet to -ven feet off the ground. b: Berms shall be constructed in areas where the existing tree stands do not exist. The berm hall be at lea en feet in hei• measured from he toe of the .erm or from the fo• line of t e exi 'n• public roao whichever re ults in the greatest height of the berm. 6. Hours of Operations: a. Mining: The hours o o peration shall be limited o 7 a.m. to -7 . m M.nda - through Saturday. The Community Development Director may authorize S unday operation from 8 a m to 5 p m on no more than five (51 Sund s Inn all .rovid-d the .'. -rator notifies he Com Devel• _.men Director no less than 72 hours before a Sunday operation, The City Council mav grant special permission for extra hours of operation within the annual extraction permit The extra hours of operatiot may be conditioned on • more restrictive performance standards to address the additional adverse itnpacts caused bv'the extra hours of operation. b. Crushing and Washing: The hours of operation shall be limited to 7 a.m. to 7 p.m. Monday through Saturday: The City Council may grant special p ermission for extra hours of operation within the annual ex -ac 'On permit The extra hours of operation may be conditioned on more restrictive performance, standards to address the adverse impacts caused by the extra hours of operation. c. Truck Hauling:- The hours of operation shall be limited to 7 a.m. to 7 p.m. Monda throw• h Saturda 7. The ommuni Development Director ma authorize - Sunday operation from 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. on no more -than five 5 Sundays annually provided the operator notifies the Community Developrrient Director no less than 72 hours before a Sunday operation. he Ci , Council ma 'rant s. ecial permission for extra hours • f o. eration within the annual extraction permit. The extra hours of operation mav be conditioned on more restrictive performance standards, including but not limited to the truck haul routes, to address,the adverse impacts caused bv the extra hours of operation., d. Staging Activities: taging activities will be permitted one half hour before normal hours and one half hour after normal hours. Staging activities include limn• u and loadin• of trucks e.ui ment ins ec 'ons fuelin• and other similar related actions. Trucks may enter the site within one half hour. before the normal hours; however no gravel trucks may leave the site until normal hours of operation. After the P.M. normal hours of operation and within one half hour past the P.M. normal hours of operation, site clean -up `, and equipment maintenance is permitted as well. 14 F � 7. Slopes: a. 1 Durinng the entire period of operations all excavations other than the working face shall be sloped on all sides no steeper than one (1 f of horizontal to on (1) foot vertical, unless a steeper slope is approved by the City En in eer. b. Berming: The public view or right of way face of the perimeter berms shall be sloped no steeper than four (4) feet horizontal to one (1) foot vertical. The extraction side of the perimeter berm shall be sloped no steeper than three (3) feet horizontal to one 1 foot ver 'cal. 8. Noise: Maximum noise level at the perimeter of the EIS boundary shall comply with the limits o standards e tablish-d b th- Minnesota Pollu 'on on of A• enc and the United States Environmental Protection Agency. 9. Paved Acce s Road: All access road fro a lar• e tale eral extraction o•eration to an pubic r•adwa T hall be aved with shalt or con'rete for distan e of at least 150 feet, measured from the minin• s' • e of - • ublic ri• h -• f - -wa to minimize dust conditions. During the annual -:- -''• •era 'n. permit review t e Ci Council ma J re • uire addition-11 avin • len • th if dus Ind d trackin • are identified as a • r• blem b the ci ' ll `un • aved r. s ds within the mi in' o • erasion shall be trea wit a`dust retarda on a r basis as sti in t he ann operating permit. 10. Dust Control:..0perators shall use all practical means to reduce the amount of fugitive dust generated by excavation operations. In any event, the amount of dust or other particulate matter generated by the excavation shall not exceed air pollution standards e. ablished b -th- Minnesota Po 1 on •ntrol • tenc On da `s.with wind adviso - ' s defined b - the National • ceanic and A os. heric Administration''s National Weather Service, the Community Development Director ma re uire • utii • the time of wind advis • - that he d minin • operation cease operations to eliminate additional dust generation. 1 1 . Ez • 1• sines: The use of ex . osives in the large scale mineral extraction operation is prohibited. 12: urface a er'P.11ution: The minin• •lans shall com:l w the Ci 's Surface _ - Water Mana• ement Plan. Excavation operators shall comply with all applicable Minnesota Pollution Control Agency and Department of Natural Resources regulations and all applicable United States Environmental Protection Agency regulations for the protection of water quality No waste products or processed r-sidue includin• untreated wash water sh 11 be de osited in an - ublic waters of the State of Minnesota. 