Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout8.a.Zoning Text Amendment and Conditional Use Permit - Lance Johnson & Shafer Contracting / CITY OF ROSEMOUNT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY FOR ACTION City Council Meeting Date: August 3, 1999 AGENDA ITEM: Zoning Text Amendment and Conditional Use AGENDA SECTION: Permit-Lance Johnson& Shafer Contracting Old Business PREPARED BY: Rick Pearson, City Planner AGENDA�� � - ATTACHMENTS: Draft findings for denial;PC Minutes (5-11 APPROVED BY: and 25-99) � Applicant: Lance Johnson, Shafer Contracting Location: 11/4 mile north of County Road 38 and 1/3 mile west of Rich Valley Blvd. Property Owner(s): Lance Johnson Area in Acres: 93 (total) Comp. Guide Plan Desig: Conservancy(`93 Comp Guide Plan); Agriculture (pending 2020 Comp Plan). Current Zoning: Agriculture Planning Comm. Action: Recommendation of approval(both) 3-2 SUMMARY Prior to taking action regarding the findings for denial,the City Attorney would like to speak with the Council in closed session. The draft findings are based upon policies of the Comprehensive Guide Plan intended to protect agricultural land. Additionally,there is a reference to the process undertaken with John Shardlow which has just started to examine mining in general. Any action taken to expand the scope of mining prior to the completion of this process is viewed as premature. Council could add findings to the resolution by motion which could still be executed by the Mayor prior to August 10, 1999 which is the last day of the extension. One of the questions that came up on July 13, 1999 concerned the applicant's ability to re-apply for the zoning text amendment and/or the conditional use permit. Zoning ordinance for amendments Section 12.11.B.6 Reapplication states"No application for the same or substantially the same amendment shall be made within six (6) months of the date of denial." RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to adopt a resolution for denial of a zoning text amendment; - and- Motion to adopt a resolution for denial of a conditional use permit. CITY COUNCIL ACTION: / CITY OF ROSEMOUNT �� DAKOTA COUNTY,NIINNESOTA q�� RESOLUTION 1999- A RESOLUTION FOR DENIAL OF A ZOIVING TEXT AMENDMENT REQUESTED BY MR. LANCE JOHNSON AND SHAFER CONTRACTING BASED UPON FINDINGS OF FACT WHEREAS,the Community Development Department of the City of Rosemount received an application for a zoning text amendment that would allow mineral extraction in the Agriculture District on a site located 11/4 mile north of County Road 38, 1/3 mile west of Rich Valley Boulevard on Apri19, 1999; and, WHEREAS,the Planning Commission conducted a public hearing as required by the zoning ordinance on May 11 and 25, 1999; and, WHEREAS,the City Council reviewed the zoning text amendment request on July 20, 1999 whereupon the Council directed city staff to prepare findings of fact in support of denial of the zoning text amendment request. NOW,THEREFORE,BE IT RESOLVED,the City Council of the City of Rosemount hereby denies the zoning text amendment requested by Mr. Lance Johnson and Shafer Contracting based upon findings of fact: FINDINGS OF FACT 1. The zoning text amendment is inconsistent with policies of the draft Rosemount 2020 Comprehensive Plan including Section 3.1.1 Agriculture which states "The agriculture area serves to protect natural environmental features such as trees, slopes, surface waters, and wetlands. It also prevents urban land uses from encroaching on heavy industrial and waste management uses by providing a buffer zone to mitigate problems between incompatible land uses. Typical uses within agriculture areas include those customarily associated with crop production, agricultural homesteads, and the raising,keeping and breeding of animals. Parks, open spaces, and recreational uses may also be accommodated in agricultural areas." Furthermore, it is the City's policy to "allow low intensity uses within the Agriculture areas as parks,recreation, open space,trails, agriculture, and residences at very low densities." The amendment to allow mining of sand& gravel will reduce the area of buffer between heavy or general industrial land uses and rural residential and agricultural uses. 2. The zoning text amendment is inconsistent with the current Comprehensive Guide Plan (Adopted in 1993)which designates the subject property for conservancy land use. \ Resolution 1999- Conservancy does allow interim uses such as sand and gravel mining only in areas where they do not disturb unique natural land forms (wetlands,hills, slopes and trees). Expansion of mining in this area will impact a wooded area and a thirty foot high slope which transitions into rolling topography. 