Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout6.e Zoning Text Amendment fo Asphalt Plants as an Interim Use Permit in the General Industrial District, 04-77-IUPCITY OF ROSEMOUNT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY FOR ACTION Citv Cnunril Meeting Data Janunry 18. 2005. AGENDA ITEM: Planning Case 04 -77 -IUP Zoning Text AGENDA SECTION: Amendment for Asphalt Plants as an Interim Consent Use Permit in the General Industrial District PREPARED BY: Rick Pearson, City Planner. AGENDA NO ATTACHMENTS: Draft Zoning Ordinance, Draft PC Minutes of 12/28/04, CC Work Session Minutes of APPROVED BY 09/15/04, CC Minutes of 08/17/04, PC Minutes of 07/27/04 RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to adopt an ordinance amending Section 6.16, General Industrial District creating an Interim Use Permit requirement for asphalt plants with standards. ACTION: ISSUE This item is staff initiated based upon a request by a local business and discussion by the City Council regarding the appropriate mechanism for locating asphalt plants in the City. Discussions resulting from the IUP application elsewhere on the agenda have prompted the preparation of the attached draft ordinance language. The text amendment regulates Asphalt plants permitted in the General Industrial District by granting of an Interim Use Permit (IUP). PLANNING COMMISSION PUBLIC HEARING On December 28, 2004, the Planning Commission conducted a public hearing as required for zoning text amendments. No one from the audience identified concerns about the proposed amendment. Joe Jacoby of Pine Bend Paving was present to answer questions on behalf of the asphalt industry. The Commissioners had a number of questions including: 1) the location of the General Industrial District and its relationship to the Metropolitan Urban Service Area boundary; 2) a typographical error in the proposed text, 3) regulating heights of the stockpiles; and 4) clarification of the lifespan of the Interim Use Permit. In response, staff displayed the 2020 Comprehensive Plan for the land use question and noted the error. Staff then indicated that the maximum stockpile height would be fifty feet. Joe Jacoby commented that this was acceptable to Pine Bend Paving. Lastly, the expiration of the Interim Use Permit is specified within the permit itself. The Commissioners then unanimously recommended approval of the text amendment. BACKGROUND Asphalt plants are currently a permitted use in the General Industrial District. Pine Bend Paving operates the only asphalt plant in Rosemount, and is examining options for relocating. It is currently located west of U.S. 52 on the southern edge of the Flint Hills Resources (FHR) refinery, near the base of one of the "Flame towers The site is the former Solberg Aggregate site, now owned by FHR. Mining in the Solberg area is winding down, and the pit area is in the process of being restored. Pine Bend's strategy is to continue to operate in the current location for another year under its own permit, then another site would be secured for a more long -term plant location. The current ordinance makes it difficult for asphalt plants to settle in the community even though permitted in the GI District. The District performance standard requiring a building for permitted uses has the effect of precluding an asphalt plant in the community. This item was briefly discussed by the Planning Commission several months ago. Due to concerns raised by the Planning Commissioners about the potential longevity of asphalt plants and discussions with the City Attorney staff is recommending the Interim Use Permit process. SUMMARY Asphalt Plants are somewhat unique in that they don't require buildings and can be mobile. A recent amendment to the General Industrial District created a minimum building requirement of ten percent of a site. This requirement effectively preempts establishment of an asphalt plant. The standard was created to encourage permanent investment in industrial land. There is support in allowing asphalt plants within the community because there are local and regional benefits. There may be some economic benefit to the City because of a locally available source of asphalt for street and highway improvements. There is also the efficiency of locating asphalt plants with aggregate mining, to reduce the trip generation of the truck traffic. The IUP process creates an opportunity to permit asphalt plants with a defined life span and as a result, waive some of the performance standards applied to permanent industrial uses. The down -side of asphalt plants can be that once they are established, they can be difficult to remove, primarily due to the regulatory environment in the Metro area. The reason a city may want them relocated is that they are a reasonable use in a more secluded location, but when development starts moving toward the asphalt plant location, there are usually nuisance related issues. In other words, it is commonly held that urbanized development and an asphalt plant are incompatible land uses. The IUP process can specify the removal date as well as conditions of operation, similar to conditional uses and mineral extraction permits. In general, an IUP can be revoked when: 1. The date specified in the permit occurs. 