13. Groundwater: The excavation operators shall prepare a • roundwater monitorin• Ian to ensure that •roundwater flow level or •uali is not im•acted. The 15 t groundwater monitoring plan shall comply with City and Minnesota Department of Health regulations. '14. Wastewater: On site sewage treatment systems shall conform. with City Code Title 9 Chapter 6, Dakota County Ordinance 113, and all applicable state and federal regulations. 15. Topsoil: All topsoil located within the EIS boundary before the mineral extraction operation begins, except the topsoil located over areas that are planned to be ``_ reclamated as open water, shall remain within boundaries of the operation.' Additional topsoil may be retained to ensure that a minimutn of 6 inches of topsoil is .l ced .n all area re laimed and r -' ored . •r. nd. 16. Landscaping a. Existing tree and ground cover shall be preserved the maximum extent feasible maintained or supple mented by selective cutting "transplanting and re of trees shrubs and`o groun c ov e r alon a ll setback areas b. The public view a d ri•ht -of -wa side if berms that ar- alarmed to exi t longer than fifteen (15) years shall be landscaped ivith a density of one tree per 625 square feet. Aminimum of 66% of the trees shall be conifers. fr c. The Ci Council a consider stag.erin. the timin• of the in alla on of th- landscaping if more bermirg is construction than is required to screen the , phase of mining ermitte with the annual operating eetmit d. Berms tint are fined to -xist less than 15 rears shall be landsca ed with a standard MNDOT ROW mix. e. All areas reclaimed shall be seeded with a City approved seed mix'within' fourteen 114) days of final grade being established Additional seeding shall be a .lied as need-d until the ve•etation has been established. The City may require cover over areas that have remained undisturbed for more than twelve (12) months if it is determined that these areas generate airborne dust particles. 17. ' Maintenance of Mining Vehicles: a. All machinery shall be kept operational. b. Abandoned machinery and rubbish shall be promptly removed - from the excavation site. c. All machine shall be eriodicall ins ected re.air•d and ainted as need to prevent rustier or other deterioration of the machinery. 16 • 18. Li•htin•: A li•htin• ha se shi-lded • .revent lishts from being directed at traffic • n a .ubli road in uch brilliance that it im. air he vi ion of he driver and ma not interfere with or •bscur- traffic si• s or si• nals - • + ++ •• - . The level of li•htin• shall not exceed 1.0 lumen at the EIS boundary line. 19. Com.lianc- with •ther •vernment.1 Re•ul 'ons: The lar•e ale 'neral extraction o.erati•n shall com.1 wi h all a..lica on Federal tate nd • laws and regulations, including Dakota County Ordinances No 110 and No 111. 20. Council Waiver: The City Council, at the time of issuance of the annual extraction n ew t ma waive or modify any of the provisions in this section or im se addi 'onal re. • ements if i find that the .lan of o era on •r other material s is mitre. w'th the al • li ation • r other factor mak- a.. r. orriate more itable measures for standards consistent with the public health safetv'and welfare Special Requirements: 1. Reimburse of City Costs: The permittee shall reimburse the city for the cost of periodic inspections for the purpose of deternurunj that the provisions of the extra '•n . -rmit and this Sec on are bei •'followed. 2. Haul Routes: The applicant shall submit to the city a detailed map of the streets on which the m terial removed hall be ans.or ed aul s: routes . T e ci shall inspect the haul ids routes proposed to be used by the applicant or owner and shall recommend to the co cil n `cessat T u. • ra • in • • r re. airin • of he haul 'roads routes p ca oor to their use bathe applin or. owner The council shall d ate. the haul roads routes and may ' consider the recommendations of the responsible city officials in he extras on -rmi issued to the a licant. 'It shall be the es. •nsibili of the or owner to maintain the haul roads routes in accordance with the provisions set'foth in the permit The city shall periodically inspect haul roads routes to ensure'com.liance with the .ermit. Durin• the ieriod of or u.on completion of the excavation operations, the applicant or owner shall make any necessary repairs to the haul roads routes as recommended by the city. All costs of inspection provided for in this subsection shall be borne by the applicant or owner. The use` of the haul roads routes shall be subject to any road and weight restrictions i by t he city The operator sha be responsible for reimbursing_ the city' for any additional maintenance costs incurred for public roads as a result of the mininp operation. 3. Gravel Production and Phasing: a. A phasing Plan shall be pre . ared b. No mineral extraction permit shall authorize extraction operations to be cond cted in more han two 2 non- conti• uous ei• h T 80 acre areas of an extraction operation concurrently. - -17 . F c. No mineral extraction permit shall authorize extraction to be conducted on more than one hundred and sixty (160) acres at one time.