3. Altering the shape of the land for future development of industrial land uses is a logical reason to allow interim uses such as mining for sand and gravel. However, the subject property is not in an area that anticipates future land uses other than agriculture in the draft Rosemount 2020 Comprehensive Plan. 4. The City Council has initiated a strategic planning process to study mineral extraction and determine the most appropriate locations for mining to occur. Designated areas for mining which incorporates end-use plans for future land development have not yet been identified. THerefore, consideration of the zoning text amendment is premature. ADOPTED this 3rd day of August, 1999 by the City Council of the City of Rosemount. Cathy Busho,Mayor ATTEST: Susan M. Walsh, City Clerk Motion by: Seconded by: Voted in favor: Voted against: Member absent: O CITY OF ROSEMOUNT DAKOTA COUNTY,MINNESOTA RESOLUTION 1999- A RESOLUTION FOR DENIAL OF A CONDITIONAL USE PERNIIT REQUESTED BY MR.LANCE JOHNSON AND SHAFER CONTRACTING BASED UPON FINDINGS OF FACT WHEREAS,the Community Development Department of the City of Rosemount received an application for a conditional use permit for mineral extraction in the Agriculture District for a site located 11/4 mile north of County Road 38, 1/3 mile west of Rich Valley Boulevard on April 9, 1999; and, WHEREAS,the Planning Commission conducted a public hearing as required by the zoning ordinance on May 11 and 25, 1999; and, WHEREAS,the City Council reviewed the conditional use pernlit request of July 20, 1999 and whereupon the Council directed city staff to prepare findings of fact in support of denial of the conditional use permit request. NOW,THEREFORE,BE IT RESOLVED,the City Council of the City of Rosemount hereby denies the conditional use permit requested by Mr. lance Johnson and Shafer Contracting based upon findings of fact: FINDINGS OF FACT 1. Section 6.1.D of the City of Rosemount Zoning Ordinance specifies Mineral Extraction as a conditional use in the Agriculture District provide that the site is east of State Trunk Highway 52 on properties situated within one-half('/z) mile of County State Aid Highway 42. 2. The City Council denied an amendment to the zoning ordinance to allow mineral extraction for the above mentioned property in the Agriculture District(Resolution 1999- �• ADOPTED this 3rd day of August, 1999 by the City Council of the City of Rosemount. Cathy Busho,Mayor ' \ Resolution 1999-_ ATTEST: Susan M. Walsh, City Clerk Motion by: Second by: Voted in favor: Voted against: Member absent: O Planning Commission . Regular Meeting Minutes May 25, 1999 Page 2 Public Hearing• Shafer Contracting Co., Inc CUP and Zonin� Text Amendment (Cont'd. from 5-11-991 Mr. Pearson summarized the request by Shafer Contracting for a zoning text amendment to expand mineral extraction in the Agriculture District. The amendment would allow mineral extraction as a Conditional Use Permit,providing location restrictions and requiring that an environmental review be completed prior to June 1, 1999. Commissioners discussed issues related to mining outside the Johnson property and hours of operation. Mining requests at other locations would require another text amendment and city council approval. Desired times for operation are Monday-Saturday, 7:00 a.m.-7:00 p.m. The CUP creates a mechanism to tighten the conditions of operation. Mr.Pearson indicated Shafer requested Paragraph 3 of the CUP be changed from 19 acres to 19%z acres consistent with ordinance standards for mineral extraction. Additionally, that Paragraph 5 be changed such that the access issue is consistent with the conditions of the current permit. The buffering provided is more than required, and staff has recommended a double row of spruce trees 12'high on the berm. In response to a letter from 7oan Schnieder, Mr. Pearson explained that the haulback of materials is not included in the permit and would require separate city council approval. Changes in the hours of operation would also require city council approval. Commissioners discussed city council's opposition to the extension of mining permits and their responsibility to the applicant to consider this application. Mr. Pearson explained the 60-day law which requires action on this application by June 11, 1999 or an extension of the deadline. Commissioner Klassen requested that