Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2011-06-01 PACKET 04.A.ii.REQUEST OF CITY COUNCIL ACTION COUNCIL AGENDA MEETING ITEM # •® DATE 6/1/11 , ®® Community Development ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT Jennifer Levitt 61 ITG\13G[111111 11"MIZ COUNCIL ACTION REQUEST Receive and place on file the approved minutes for the Planning Commission's meeting on April 25, 2011. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Receive and place on file the approved Planning Commission minutes for the meeting on April 25, 2011. BUDGET IMPLICATION $N /A $N /A N/A BUDGETED AMOUNT ACTUAL AMOUNT FUNDING SOURCE ADVISORY COMMISSION ACTION DATE ® PLANNING 5123/11 ❑ PUBLIC SAFETY ❑ PUBLIC WORKS ❑ PARKS AND RECREATION ❑ HUMAN SERVICES /RIGHTS ❑ ECONOMIC DEV. AUTHORITY SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS REVIEWED APPROVED DENIED ❑ MEMO /LETTER: ❑ RESOLUTION: ❑ ORDINANCE: ❑ ENGINEERING RECOMMENDATION: ❑ LEGAL RECOMMENDATION: ® OTHER: Planning Commission minutes from meeting on April 25, 2011 ADMINISTRATORS COMMENTS City Administrator Date COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: ❑ APPROVED ❑ DENIED ❑ OTHER ❑ ® ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ MEMO /LETTER: ❑ RESOLUTION: ❑ ORDINANCE: ❑ ENGINEERING RECOMMENDATION: ❑ LEGAL RECOMMENDATION: ® OTHER: Planning Commission minutes from meeting on April 25, 2011 ADMINISTRATORS COMMENTS City Administrator Date COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: ❑ APPROVED ❑ DENIED ❑ OTHER April A meeting of the Planning Commission was held at Cottage Grove City Hall, 7516 — 80th Street South, Cottage Grove, Minnesota, on April 25, 2011, in the Council Chambers and telecast on Local Government Cable Channel 16. ••.- Chair Treber called the Planning Commission meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. ` Members Present: Steve Messick, Tracy Poncin, Brian Pearson, Ryan Rambacher, Jim Rostad, Brian Treber Members Absent: Ken Brittain, Michael Linse, and Chris Willhite Staff Present: Jennifer Levitt, City Engineer John McCool, Senior Planner David Thiede, City Council Derrick Lehrke, City Council Justin Olsen, City Council •,. Treber asked if anyone wished to address the Planning Commission on any non - agenda item. No one addressed the Commission. Rambacher made a motion to approve the agenda. Rostad seconded. The motion was ap- proved unanimously (6 -to -0 vote). Chair's Explanation of the Public Hearing Process Treber explained the purpose of the Planning Commission, which serves in an advisory capacity to the City Council, and that the City Council makes all final decisions. In addition, he explained the process of conducting a public hearing and requested that any person wishing to speak should come to the microphone and state their full name and address for the public record. Public Hearings and Applications Joint Meeting with Public Safety. Health, and Welfare Commission 6.1 Public Safety /City Hall Project— Case SP11 -009 Planning Commission Minutes April 25, 2011 Page 2 of 9 The City of Cottage Grove has applied for site plan review of the proposed Public Safety /City Hall facility to be built on approximately 6.8 acres located on the southeast corner of Keats Avenue ( County Road 19) and 85th Street. McCool summarized the staff report and recommended approval subject to the conditions stipulated in the staff report. Jodi Nelson, Wold Architects, provided a detailed description of the site plan and pictures of the exterior features of the building, landscaping plan, and the interior floor plan. Treber asked how the public areas, such as the amphitheater, would be administered. McCool responded that it is an open area and staff does not foresee that there would be a lot of programming of events and activities. He stated that those areas could be reserved by the public for various uses. Treber expressed concern about traffic circulating past the Washington County South Service Center to the Public Safety /City Hall using the first entrance they encounter, which would be the entrance to the parking area by the police garage. He asked if there are plans for signage at that entrance to direct traffic around to the other side of the building. McCool responded that 85th Street will be extended to the east and will connect with Ravine Parkway to the north of the property. Traffic will be able to loop through the site either from 85th Street or at 90th Street. Treber asked if most of the traffic would come from 85th Street. McCool responded that it would probably be a split traffic pattern; northbound vehicles on Keats Avenue will probably take the 90th Street entrance and southbound traffic on Keats Avenue will take the 85th Street entrance. Treber requested that signage be added at the entrance to the parking area by the police garage to discourage traffic from pulling in there. Treber opened the public hearing. No one spoke. Treber closed the public hearing. Messick stated that the public record should reflect that the purpose of public hearings for site plans is to provide citizens an opportunity to comment on new projects and to ensure that new developments conform to the City's development standards and ordinances. He believes this project is consistent with the City's comprehensive plan and the development standards required by City ordinances. He stated that he will vote to approve the site plan, but wanted it in the record that the Planning Commission is not approving building this facility. Messick stated that the Commission's task is to ensure that the proposed facility meets city ordinance requirements, which is the Commission's only jurisdiction. McCool asked if the Public Safety Commission had any questions or comments on the site plan. There were none. Poncin made a motion to approve the site plan review for the Public Safety /City Hall facility subject to the conditions listed below. Rambacher seconded. 