- 4. Other Re•uirements a Determined . the ouncil: The . ermittee shall c• .1 with suc other re.uirem-nts as the council shall from e t• e d-em .r•.er and necessary for the protection of its citizens and the general welfare J. Reclamation, Restoration, and Rehabilitation: 1. Ph, ed • . -ration: To en ure that he mine is reclaimed in a timel - an. orde ly m,nner the minin• •.eration shall be divided into .hases of no m•re;th n e' +h (80) acres per phase. 2. Si. ificant Trans. .rtatio orrid.rs: The eclama on .lan'shall show all future collector and arterial r•adwa . To .r.vid- for the tea.wa n u ' ' cons c on of these future roadways, a reasonable reclamation grade as determined by the City shall be established within the entire designated right -o£ -way width for the a..ro.ri to ro, dwa classification. . fhin tw-n :four` 24 onths of recei.t of written notice from the City that the collector or arterial right -of -way is needed for either roadwa and or utili cons uction the -rmittee will corn lete minin• within that ri.h -of -wa and recl, im the ri•ht-of- way ° to the trades a Droved within e Interim Reclamation Plan. The Citv'Council may within the interim use permit provided a minimum period of tirne such`that the operator will have mine before the twenty four (24) month advance can be' 3. Trunk Utility Services: Within twenty four 24 months of recei.t of written notice from the City that public trunk utility services are needed to be constructed within the mining operation, the permittee shall provide an easement for the utility construction com lete th- minin' within the easement, and reclaim the easement to the grades approved within the Interim Reclamation Plan. The City Council may within the interim =use permit provided a minimum period of time such that the o. erator will have mine befor - the twen four 24 month advance can be • iven. 4. Water,Bodies and Drainage Plan: The City has an adopted Surface Water Management Plan which plans for the conveyance of surface water across the City . The mining operation shall allow for the conveyance of surface water within the approved mining areas as called for within the Surface Water Management Plan. 5 ~" Interim Re lamation Plan: The . ermittee shall .rovide an interim reclamation .lan which r.vides reclamatio •rades for all ei•h 80 acre .base that would allow for atricultural use inmedatel foll•wint reclamation. 6. End Use Grading Plan: The Comprehensive Plan anticipates that the ultimate use for the entirety of the City is urban development To accommodate this ultimate use and allow for orderly develo ment the ermittee shall rovide an end use •radin• plan that can reasonably accommodate urban 'development. F•r minin• operations that are expected to require more than twenty (20) years to complete, the City Counci m ay approve an end use grading.plan for the area that is expecte to be 18 completed within twenty (20) years. P The Ci Council shall not approve an annual,, • . eratin • _• ermi for an area with • t an a. proved end use • radin • .Ian. 7. Remov 1 of Buildin• s Struc res and Vehicles: . ithin ei• h een 1: months • f the reclamation of each • ha - all . uildin • _ struc re and • lants inciden al to that phase of operation shall be dismantled and removed by and at the expense of the sand and gavel producer last operating the building, structure or plant, or the owner of the property. unless the structure or use is compatible with the anticipated ultimate use of he .roper . All buil.'n• s ucture or •1 nts not removed , s re.uir-d • :th's section ma • - removed b the cia with th- co is for he removal char•ed`t• the permittee or the owner of the pro er . 8. H ul- • ack Materials and • aerations: Th - i oun it ma • rrni the de . osi 'n • of f clean and compactable inorganic fill that is able to support urban development to achieve the reclamation • rides. The •ermittee hall sup mit a haul -back m na • ement plan that includes the types of fill that shall be deposited, where the fill comes from -and what testing of the fill shall occur. All fill deposited within the mining operation must be able to support urban residential development` 9. D ration • f Minin • and or Ancilla Uses: To , r •vide for the • rderl development of the City, the City Council shall determine the ` duration of the mining or ancillary use within the interim use permit. K. Annual Operating Permit: 1. Pur•o e of he Annual 0 era 'n • Permit: A Dirge scale m ineral ext raction operation may extend 'for years or decades to complete. The purpose of the annual operating permit is to provide an opportunity for the City Council to review the operation of ' the mi e :other • ublic c •mment on the • . erati• n m • di an - permit conditions as necessary to address: adverse impacts that arise from the operation, and revise the phases and /or hases of the mine. The large scale`mineral extraction interim use .e nit irovides a z•nin• basis for the 'tie provided the c issues an annual operating permit. 2. Application Public Hearin: Notice And Procedure: The application, public hearing, public notice and proced requi rements for annual op era ting permit s be the ' same as those for amendments as rovided i section 11 -10 -11 of this chast-r 'e that the permit may b issued only on the af firmative vote of a ma'or of the entire council. 