issuance of the CUP be contingent upon Shafer remaining as owner. Mr. Pearson explained that a CUP runs with the land and cannot be limited to a specific owner. � Chairperson Droste opened the floor to the applicant. Scott Spisak indicated that he contacted each resident who attended the previous meeting in an effort to address any concems. Issues presented have been addressed, such as encroachments onto the Koehnen property,restoration,drainage and ponding. In response to Ms. Schnieder's letter, Shafer has not bid any projects with the airport which would result in the haulback of contaminated materials. It is against federal and state regulations, as well as company policy,to transport contaminated soil. Additionally, Shafer will comply with the hours of operation set by city ordinance. David Sellergren addressed issues with the CUP. Shafer does not care whether the access is a Planning Commission Regular Meeting Minutes May 25, 1999 Page 3 public street or an easement. Lance Johnson claimed it was a public street. It is Johnson's responsibility to resolve the issue. Shafer's consultant forester indicated the spruce trees recommended by staff are inconsistent with the existing oak savanna and may not survive due to the drainage system. While there is no visual connection with Koehnen, Shafer is willing to increase or decrease the berm as directed. Chairperson Droste opened the floor to the public. The following items were read into the record: letter dated May 24, 1999 from 7oan Schnieder; letter dated July 16, 1998 from the Minnesota Deparhnent of Transportation, addressed to Andy Sanchez and provided by Bob Plan; letter dated May 25, 1999 from Kunde Co. Inc. addressed to Scott Spisak. Charlie Koehnen, 12255 Rich Valley Blvd., indicated he does not want the berm,explaining he cannot see the mining area from his home. Prior to enlarging the mining operation,he wants to see the pit restored. Bob Plan, 11889 Rich Valley Blvd., Inver Grove Heights, expressed concems with the truck traffic,pollution and noise. He suggested that alternate routes be considered. He also expressed concerns with haulback activity in the future and a 24-hour operation. Mr. Spisak responded there is a 5 ton road limit going south of the property. He addressed issues with alternate routes,noise, and hours of operation. MOTION by Droste to close the public hearing. Seconded by Shoe-Comgan. Ayes:Droste, Shoe-Corrigan, Weisensel,Klassen, and Tentinger. Nays: 0. Motion carried. Comtnissioner Shoe-Corrigan indicated she did not approve the mineral extraction pernut for Lance Johnson because of non-compliance. She feels that,prior to issuing a CUP to Shafer, Mr. Johnson should live up to the obligations of his permit and bring the property into compliance. She is also concerned with the 20 year lifespan for this operation. Mr.Pearson explained that encroachments have been restored and the turf established. The minimum standards have been met by Mr. Johnson. Mr. Spisak further explained the first three phases will be reclaimed prior to expansion. MOTION by Tentinger to recommend that the City Council adopt a zoning ordinance amendment which will allow expansion of the mineral extraction permit for the property currently owned by Lance Johnson as proposed by Shafer Contracting. Seconded by Weisensel. Ayes: Weisensel,Tentinger, and Droste. Nays: Shoe-Corrigan and Klassen. Motion carried. MOTION by Tentinger to recommend that the City Council grant a Conditional Use Permit for / Planning Commission Regular Meeting Minutes May 25, 1999 Page 4 the 93 acres in the south half of the north half of Section 14,Township 115,Range 19,Dakota County, Minnesota subject to 1) Conformance with all requirements and standards specified in Section 12.4 of Ordinance B,the Rosemount Zoning Ordinance; 2)Conformance with the conditions of mineral extraction as they apply specifically for the property and are reviewed annually or as required by the City Council attached as Exhibit B; 3)Activity related to the mineral extraction process shall be confined to an area of no more than 19%contiguous acres as indicated by the phasing plan attached as E�chibit C, and all surrounding property shall be undisturbed or completely restored and vegetation established in a manner identified in Exhibit D; 4)No new mineral extraction permits will be issued in the Agriculture District within 1.5 miles of the Conditional Use; 5)Access for the Conditional Use utilizes an easement connecting to County Road 71, one mile north of County Road 38 via land owned by Koch