2. An event occurs as specified in the permit causing it to be revoked. Or the use does not operate in compliance with conditions of the IUP, causing revocation. 3. Rezoning of the property where the IUP is located causing the use to be non- conforming. Common complaints are odors and the potential for excessive truck traffic. Conditions of operation similar to mineral extraction permits are included to address these issues and others that may be identified through the process. The attached draft ordinance has 2 performance standards dealing with separation of the use from right -of -way and residential or public uses. This is both to address aesthetics and potential nuisance complaints. To address a previously stated concern by the Planning Commission, stockpiled materials will be limited to 50' in height and the ordinance also requires screening of the stockpiled materials as well as equipment on site. Another primary concern is truck traffic generation. The ordinance requires designating particular haul routes and ensures that the developer will pay for any road improvements necessary to operate the asphalt plant. Conditions also address smoke and particular matter, and odors. RECOMMENDATION Staff is recommending approval of a text amendment to the General Industrial District to permit asphalt plants by Interim Use Permit. 3 City of Rosemount Ordinance No. B- AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 6.16 OF THE CITY OF ROSEMOUNT ZONING ORDINANCE B Interim Use Permit for Asphalt Plants in the IG District THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROSEMOUNT, MINNESOTA, ORDAINS that Ordinance B, adopted September 19, 1989, entitled "City of Rosemount Zoning Ordinance," is hereby amended as follows: Section 1 Rosemount Zoning Ordinance B, Section 6.16D is hereby amended by adding the following: 4. Asphalt Plants and related processing of stockpiled materials subject to the following: a. The asphalt plant and all equipment and materials associated with it shall be located a minimum of 600 feet from anv non General Industrial District land, and 2,600 feet from anv Residential or Public district. b. The plant and all equipment and materials associated with it shall be setback a minimum of 75 feet from any property boundary line and screened by natural features including changes in elevation and vegetation. Year -round 100% opaque screeninq with earthen berms and landscaping shall be required from ground level to the first 30 percent of the overall height and 50% opaque to 50 percent of the overall height of the plant as viewed from eve level from surrounding right -of -way or roadways. c. Asphalt plants are exempt from the minimum building size requirements specified in Section 6.16.E.9.b. d. Traffic generated by the asphalt plant shall utilize haul routes approved by the City and other agencies as required. The asphalt plant owner shall be responsible for road improvements and easements needed for ingress and egress subject to approval by the City, as well as the County Highway Department or the Minnesota Department of Transportation as required. e. Traffic generated by the asphalt plants shall enter onto streets consistent with City access and design standards. The owner of the asphalt plant shall be responsible for all costs associated with road improvements required to serve the use. f. Stockpiles associated with the asphalt plant shall be limited to a height of fifty 50 feet. Ordinance B- g No smoke or particulate matter shall be discharged that is darker than No. 1 classification of the Ringlemann Smoke Chart furnished by the U.S. Bureau of Mines, or 20 opacity as determined by the MPCA. Further, emissions shall conform to standards set by E.P.A. and M.P.C.A. h. The asphalt plant shall operate so as not to discharge onto the soils of the lot, across the boundaries of the lot or through percolation into the subsoil of the lot or beyond the boundary of the lot where such use is located toxic or noxious matter in such concentrations as to be detrimental to or endanger the public health, safety, comfort or welfare; or, cause injury or damage to property or business. i. The asphalt plant shall operate in a way so as to prevent the emission of odorous matter of such quality as to be readily detectable beyond the lot line of the site on which such use is located. L The asphalt plant shall comply with the applicable operating, special requirements and bonding for restoration standards for Mineral Extraction