3. Area without an End Use Gradin• Plan: The Ci 7 Council sha not issue an annual operating permit for an ar without an approve End Use Gradin Plan that accommodates urban development. 4. Duration of O. eratin • Permit: The lar• e.sc, le mineral extraction • ermit shall run from anua T 1 throu•h December 31 of the same Tear or for a lesser eriod of time as the City Council may specify at the time of issuance of the extraction permit. If 19 the extrac on permit is to 'run for less than a full ear the fee hall . e . rorated as d etermined by the City Council 5. O. -ratin! Per Fee: Th- fee for lane scale mineral extraction permit shall be as est blished from time t. ti e b resolution of the Cii Co ncil. 6. Inspections: The City may inspect all mineral extraction ites where a larg sc ale mineral extrac '.n'.ermit has been issued. The operator or ovine of n large scale mineral extraction operation found in violation of the requirements of this title or its ex ction per hall r-med such violations vi hin the time s. -cifi -d .` writ =n notice from the City. P l 7. Financial Sur : The -co ncil shall resit' e the `..licant . r owner of the .semi es on which the excavation opera 'on is loci ed to post a ure with' siire ' acce. table to the ci ,cash escrow Performance bond or letter of cre dit (" "1 in an-amount and source determined by the council, in favor of the city,- conditioned to pay the city the co is and -x.ens- of re.airin• an str-ets where such e.air work is made necessary by the special burden resulting from hauling and travel,. and removing material from an it or excavation nd co ductin' -e. fired reh, bilitation and conditioned further to comply with all the requirements of this Section 11- 10 -4 -1 and the particular extraction permit, and to pay a expense . the city may incur by rea on of d. in . an hin • required o be`done b an as licant to whom a . ermi i issued. The security shall remain in full force and effect for a minimum period of one year after expiration of t he extraction nertnit to guarantee the reauired rehabilitation as well as the other requirements herein provided. The surety bond will be based on the numbe o acre re.uested within the annual renewal ex ac on ermit the amount of a res hat hav- not been recla' ed to the end use sradin. plan elevations, and an amount'that can be immediately withdrawn for the special burden of street repair o t lace insufficient landscaping Surety for unfulfilled rehabilitation measures will be determined and a security will be required as long as the reha ilitatio measures a -e not completed. 8. Insurance The permittee shall maintain general liability insurance and provide the City annually a Certificate of General Liability Insurance issued by insurers duly licensed within the State of Minnesota. The City Council shall determine the appropriate amount of liability insurance during the annual permit renewal. Section 8. This Ordinance shall-be in effect following its passage and publication. 20 Adopted this day of , 2012 by the City Council of the City of Rosemount, Minnesota. By: William H. Droste, Mayor M r ATTEST: By Amy Domeier, City Clerk Published in the Rosemount Town Pages the day of 2012. 21 4 � MEMO TO: Eric Zweber, `City Planner of the City of Rosemount FROM: Dakota Aggregates, LLC DATE: March 23, 2012 RE: Status Update re Comments of Dakota Aggregates, LLC re City of Rosemount Large Scale Mineral Extraction Ordinance Section 1. Background. At the Tuesday, March 13, 2012 Planning Commission meeting, Dakota Aggregates, LLC (Dakota Aggregates) proposed written modifications to the draft City ordinance dealing with large scale mineral extraction overlay district (the ordinance). A number of the items raised by Dakota Aggregates have been addressed in the most recent draft of the ordinance that the City Planning staff is submitting to the Council for the March 27, 2012 meeting. The purpose of this memo is to identify items that require more clarification and explanation or items where there are still disagreements. 1. Subpart (H)(16). Dakota Aggregates suggests language whereby the Council, at the time of the interim use permit, could lessen the height requirement of screening trees on a berm if the applicant provided off site screening approved.by the Council. Dakota Aggregates asks that the following sentence be included in subpart (H)(16): In the interim use permit, the Council may lessen the zoning ordinance requirements -for the height of screening trees on a berm if the permit holder agrees to make other accommodations for offsite landscaping as approved by the Council. The Council should have the flexibility at the time of permit issuance to lessen the height ' requirement if the applicant has a reasonable plan for off -site screening which presumably will benefit the neighbor's property and over which the Council will have ultimate approval. 