Petroleum Group; 6) Traffic volumes and frequency shall be subject to Dakota County approval. Copies of all required permits from Dakota County or Minnesota Deparhnent of Transportation shall be provided to the City along with any applicable conditions; 7)A landscaped 75-foot setback is required along the common boundary with the eleven acre Koehnen property. Applicant shall submit a detailed grading and planting plan to be approved by staff and City Council. The plantings shall be maintained in good health for the duration of the mining operation, and the operator shall replace dead trees within the same season. Seconded by Weisensel. Ayes: Weisensel, Tentinger, and Droste. Nays: Klassen and Shoe-Corrigan. Motion carried. Public Hearin�: oning Text Amendment for Initiation of Ordinance A endments Chai rson Droste opened the public hearing on the Zoning Text Am ment for Initiation of Ordinan Amendments. The recording secretary has placed the davit of Publication and Posting of a ublic Hearing Notice on file with the City. Mr. Peazson explai d the proposed amendment to p graph 12.11 of the zoning ordinance changing the applicati procedure for text amen ents. Amendments may be initiated orily by the Council, Commission, r by petition of fected landowner. The petition will go first to the City Council for review, d will the e forwarded to the Planning Commission, along with Council coinments, for public he 'n Commissioners discussed iss regar due process and the definition of"affected" landowner. MOTION by We' ensel to close the public hearin Seconded by Droste. Ayes:Klassen, Tentinger,Dr e, Shoe-Corrigan, and Weisensel. Na • 0. Motion carried. MO N by Droste to recommend that the City Council adopt oning Text Amendment cerning Paragraph 12.11 changing the application procedure so applications may be ,. - Planning Commission . Regular Meeting Minutes May 11, 1999 Page 2 MOTION by Droste to recess the meeting unti17:00 p.m. Motion carried unanimously. Public Hearing: Shafer Contracting Co., Inc. CUP and Zoning Text Amendment Chairperson Droste opened the public hearing on the application by Shafer Contracting Co., Inc. for a Gonditional Use Permit for Mineral Extraction and a Zoning Ordinance Text Amendment. The recording secretary has placed the Affidavit of Publication and Affidavit of Mailing and Posting of a Public Hearing Notice on file with the City. Mr. Pearson summarized the requests by Shafer Contracting. The CUP is for mineral extraction on the Lance Johnson property,which is located in the Agriculture district. Currently,mini.ng is permitted in the General Industrial district and is limited in the Agriculture district to an azea within 1/�mile on either side of CSAH 42, east of Hwy. 52. The requested amendment to the zoning ordinance would allow mining in an area where it currently is not allowed. The zoning text amendment must be approved prior to the CUP. The CUP would include an additional 53 _ acres and would set up future phasing plans to the west. While existing standards for mineral .� extraction remain,the CUP process incorporates additional conditions and findings. Chairperson Droste opened the floor to the applicant. David Sellergren, attorney for Shafer Contracting, Scott Spisak, Vice President of Shafer Contracting, and Steve Nicholson, Consultant Forester were present. Mr. Sellergren explained Shafer's request for a zoning text amendment versus a zoning change in order to establish permanent, long-term parameters for the mining operation. Shafer understands that non-compliance with any of the conditions could result in revocation of the CUP. Mr. Sellergren referenced the environmental review previously done and indicated that another review is not required. He indicated that berming,plantings and cleanup will be done immediately. Scott Spisak provided background information on Shafer Contracting and the structure of the operation. He explained the various uses for aggregate, and listed the numerous consultants utilized for this mining operation. Primary access to the property would be via an easement over Koch property or 120th St. No access is intended through the Koehnen property. .Mr. Spisak reviewed existing and proposed mining operations,haul routes, dust control, and the phasing plan. Shafer will immediately construct additional berm along both sides of the Koehnen property and the eastern edge of the pond area. The existing pond will be moved and the pipe sealed so drainage no longer goes north to the Koehnen property. Mr. Spisak assured the � Commission that