10/10/2001 P&Z Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Search

Planning & Zoning Board October 10, 2001 Page 3 the CUP as well as the interim use permit. The CUP amendment did include an • expansion of the production building and included the batch plant that was 80' high. Staff advised that the conditions attached to the 1997 approvals did not specifically distinguish between the two permits —the conditional use permit and the interim use permit. The interim use permit only covered the northern 20 acres which was zoned LI. The conditional use permit covered the entire property. One can infer that conditions related to storage were intended to apply to the northern area. However, there had been differing interpretations voiced regarding which conditions apply where. Staff reviewed the conditions approved in 1997 and Molin's request that conditions 11 a, 13c, and 13e be eliminated. With regard to noise standards, staff noted the excerpts from M' es as listed with comments in the staff report. Staff noted that a test must be e to de ne if the specified decibel level was exceeded for 10% of the time o� our, r for 50% of the time for one hour. Daytime was defined as 7:00 am to time as 10:00 pm to 7:00 am. Molin had a noise measurement analys' ctober 2000 by Wenck Associates. On October 24, 2000, the firm t from 4:30 am to 5:30 am and from 5:30 am to 6:30 am. On October 201 ,1 the took readings from 4:30 am to 5:30 am. The readings indicated no violation _ PCA noise rules during those times. MPCA did state in a conversatio i F. y staff that if a test was conducted by established methods, MPCA typically a t� results of the test. Staff advised that neighbors we the MPCA to see if MPCA w a waiting period of sever perform another analysis. y the Wenck analysis. Staff contacted e analysis. This was possible, but there was ad, the City hired a noise analysis consultant to Staff noted the me the vironmental Specialist, on August 29, 2001 the Environment. Board t : d the project pending; submission of landscape plan, tree inventory, Ric W . '' rshed's TWAFFA requirement information, lighting plan, an understanding o e _ al use on the site, use of well heads on site as indicated by the County Well Poi Index. The landscape plan should show the use of native groundcover plants and trees, t e berm area on the north should be looked at for effectiveness and the use of irrigation, and the City should re -focus on the priorities set forth in the current Surface Water management Plan review process so that the surface water issues were better understood in plan review sites such as Molin Concrete. Staff commented that it was not clear why the Environmental Board did not receive the submitted landscape plan. The landscaping plan was approved in 1997. The new plan was a revision of the previously approved plan, and the drought - resistant species have already been planted. Staff advised that no tree loss would occur from the proposed new building. The Rice Creek Watershed had granted its preliminary approval. A complete lighting plan would be a condition of approval before City Council review. Chemical use on the site was not changing, nor were any new wells being proposed.