2. Subpart (J)(2) And Subpart (J)(3). The version provided by the City Planning staff to the Planning Commission for the March 27, 2012 meeting reads as follows: 1 2. Significant Transportation, Corridors: The reclamation plan shall show all future collector and arterial roadways. To provide for the roadway and utility construction of these future roadways, a reasonable reclamation grade as determined by the City shall be established within • the entire designated right -of -way width for the appropriate roadway classification. Within twenty four (24) months of receipt of written notice from the City that the collector or arterial right -of -way is needed for either roadway and /or utility construction, the permittee will complete mining within that right -of -way and reclaim the right -of -way to the grades approved within the Interim Reclamation Plan. The City Council may within the interim use permit provided a minimum period of time such that the ,operator will have mine before the twenty four (24) month advance can be given. 3. Trunk Utility Services: Within twenty four (24) months of receipt of written notice from the City that public trunk utility services are needed to be constructed within the mining operation, the permittee shall provide an easement for the utility construction, complete the mining within the easement, and reclaim the easement to the grades approved within the Interim Reclamation Plan. The City Council may within the interim use permit provided a minimum period of time such that the operator will have mine before the twenty four (24) month advance can be given. Dakota Aggregates suggests the following: 2. Significant Transportation Corridors: The reclamation plan shall , show all future collector and arterial roadways. To provide for the roadway and utility construction of these future roadways, a reasonable reclamation grade as determined by the City shall be established within the entire designated right -of -way width for the appropriate roadway classification. Within twenty four (24) months of receipt of written notice from the City that the collector or arterial right -of -way is needed for either roadway and /or utility construction, the permittee will complete mining within that right -of -way and, reclaim the right -of -way to the grades approved within the Interim Reclamation Plan. • =The City Council may within the interim use permit provide a minimum period of time such that the operator will have a reasonable opportunity to mine before the twenty "four (24) month advanced notice can be given. Prior to the notice, the collector and arterial roadways and utility construction shall be shown on the City's Comprehensive Plan and shall be identified.in the `City's Capital Improvement Program. 2 x a 3. Trunk Utility Services: Within twenty four (24) months of receipt of written notice from the City that public trunk utility services are needed -to be constructed within the mining operation, the permittee shall }provide an easement for the .utility construction, complete the mining `within the easement, and reclaim the easement to the grades 'approved within the Interim Reclamation Plan. The City "Council may within the interim use permit provide a minimum period of time such that the operator will have a reasonable opportunity to mine before the twenty four (24) month advanced notice can be given. Prior to the notice, the trunk utility lines . shall be shown on the City's Comprehensive Plan and shall be identified in the City's Capital Improvement Program. , Dakota Aggregates seeks to clarify that the collector and arterial roadways and the trunk utility lines will have first been analyzed and examined through the deliberative process of the City's Comprehensive Plan and the City's Capital Improvement Program before the City gives notice to Dakota Aggregates that the mining plan has to be altered to accommodate such facilities. 4 3 Eric, Thank you for meeting with me yesterday. Since we did not have time to cover all my questions I have included them in this email. I did not see language in the Ordinance regarding the requirements for street sweeping. =Section E -8 -2 (New 2.5)Proposed fill below the water table must be material that originated from the site that has been sampled for contaminants of concern determined by the City of Rosemount and Dakota County and are clean: free from debris, asbestos or chemical contamination Section E -8 -b -5 We agreed that item 5.) Groundwater monitoring plan should be a moved and you suggested moving it down to number 9. In place of this I would like Section E -8 -b -5 to read "Soil test results from the proposed fill, test parameters to be determined by the city," Section E -8 -b -9 (New) Groundwater monitoring plan The gravel mine applicant must design a groundwater monitoring plan that establishes a baseline of groundwater quality in a monitoring well network consisting of wells completed in the unconsolidated, Prairie du Chien and Jordan Aquifers prior to mining activities. The city must approve of the plan prior to well installation. The test results'must be submitted to the City prior to mining activities. The list of parameters to be analyzed for, but not limited to are: pH, temperature, conductivity, dissolved oxygen, chloride (Laboratory