Shafer will comply with the 19%z acre limitation on maximum open mining • Planning Commission Regular Meeting Minutes May 11, 1999 � Page 3 � area allowed at one time and that reclamation will follow each advancement to the west. Mr. Spisak estimated a timeframe of approximately 20 years for this mining operation. Steve Nicholson addressed tree preservation issues. He proposed immediately moving trees to berms and buffer zones. He further proposed the establishment of a nursery with plant stock for later use in an effort to establish tree diversity on the si�e. ' In response to Mr. Pearson's outline of the negative impacts of expanding the mining permit,Mr. Sellergren indicated the improvement to tlie existing operation would provide a benefit, inspections are encouraged and may result in a comfort level requiring less monitoring, Shafer will post a bond to negate any financial drain on the city,the mining operation will not be iricreased and will be better managed and restored, and the surrounding area is riot planned for urban development. Commissioners reviewed the proposed grading elevations. � _ Chairperson Droste opened the floor to the public. Joan Schnieder, 12255 Rich Valley Blvd., expressed concerns with prior reclamation promises not kept, water contamination,traffic,recycled& contaminated material hauled to the site, and the lack of policing to control dumping &shooting in the area. Ms. Schnieder opposes the expansion of the mining operation. Charlie Koehnen, 12255 Rich Valley Blvd.,noted that taxes on this property have not been paid to the County by Lance Johnson. Additionally,Mr. Johnson has not reclaimed the property. Marsha Mrozinski, 11771 Rich Valley Blvd.,Inver Grove Heights, expressed her concerns with truck traffic and drivers' failure to obey stop signs and speed limits, along with dust and noise pollution. She would like to see limits placed on the hours and days of operation. Bob Plan, 11889 Rich Valley Blvd.,Inver Grove Heights,wants to see a limitation on the hours of operation and no activity on the weekends. He is also concerned about the traffic. He indicated that oil or gas was found in the water,which raises concerns of pollution. Chris Plan, 11815 Rich Valley Blvd., Inver Grove Heights, also expressed concerns with traffic and pollution. � Discussions continued concerning the storm water storage pond and pollution concerns. / Planning Commission + Regular Meeting Minutes May 11, 1999 Page 4 Mr. Spisak responded to residents' concerns. He explained there is a designated recycling area. Any existing,recycled materials located elsewhere on the property will be moved to the designated area. While no contaminated materials were foundhas been installed to pre ent' if anything is uncovered,it will be disposed of properly. A gate unlawful dumping in the mining area. No increased traffic is expected and there are no plans to operate at night. Shafer has a safety director°neet with es d ntato address hteirgoncerns.� drivers. Mr. Spisak indicated he is willmg to Commissioner Shoe-Corrigan identified issues of whether this use is compatible with the neighborhood and the timeframe for the mining operation. A long-term mininS operation would have an impact on the lives of the neighborhood. She believes this company would be an asset to the community. The reclamation plan is the best seen and the operation would be an improvement over what is usually done. Commissioner Weisensel recognized the concerns of the neighbors but felt those issues would be addressed by the city council. He supported the reclamation plan and proceeding with a � recommendation of approvaL Commissioners discussed terms and conditions to be included in the CUP. Staff matter back on to draft recommendations based upon Commissioner comments and to bring tlus May 25. Discussion continued concerning the area to be covered by the text amendment. Commissioner Weisensel indicated he would be interested in including more than the 93 acres involved in this application. Following further discussion, Staff was instructed to limit the zoning text amendment to 93 acres and future requests for mining permits in the Agriculture district would be addressed on a case-by-case basis. MOTION by Droste to table action regarding the zoning text amendment and the conditional use permit until May 25, 1999. Seconded by Shoe-Corrigan. Ayes: Shoe-Corrigan,Weisensel, � T�ntinger, and Droste. Nays: 0. Motion carried. There being no further business to come before this Commission,upon MOTION by Droste and upon unanimous