1. All applicable permits (i.e., building, electrical, grading, mechanical) and a commercial plan review packet must be completed, submitted, and approved by the City prior to the commencement of any construction activities. Detailed construction plans must be reviewed and approved by the Building Official and Fire Marshal. Planning Commission Minutes April 25, 2011 Page 3 of 9 2. All signage on the site must comply with the ordinance criteria. 3. The grading and erosion control plan for the site must comply with NPDES 11 Permit requirements. Erosion control devices must be installed prior to commencement of any grading activity. Erosion control must be performed in accordance with the recommended practices of the "Minnesota Construction Site Erosion and Sediment Control Planning Handbook" and the conditions stipulated in Title 10 -5 -8, Erosion Control During Construction, of the City's Subdivision Ordinance. 4. An as -built survey of all private utilities must be submitted to the City prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. 5. Ornamental wrought iron /aluminum fencing that is consistent with the City standards will be required for any fencing completed on the site. 6. A bicycle rack of sufficient design to accommodate two or more bicycles of a variety of sizes and frame shapes and support the bicycle upright by its frame in two places is required. Motion passed unanimously (6 -to -0 vote). The Public Safety Commission, along with their Council Liaison Olsen, adjourned to their meeting in the Administration Conference Room. 6.2 TNT Fireworks at Cub Foods - Case ICUP11 -008 TNT Fireworks has applied for an interim conditional use permit to allow the retail sale of Minnesota- approved safe and sane fireworks in the Cub Foods parking lot at 8690 East Point Douglas Road South. McCool summarized the staff report and recommended approval subject to the conditions stipulated in the staff report. Treber opened the public hearing. Mark Anderson, stated that he is representing Chris Ulmer from TNT Fireworks. He is the youth pastor at Rose of Sharon Lutheran Church, 6875 Jamaica Avenue, and will be in charge of the tent. No one else spoke. Treber closed the public hearing. Rostad made a motion to recommend approval of the interim conditional use permit for TNT Fireworks, subject to the conditions listed below. Pearson seconded. 1. The Interim Conditional Use Permit is in effect sixteen days prior to July 4 and four days after July 4 for years 2011 through 2013. The interim conditional use permit application fee must still be paid to the City for each year. Planning Commission Minutes April 25, 2011 Page 4 of 9 2. A building permit for the 30 -foot by 50 -foot temporary sales tent must be issued by the City's Building Inspections Department before the temporary tent is erected. 3. No merchandise may be displayed outside the tent. 4. A portable multipurpose dry chemical type fire extinguisher must be provided if electric service is provided to the temporary tent. "NO SMOKING" signs must be posted as required by the City's Fire Marshal. 5. All electrical wiring and connections must comply with State electrical requirements. 6. Overhead electrical service or electrical extension cords are prohibited from any power source that extends across the parking /paved area of the Cub Food's site. 7. Advertising signage attached to the temporary tent is permitted. Free - standing signs or off - premise advertising are prohibited. 8. All the requirements imposed by the National Fire Protection Association 1124, 2003 Edition for retail sales of consumer fireworks must be complied with. 9. The minimum aisle width serving as a portion of the exit access in the temporary sales tent and all aisles accessible by the public must be a minimum of 48 inches wide. Dead -ended aisles are prohibited. 10. Discharging fireworks within 300 feet of the temporary tent is prohibited. 11. Sale of fireworks is permitted between the hours of 9:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. TNT Firework's employees must be on site during business hours and during non - business hours if there is no storage container to lock -up the merchandise. 12. The applicant must obtain a "Sale of Fireworks" license from the City Clerk's office prior to selling any consumer fireworks. Motion passed unanimously (6 -to -0 vote). 6.3 3M East Cove Environmental Assessment Worksheet— Case EAW11 -007 3M Company has applied for a conditional use permit for removal of approximately 17,000 cubic yards of sediment containing PFCs from the East Cove at the 3M Cottage Grove plant and a portion of the sandbar at the cove outlet. The project removal area is approximately 1.5 acres in size and is located on 3M property, 10746 Innovation Road, at the base of a ravine adjacent to and east of the 3M Cottage Grove Plant. 