method detection level at least 0.1 mg /L), arsenic, volatile organic compounds, diesel range organics, nitrate, MDA List 1, MDA List2 and MDAiist 3. The UMA is an agricultural research station. The University of Minnesota must disclose the Agricultural chemicals used including`petroleum, fumigants, pesticides, hormones, antibiotics, etc. used historically at the site and test for them in the monitoring well network. Section E- 8 -b -10. (New) Surface Water Monitoring Plan Prior to mining the first phase that will be part of the resulting lake, a surface monitoring plan will be submitted to the city for approval which will describe the frequency of water sampling and sampling parameters. Section E- 8 -Aa -6 (New) Characteristics of reclamation soils needed to restore the site including volume, origins, historic land use, physical and chemical characteristics. Section E- 8 -b -10 (New) Map of the location of any and all existing wells including the construction information of all wells within 300 feet of the proposed mining boundary. What would be different about the construction requirements of the AUF if the entire proposed location, of the AUF was currently in the DWMSA? Section 7 -15 U of M Agriculture experts have told me 3 feet of soil is necessary for growing corn. When a Phase is reclaimed 10 inches of topsoil and 26 inches of soil is what is necessary to return the land to growing corn. I w ould like the Ordinance language from "6 inches of topsoil" to "10 inches of topsoil g p p underlain by 26 inches of soil ". • Dakota Aggregates continues to maintain that the end use of the property_will'be for agricultural use and the reclamation standards are reflective of this stated use. However, it is apparent to all including' the proposer and the land owner that the ultimate use will be residential and the permit must reflect this fact. Since the potential for human exposure to existing contamination or contaminants introduced to the site from the asphalt /concrete plant or mine reclamation activities is greatest in a residential use scenario, the unresolved matter of existing contamination and control of introduced contamination must be addressed. Section G -2 -b -8 add definition of "Waste By products" to list of definitions should include all process water, gravel wash water, truck wash , etc. Section G- 2- b- 11 -e -4 Ratio of Aggregate Processing Ida not agree with limiting the amount of recycled aggregate product to 30% in order to have the mine close sooner. Section G -2 -e -5 (new) Runoff from recycle piles must be collected and fines and sediments sampled for contaminants of concern and managed appropriately. Section H -4 -b I believe the word "hours" is missing after "twelve (12)" Section H -7 -9 Can we change last sentence from "...treated with a dust retardant on a regular basis..." to "...treated with a dust retardant as needed..." Section H- 7- 13'What MDH regulations are applicable? Section H -7 -15 U'of M Agriculture experts have told me 3 feet of soil is necessary for growing corn. When a Phase is reclaimed 10 inches of topsoil and 26 inches of soil is what is necessary to return the land to growing corn. 1 would like the Ordinance language to from "6 inches of,topsoil" to "10 inches of topsoil underlain by 26 inches of soil ". Section J -8 Haul -back Materials and Operations The types of sites that fill material can be derived from are limited to agricultural and residential that have,not history of environmental concerns. Fill is not allowed from industrial or commercial sites. I cannot,fin`d a definition in the City's ordinances for clean fill so let's use this one. Clean fill as defined as uncontaminated natural earthen materials such as soil, sand and gravel. a y EXCERPT OF DRAFT MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING MARCH 27, 2012 5:b. Dakota Aggregates Request for Ordinance Text Amendment to Allow Large Scale Mining (12- 02 - TA). Dakota Aggregates has submitted a request for 'an amendment to Section 11 -10 -4 of the zoning ordinance to allow mining iii an area of Rosemount located west of Akron Avenue and south of County Road 42 which is currently riot allowed so as not to interfere with orderly growth and expansion of public utilities. This is a continuation of the public hearing opened at the February 28, 2012, Planning Commission meeting and continued to the March 27, 2012 meeting. Senior Planner Zweber reviewed the staff report and explained the changes made since the February 28 meeting and how the public comments were addressed. City Attorney LeFevere explained why the area should not be zoned industrial rather than remaining agricultural. Mr. LeFevere also addressed the issue of the extension of streets and utilities into the mining area. The public hearing was re- opened at 7:52p.m. Myron Napper, 338f 145 Street East, stated he spoke at a previous meeting about the, safety hazard of increased traffic on the County Road 42 and Highway 52 infrastructure and asked when it will be addressed. He stated he is in favor of the mining. There were no further public comments. MOTION by Ege to close the'public hearing. Second by Miller. .Ayes: 