specified in Section 12.4 of this ordinance. Section 2 EFFECTIVE DATE This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect from and after its passage and publication according to law. ENACTED AND ORDAINED into an Ordinance this 18th day of January, 2005. CITY OF ROSEMOUNT William H. Droste, Mayor ATTEST: Linda Jentink, City Clerk Published in the Rosemount Town Pages this day of 2005. Excerpt from the Regular Planning Commission Meeting of December 28, 2004. Public Hearing: 5B. Case 04 -77 -TA Zoning Text Amendment for Asphalt Plants as an Interim Use Permit in the General Industrial District. City Planner Pearson reviewed the Staff Report. Staff initiated this item based upon a request by a local business and discussion by the City Council regarding the appropriate mechanism for locating asphalt plants in the City. Discussions resulting from the IUP application elsewhere on the agenda have prompted the preparation of the attached draft ordinance language. The text amendment regulates Asphalt plants permitted in the General Industrial District by granting of an Interim Use Permit (IUP). Chairperson Messner asked the Commission if they had any questions for Mr. Pearson. Commissioner Powell questioned if the areas where the plants would be generally located are outside the existing MUSA line and areas that would not require utility service in the near future. Mr. Powell was concerned with filling the MUSA area with asphalt plants. Mr. Pearson responded that the area north of Count Road 42 on either side of Highway 52 and a small area south of 55 and east of 52 are all zoned General Industrial and in the MUSA. That is a fairly large area and an area where it is feasible that an asphalt plant could be located off of Highway 55 but eventually the area may be zoned differently by the railroad tracks. Mr. Powell then asked for clarification of Item H. Mr. Pearson noted the typographical error in line three of Item H. Mr. Messner asked if there was a problem with traffic or the height of stock pile what kind of remedy is there unifier an IUP. Mr. Pearson stated the IUP could be revoked if not operating to the standards. Mr. Messner asked the timeline of the IUP. Mr. Pearson stated each IUP defines its own end date. Chairperson Messner opened the public hearing. MOTION by Powell to close the Public Hearing. Second by Schultz. .Ayes: Schultz, Zum, Messner. Humphrey. and Powell. Nays: None. Motion carried. Chairperson Messner asked for any follow -up discussion or questions. MOTION by Powell to recommend that the City Council adopt an amendment to the General Industrial District creating an Interim Use Permit requirement for asphalt plants with standards. Second by Humphrey. Ayes: Schultz. Zurn, Messner, Humphrey, and Powell. Nays: None. Motion carried. Mr. Pearson indicated the item will go before the City Council on January 18. 2005. Excerpt from the Regular City Council Meeting of August 17, 2004 Danner Zoning Ordinance Text Amendment Community Development Director Lindquist, presented an amendment to the zoning ordinance that would permit an asphalt plant on the property of Marlon Danner. City Attorney LeFevere noted that a conditional use permit (CUP) could be used in conjunction with the mining permit. The Planning Commission noted that it would be hard to track with the mining permit. An interim use permit could restrict the time period and not allow any extensions. LeFevere said this is a difficult decision since the future of the mining business is unknown. LeFevere suggested linking the asphalt plant as an accessory use to the mining. Staff does not support the interim use process for an asphalt plant because it has a ten to fifteen year window. There are zoning districts now that do allow an asphalt plant. Mr. Joe Jacoby, from Pine Bend Paving, explained that they had been leasing the land from Flint Hills for the past 31 years and Flint Hills recently asked them to move their operations. Jacoby noted that their truck traffic would be three trucks per hour for about 60,000 tons of fill per day. The asphalt plant consists of a small control house within the mitring operation. They employ thirty people with an average hourly wage of S24. Community Development Director Lindquist noted that the land would have to be zoned industrial in order to locate an asphalt plant on it and industrial also has a minimum building size of 10% of the land size. Lindquist thought this zoning amendment is premature due to the Highway 52/42 Corridor Study and its affects on land use. Council Member DeBettignies reminded Council about the possibility of siting the air cargo facility in that area and its affects on land use. City Attorney LeFevere noted that once a business was allowed it may be harder to shut it down if land uses change. Council consensus was that more research would be needed including maps and mining facts, and directed staff to add this item to the Council's September work session. MOTION by Strayton to table the Zoning Ordinance Text Amendment requested by Marlon Danner until the October 5. 