3M has also applied for an Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) for their East Cove Sediment Removal Project. Planning Commission Minutes April 25, 2011 Page 5 of 9 McCool summarized the staff report and recommended approval of both the conditional use permit and the environmental assessment worksheet subject to the conditions stipulated in the staff report. Mark Gaetz, 3M Company, stated that this is the final stage of the physical removal at the site; there were three other distinct locations within the 3M Cottage Grove property that they took care in 2009 and 2010. Under this consent order, there are other activities that will happen related to treatment of waters and installation of a barrier well system for ground water extraction, which is the primary protection of the river. He presented schematics of the different phases of this project. He explained that the East Cove is a seasonal wetlands area and is the continued discharge area for the 3M wastewater treatment facility. He stated that they need to maintain their discharge so they can continue to operate the facility. He provided a description of the staged approach to the excavation and disposal of the excavated sediment. Sheet pilings will be installed by the railroad right -of -way and the west side of the cove and around the sandbar area along the bank of the Mississippi River. The water will be diverted to the east side of the Cove and a temporary loading dock will be constructed. They will then reverse the flow to the west side of the Cove and install a turbility curtain on the north and east sides of the Cove. They will dredge the east section of the Cove by using a piece of equipment on a floating platform and depositing the dredged material onto a barge where they will apply a super absorbent material. This material will be loaded onto trucks for transport to the approved disposal site. After the east side is dredged and partially backfilled, they will move to the west section and divert the water flow to the east. They will excavate approx- imately 17,000 cubic yards of sediment in wet form, which will be dewatered on site and hauled to the disposal site in Rosemount, Minnesota. Contaminated sediment at the sandbar will be removed and backfilled with clean sand. The last stage is to remove the dams and barges, stabilize, and demobilize. The schedule, pending PCA approval, is to start the process in June and demobilize in November 2011. The Army Corps of Engineers and Department of Natural Resources will provide a recommendation on the planting plan, to be completed in spring 2012 and then monitor the plantings over time to ensure active growth. Poncin asked what the jurisdiction is for the Planning Commission in regard to this application. McCool responded that the City is the responsible government unit and is responsible to evaluate that the EAW includes all the environmental issues and findings of the environmental review process, advertise the availability of the EAW, and conduct the public hearings. Planning staff is recommending that the Planning Commission consider a recommendation of a negative declaration that an Environmental Impact Statement is needed, because the City finds this project is warranted for the removal of the PFCs found in the sediment material in the East Cove, based on the findings that are identified in the planning staff report. Staff is also recommending approval of the conditional use permit for the grading operation to take place, subject to the conditions listed in the staff report. McCool reported that today, the City received a response from the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency responding to the comments made by the Metropolitan Council. The MPCA identified that the comments made by the Met Council were not within the scope of this particular project, but there are other projects taking place in Pool 2 of the Mississippi River, and it also deals with the total daily load limits of the Mississippi River. Those projects and their evaluations are ongoing. Linse asked if the negative declaration on the EIS is primarily because the a benefit for getting PFCs out is greater than the impact on the environment. McCool responded that was correct. Planning Commission Minutes April 25, 2011 Page 6 of 9 Treber opened the public hearing. Dale Andrews, 8430 Keats Avenue South, asked about the 2007 agreement and if this is a subset of whatever actions were to be taken by that agreement. She also asked for clarification on the number clean -up sites. McCool responded there are three sites. Andrews asked outside of the 3M plant, what the other two Washington County are. Gaetz responded in Woodbury on the east side of County Road 19 just north of the Woodbury/Cottage Grove boundary and in Oakdale on Highway 5 between Granada and Hadley. Andrews asked if the May 2007 agreement is public record. Gaetz responded yes. Andrews asked if they went through the same process for other two locations. Gaetz responded that this process was very similar to what was done in Oakdale and Woodbury; the only difference is that there is a wetland involved with the Cottage Grove site. Andrews asked if this process was also done because it involved the Mississippi River. Gaetz responded that it is in a sandbar in the River. No one else spoke. Treber closed the public hearing. Poncin stated that in the Met Council letter, one of their points of concern is that the East Cove Sediment Project does not include post project