6. Nays: None. Motion approved. Public hearing was closed at 7:57p.m. In response to the question about the interchange improvements, Community Development Director stated that the county had applied for State funding for the interchange and it scored too low to qualify. Chairperson Powell confirmed that the project ,does not score well regionally compared to other projects. applying for funding.. -Commissioner Miller asked if the traffic patterns will be discussed in the permitting process and Mr. Zweber stated that the traffic plan can be reevaluated at that time. Commissioner Demuth stated she had submitted two pages of change and that only one of the changes had been approved so she will not be able to vote in favor of this item. Chairperson Powell asked staff to discuss the letter received from Dakota County and Commissioner Demuth's requested changes. Mr. Zweber stated many of the suggested changes are specific in nature and would be more appropriate to discuss incorporating at the permitting process. He also stated that some of Commissioner Demuth's changes are similar or the same as the County's regulations and while staff agrees that the County regulations should be followed and their ordinances can be sited within the ordinance, the specific language does not have to be stated in the ordinance. Mr. Zweber stated that Commissioner Demuth has requested the,current County definition of clean fill be adopted, while the County letter requests a definition of clean fill that is proposed within a draft - County Ordinance` amendment. Mr. Zweber stated that if our ordinance says that the County regulations need to be followed, then our ordinance would not need to be amended if the County amended their regulations. Mr. Zweber further stated that the applicant's groundwater monitoring plan will be reviewed in more detail during the permitting process. • Commissioner Demuth stated there needs to a timeline when the groundwater monitoring plan is to be submitted; she would like more`language'regarding the groundwater monitoring plan; and reclamation should include enough top soil to accommodate the growth of crops. Commissioner Miller stressed the importance of including control in the ordinance over groundwater connectivity which could occur in a large scale mining operation. Chairperson Powell stated that while he appreciated Commissioner Demuth's concerns, he felt staff has strived to meet all of the issues raised. He further stated he is familiar with mining sites and reclamation plans and has never seen a three foot requirement for top soil. MOTION by Powell to recommend the City Council Adopt an Ordinance Relating to Large Scale Mineral Extraction; Amending Rosemount City Code, Sections 11 -1 -4, 11 -4 -1 and 11 -10 -4 and Adding New Section 11- 104-1. Second by Ege. Ayes: 3. Nays: Demuth, Miller, DiNella. Motion was not approved with a 3 -3 vote. Chairperson Powell asked the commissioners who voted against the motion to share their reasons. Commissioner Miller stated he is looking for language in the ordinance that holds the applicant accountable at the permitting process for the requirements in the ordinance. Mr. Zweber stated that the Commission can deny a permit if the applicant does not meet the ordinance requirements. Commissioner Miller added that any operation that impacts the groundwater needs to be addressed early in the ordinance. Mr. Zweber clarified the difference between and ordinance and a permit and stated that the ordinance requires an EIS and describes all regulations that the applicant needs to meet. During the permitting process, specific issues are examined and evaluated or not the applicant is following the ordinance regulations. If the applicant does not meet those requirements, Mr. Zweber further stated that the Commission can then deny the permit. Mr. Lindquist clarified that the EIS has already been performed and asked Commissioner Miller what specific language he would like to see in the ordinance. It was decided that"language should be included in the ordinance that states that the issues raised through the EIS will be properly evaluated and can be used as the basis for additional permit conditions associated with the permit issuance. Chairperson Powell asked staff if the item should be tabled to give staff time to incorporate language into the ordinance that addresses the commissioners' concerns. Commissioner Ege stressed" that she would not want these actions to be precedent setting based on the new language being proposed about the'EIS. Ms. Lindquist made the assurance that each permit would stand alone with similar requirements to meet but each separate situation would be addressed. MOTION by Powell to continue the item to the April 24, 2012, Planning Commission meeting. Second by Weber. 4 Commissioner Demuth stated she still has other concerns that have not been addressed. Chairperson Powell instructed Commissioner Demuth to meet with staff individually and he will inquire at the next meeting if her concerns were met. Ayes: 6. Nays: None. Motion was approved. The item was tabled to the April 24, 2012 Planning Commission meeting. y c . k �