11/14/2001 P&Z Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Search

Planning & Zoning Board September 11, 2001 Page 14 Chair Schaps asked Mr. Molin about the increased size of the operation and if he was proposing more truck trips, etc. Mr. Molin replied back in 1997 it was understood that they would be increasing their operations and this proposal would increase the trips. He stated by enclosing the building, it would take over some of the other work that was being done in the older building. He stated a lot of burden would be taken off of the old building. He stated there would be some increase of capacity. He indicated the raw materials were brought in during the morning hours, but he did not see any increase in truck traffic. He pointed out that his business was not the only business in the area that had truck traffic, and he did not believe they should be blamed for all of the increase in the traffic. He stated they had addressed the parking issue along Lilac. He indicated it had been their intention all along that they did not have to do the berm until they actually started encroaching on that area. With respect to the dust, he believed they were being held responsible for the increase of dust due to the construction of the berm. He indicated there was also increased noise from the construction of the berm and they had received many complaints about noise at that time. With respect to their hours of operation, the construction cycles were busy and then slow and they needed flexibility for their hours, but he stated at the present time, they were on 12 -hour shifts from 6:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. However, trucks did come in and out at different hours. He stated they would not be a 24 -hour operation. This would not be feasible. He stated there would be more product being stored in their yard, but it would be consolidated so they would be using the same space as they were using now. With respect to the "missing" sound test he did remember a policeman taking a noise test, but they did not feel that was representative of the noise that was actually generated by his business, but he did not know where the test was or what happened to it. With respect to the PA system, he stated they did not have a PA system, but they did have hand -held radios. He stated the original scenario was to plant a double row of trees to help with screening and noise, but as they got further into discussion with the neighbors, they came up with the concept of the berm. Originally the berm would be five foot high and smaller, but it was concluded a large 8 -foot berm and a large setback would be a nice compromise to screen the property. He stated the north end of the property line would be kept as a buffer zone and they had no intentions of doing anything with it. Mr. Rafferty asked when the plant was built. Mr. Molin replied the land was purchased in 1968 and the construction of the plant was completed in 1971. Mr. Molin indicated in 1968, it was a very rural site and when they originally purchased the site, they intended on expanding their business and planned on staying on the site and building their business. He stated they were still in the growth mode. Mr. Molin stated when they originally started business in 1971, there were very few homes in the area and the majority of the homes had been added since. Mr. Rafferty asked if they were watering down the ground on a daily basis. Mr. Molin stated they did it on a daily basis in the summer when it was dry. Mr. Molin stated they used to use Class 5, but now they used reground asphalt, which compacts very similar to an asphalt surface for any ground space they create, which reduced the dust. Mr. Rafferty stated his concern was that he could not imagine being an individual buying a home in this area and then complaining about an existing business. However, he stated the City planning was terrible to allow homes to be built around the business. He stated there was a rift that was created by nothing having things controlled properly. He stated the neighbors had been promised something and none of those issues had been taken care of. He stated staff had not given the Board members enough time to review this information and therefore he could not support this. He stated he wanted to see some of the prior issues be addressed before new issues