2004 regular City Council meeting. Second by Riley. Ayes: Riley, Strayton, DeBcui nies, Shoe Corrigan. Droste. Nays: None. Motion carried. P EXCERPT FROM THE REGULAR PLANNING COMNUSSION MEETING OF JULY 27, 2004. 5D. CASE 04 -47 -TA Danner Zoning Ordinance Test Amendment. City Planner, Rick Pearson. introduced the Danner Zoning Ordinance Text Amendment which would allow the permitting of asphalt plants in the aticultural district that in conjunction with mineral extraction. Marlon Danner requested an amendment to the zoning ordinance that would permit an asphalt plant on his property. He has a permit for a mineral extraction operation on a75- acre site in the A ricuihtre zoning district. The site is located approximately 1.2 miles east of the intersection of County Road 42 and U.S. 52, on the south side of County 42. According to Pearson, asphalt plants are currently permitted only in the General Industrial District. The request was intended for the relocation of Pine Bend Paving, Inc., current]\• located on Flint Hills Resources property. The existing site has a mineral extraction permit operated by Solberg Ag­ cgate Company that is being phased out. The current site is located on the west side of US 52 between the new railroad overpass and the refinery. Mineral extraction is currently a permitted use in the General Industrial District according to standards. It is also permitted in a limited portion of the Agriculture District otherwise described as an "overlay" district. The Danner, Furlong, Ped and Vesterra mineral extraction permits are all within the Agriculture district. The Plattning Commission needs to be satisfied that asphalt plants could be acceptable in the Agriculture district in conjunction with a mineral extraction permit. There are land -use advantages to co- locating an asphalt plant with a mineral extraction permit. According to the National. Asphalt Pavement Association, 95 of the pavement mix by weight is aggregates, originating in the mining area. The Danner property is designated as part of the Industrial Mixed WM) Use area in the 2020 Comprehensive Plan. Staff prepared a draft ordinance permit that would allow the operation of asphalt plants under a conditional use permit tCUP). A key consideration was the CUP would only be permitted as accessory to a mineral extraction permit. The CUP process included findings that are based upon mitigation of potentially undesirable effects. Present for this hearing, representing the Danner interest, was \Qarlon Danner of Danner, Inc. and Joel Jacoby front Pine Bend Pacing. Chair Messner opened the public hearing. No one responded, therefore, Commissioner Powell motioned to close the public hearing which was seconded by Conunissioner Humphrey. All ayes to close the public hearing. Questioning was opened by Chair Messner with his own inquiry related to conditional use permits and how they expire. He felt this could be become a permit without limit. Pearson pointed out that completion of mineral extraction activities would cause the expiration of the conditional use permit for the asphalt plant. Zum inquired as to whether all people in the area have been notified of this potential plant construction in reference to public noise due to operations and disturbances with the increased traffic of trucks. Pearson indicated that a nrailing had not been sent out. The zoning text amendment process is not site specific. If the text amendment were to be adopted, it would be expected that a subsequent application would be processed for the Pine Bend Paving Plant to be located on the Danner property, triggering a public hearing with mailings. Joel Jacoby of Pine Bend Paving introduced Pine Bend Paving as a local business that has been in business for 31 year and has never had a single citizen cumplaint. Chair Messner asked for clarification on the brochure that indicated 95% of the asphalt came from recycled product. Jacoby said that was correct. Messner w'as concerned with any limitation to the heiglit of the stock piles. This issue would be resolved via further investigation on Pearson's end prior to the City Council meeting. MOTION by Powell and second by Schultz to recommend that the City Council adopt an amendment to the zoning ordinance designating asphalt plants as a conditional use in conjunction with a mineral extraction permit in the Agricultural District. Ayes: Schultz, Zum, Messner, Humphrey, and Powell. Nays: None. Motion carried. Pearson indicated the follow up would consist of presentation of this Zoning Ordinance text amendment application at the August 17, '_004 City Council Meeting and that this issue would retrim to the Planning Commission in September in draft form.