monitoring, which was not addressed in the MPCA letter. She asked if there is a monitoring plan. Gaetz responded that the whole project, including the East Cove and the former disposal areas, will be under a post site monitoring program once all the remedies are put in place. In regard to the Met Council letter, he explained that the EAW form does not allow for a good description of the project. They supplied as part of their package detailed information related to the remediation project. It was designed to give an understanding of what was going on. He believes the Met Council misunderstood what was to be evaluated, and the remedy plan approved by the MPCA had already been given public notice, which would have been the proper time to address the comments related to the work plan. Poncin asked at the conclusion of the East Cove project would they test to see if the PFCs are removed. Gaetz responded that a testing protocol is not a part of this particular remediation project. He explained that as part of developing the design for this project, hundreds of samples from more than 60 years of disposition were collected within the cove area. There is approximately two feet of clean granular material on the surface, and below that is the sediment layer, which is 4.5 to 5 feet deep. That layer is the material they will be removing. Below the sediment area is virgin soil and clay that is not impacted. Based on the data collected during the investigations, they have established the elevations to which they need to excavate. They will be utilizing a floating barge to excavate under the water using GPS- controlled equipment based on very good survey data. They will remove material down to the targeted depth and visually confirm that the sediment has been removed. Rambacher asked if there will be tests after the fact. Gaetz responded that there will be no physical material testing for confirmation of removal because it is not a practical method in this type of environment. However, there will be an ongoing groundwater monitoring program supporting the overall remedy. He stated that one of the most important aspects of this project is the installation of new barrier wells along the east side of the site and coupled with the existing production wells that are on the site, this will provide hydraulic control over the site. Basically, the wells intercept water before going into the river. It is not possible to get all the material out, as some has gone down into the water table, but that material will be recovered Planning Commission Minutes April 25, 2011 Page 7 of 9 through these extraction wells. Once it is recovered through the extraction wells, that water will be redirected back into the plant and treated with activated carbon filters before the water is discharged. They will basically remove the PFCs that remain in the groundwater before the water goes back into the river. The objective of the sediment removal project is to remove the source material, and the objective of the barrier well system is to assure that any PFCs that possibly remain does not get to the river. Rambacher asked for a quick overview of a barrier well. Gaetz responded that as part of the project, 3M established two hydraulic barrier wells on the western portion of the property. Those wells extract water on a continuous basis. This water is used in the facility and then goes through their wastewater treatment system before it is discharged. They discovered that hydraulic control only goes a certain distance to the east of those wells, so they installed two additional high capacity wells on the eastern portion of the property and are waiting for the opportunity to do some extended pump testing to make sure they have complete coverage along the bluff. In concert with the wells that currently exist, these wells keep anything that might be in the groundwater from getting to the river. These additional wells will extend that control all the way to the eastern boundary of 31VI's property. Rambacher asked if the barrier wells are pumping water out of the ground and bringing it back to the plant. Gaetz responded that it is brought back to the plant and re -used within the facility. They are establishing carbon treatment systems sufficient to treat all the extracted groundwater at the site before it is discharged through their normal wastewater process. Pearson made a motion to recommend acceptance of the Findings of Facts on the EAW for the East Cove Sediment Removal Project proposed by 3M Company and declare a negative declaration on the need for an EIS for the East Cove Sediment Removal Project proposed by 3M Company. Rostad seconded. Motion passed unanimously (6 -to -0 vote). Rambacher made a motion to recommend approval of the conditional use permit to allow removal of sediment from the East Cove at 3M Cottage Grove, subject to the conditions listed below. Poncin seconded. 9. 3M must comply with the remedial actions documented in the Minnesota Decision Document made by the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency staff in approving the recommended response action alternatives. 2. 3M will obtain all required State permits before excavation begins. 3. A copy of the National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) general storm water permit from the MPCA must be given to the City. 4. 3M will provide a copy of the Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) and a copy of all the erosion control inspections to the City Engineer. Motion passed unanimously (6 -to -0 vote). Discussion Items Rm- Planning Commission Minutes April 25, 2011 Page 8 of 9 Approval of Planning Commission Minutes from March 28, 2011 Messick made a motion to approve the minutes of the Planning Commission meeting on March 28, 2011. Rambacher seconded. The motion passed unanimously (6 -to -0 vote). Reports 9.1 Recap of April City Council Meetings Thiede provided a recap of the City Council meetings on April 6 and 20, 2011. He reported that a task force is being created for the Public safety /City Hall Veterans Memorial, and the City is looking for volunteers. The Council approved the production documents for the Public Safety /City Hall; the final plats and development agreements for The Waters at Michael's Pointe and Pinecliff 4th Addition; and the sign ordinance amendment regarding non- commercial signs with a small change. McCool explained that the Council amended the ordinance regarding signs being mounted on fences that are closer than the 10 -foot setback from a roadway or the two -foot setback from a sidewalk or trail. The modification approved by the Council would allow signs to be mounted flat on fences that don't meet the setbacks. Thiede stated that the Council also gave approval to begin negotiations with the YMCA on the community center. They tabled the decision on splash pads so they can discuss the details of the proposal at a workshop that will be held prior to the next Council meeting. Levitt announced that the City Council appointed Danette Parr as the Economic Development Director, taking over for Howard Blin, and she will start with the City on May 31. 9.2 Response to Planning Commission Inquiries 9.3 Planning Commission Requests Pearson asked if someone could verify the intent of the sprinklers in the Cottage Grove Ice Arena. Since the insulation barrier was installed, all the sprinkler heads have been covered up in the small rink and 90 percent of them in the large rink. In the newest rink, all the sprinkler heads are exposed. Rostad asked if the Planning Commission would be looking again at the dynamic signage ordinance, particularly regarding the sign at River Oaks. Levitt responded that the dynamic sign for the Golf Course is currently being manufactured and should be installed by June 1. The dynamic readerboard sign at the ice arena has been installed. That sign is in conformance with the city ordinances for dynamic signs. Messick stated that a dynamic sign ordinance was approved but there were some questions relating to nonconforming signs already in existence. McCool stated that an ordinance allowing dynamic signs with text only was approved and then was amended to allow pictorial types of images. Those graphics cannot flash or have any type of motion; they have to be static. Rostad stated that he thought we were going to re- address the size and scope. McCool does not recall that, noting that the Planning Commission Minutes April 25, 2011 Page 9 of 9 ordinance established a 24 square foot maximum for dynamic signs, and those regulations were used to design the signs for the ice arena and golf course. Treber asked about the temporary status of the traffic light that was installed at Hardwood and 70th Street, stating that he believes it has really increased the safety at that intersection. He asked if there has been an update from Washington County on when permanent poles would be installed. Levitt responded that Washington County installed the temporary wood poles because they do not want to make the investment in permanent light standards due to the cost until the 70th Street reconstruction is completed. She stated that she could provide to the Commission the feasibility study that was done in partnership with Washington County that shows what the ultimate design of 70th Street will look, specifically at 70th and Hardwood. The plan is to expand 70th Street to four lanes with turn lanes, which would affect the placement of the traffic light standards. At this time, the City is working with the County on the funding for that improvement, but that project is not on the five -year horizon. The City is also attempting to secure third party funding. She mentioned that as the next federal solicitation comes out for transportation improvements, the City will to apply once again for funding for a pedestrian underpass at 70th and Hardwood. If the city is able to secure that money, it would move that project forward a little faster. 9.4 Organizational Meeting and Election of Officers Treber explained that the Commission needs to have a second reading on the 2011 Planning Commission rules. He asked if there were any changes that need to be incorporated. There were none. Messick made a motion to approve the 2011 Planning Commission Rules as drafted. Rambacher seconded. Motion passed unanimously (6 -to -0 vote). Treber stated that the Commission needs to elect a Vice Chair and Secretary. Rambacher nominated Messick as Vice Chair. Poncin seconded. There were no other nominations. The motion passed unanimously (6 -to -0 vote). Rostad nominated Rambacher as Secretary. Messick seconded. There were no other nominations. Motion passed unanimously (6 -to -0 vote). Adjournment Messick made a motion to adjourn the meeting. Rambacher seconded. Motion passed unanimously (6 -to -0 vote). The meeting adjourned at 8:10 p.m.