decision,the meeting was adjourned at 9:45 p.m. Respectfully submitted, k�` � Dianne G. Quinnell,Recording Secretary 6.1 AG AGRICULTURE DISTRICT D. Conditional Uses: 5. Mineral Extraction,provided_ a. The site is east of State Trunk Highway 52 on properties situated within one-half(1/2)mile of County State Aid Highway 42; OR b. The site is no less than one (1)mile north of Countv Road 38 on pro�erties situated within one mile west of County Road 71; AND c. The propertv is not contiguous to anv residential zoning district, and is at least one thousand(1000) feet from anv such zoning district within the Cities of Rosemount or Inver Grove HeiQhts; AND d. Environmental Review,pursuant to the Minnesota Environmental Policv Act, Minn. Stat. Chapter 116D, includin�the propertv has been completed by June 1, 1999. CITY OF ROSEMOUNT DAKOTA COUNTY,MINNESOTA RESOLUTION 1999- A RESOLUTION FOR DENIAL OF A ZONING TEXT AMENDMENT REQUESTED BY MR. LANCE JOHNSON AND SI3AFER CONTRACTING BASED UPON FINDINGS OF FACT WHEREAS,the Community Development Department of the City of Rosemount received an application for a zoning text amendment that would allow mineral extraction in the Agriculture District on a site located 11/4 mile north of County Road 38, 1/3 mile west of Rich Valley Boulevard on Apri19, 1999; and, WHEREAS,the Planning Commission conducted a public hearing as required by the zoning ordinance on May 11 and 25, 1999; and, WHEREAS,the City Council reviewed the zoning text amendment request on July 20, 1999 whereupon the Council directed city staff to prepare findings of fact in support of denial of the zoning text amendment request. NOW,THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED,the City Council of the City of Rosemount hereby denies the zoning text amendment requested by Mr. Lance Johnson and Shafer Contracting based upon findings of fact: FINDINGS OF FACT 1. The zoning text amendment is inconsistent with policies of the draft Rosemount 2020 Comprehensive Plan including Section 3.1.1 Agriculture which states "The agriculture area serves to protect natural environmental features such as trees, slopes, surface waters, and wetlands. It also prevents urban land uses from encroaching on heavy industrial and waste management uses by providing a buffer zone to mitigate problems between incompatible land uses. Typical uses within agriculture areas include those customarily associated with crop production, agricultural homesteads, and the raising,keeping and breeding of animals. Parks, open spaces, and recreational uses may also be accommodated in agricultural areas." Furthermore, it is the City's policy to"allow low intensity uses within the Agriculture areas as parks, recreation, open space,trails, agriculture, and residences at very low densities." The amendment to allow mining of sand& gravel will reduce the azea of buffer between heavy or general industrial land uses and rural residential and agricultural uses. 2. The zoning text amendment is inconsistent with the current Comprehensive Guide Plan (Adopted in 1993)which designates the subject property for conservancy land use. ' Resolution 1999- Conservancy does allow interim uses such as sand and gravel mining only in areas where they do not disturb unique natural land forms (wetlands,hills, slopes and trees). Expansion of mining in this area will impact a wooded area and a thirty foot high slope which transitions into rolling topography. 3. Altering the shape of the land for future development of industrial land uses is a logical reason to allow interim uses such as mining for sand and gravel. However,the subject property is not in an area that anticipates future land uses other than agriculture in the draft Rosemount 2020 Comprehensive Plan. 4. The City Council has initiated a strategic planning process to study mineral extraction and determine the most appropriate locations for mining to occur. Designated areas for mining which incorporates end-use plans for future land development have not yet been identified. Therefore, consideration of the zoning text amendment is premature. 5. Mining is essentially an industrial use which,because of noise,traffic, dust, fumes and other such characteristices,has an undue adverse impact on agricultural homesteads and the quietude of agricultural areas, and is therefore incompatible with such uses. ADOPTED this 3rd day of August, 1999 by the City Council of the City of Rosemount. Cathy Busho, Mayor ATTEST: Susan M. Walsh, City Clerk Motion by: Seconded by: Voted in favor: Voted against: Member absent: