Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutResolution No. 029-06 77 �Y..w:v..-.. .+K... .uV.s.Y .._v o++u..ave.+ar..-,—+.•. ._�a........r..wru_.�.,ena.,.r..c..> .v..,_._..v - i+� RESOLUTION WHEREAS, the Rochester Sand and Gravel Division of Mathy Construction applied for an amendment to and renewal of its Type III, Phase III, Restricted Development Permit #05-06 to permit the establishment of a hot mix asphalt facility on property located east of T.H. 63, south of 60t" Street South and northeasterly of Machinery Hill within the Quarve Quarry Pit; and, WHEREAS, since a hot mix asphalt facility is not a permitted use in this zoning district, the Applicant has proposed the development by way of the restricted development provisions; and, WHEREAS, R.C.O. §62.700 recognizes that certain land uses which are generally not allowed within a given zoning district can, if regulated, "serve both the public interest and allow a more equitable balancing of private interests than that achieved by strict adherence to standard zoning regulations;" and, WHEREAS, this application is being processed as an amendment to a Restricted Development Final Plan following the Type III, Phase III procedure with a hearing before the Planning Commission and a hearing before the Council; and, WHEREAS, R.C.O. § 62.708 (Criteria for Type III Developments) provides the relevant criteria for the review of this application; and, • WHEREAS, the Planning Department applied the criteria found at Section 62.708 to this application and prepared the following findings of fact:* 1) Final Development Plan Criteria: a) Public Facility Design: The proposed hot mix asphalt (HMA) facility will not result in a need for sanitary sewer or water facilities on-site. Electrical power, needed for the facility, is available. Olmsted County Public Works will require the applicant to construct a right-turn and by-pass lane on St. Bridget Road/CR 20. b) Geologic Hazards: There are no known geologic hazards on the property. c) Access Effect: Access to this property will be primarily from the north TH 63 quarry access. This access utilizes the existing frontage road access which is across from the 60tt' Street S.W., access on TH 63. The frontage road also has a south access. Secondary access to the property would be from the east side of the Quarry at St. Bridget Road/CR 20. There should be no impact to residential • 1 • roadways as a result of this application. Following the 2003 approval of a CUP for an HMA plant at this location, the applicant paved both accesses. d) Pedestrian Circulation: Pedestrian facilities and pedestrian circulation should not be impacted by this proposal. e) Foundation and Site Plantings: This plant is not a permanent structure and the HMA site sits on the floor of the quarry below grade and out of view from most of the surrounding area (except for silos and stack). Foundation plantings would not be needed nor reasonable considering the use and visibility of plantings that would be located near the equipment site. f) Site Status: This criterion is not applicable to this project. g) Screening and Bufferyards: This site offers unique opportunities for buffering and screening. The height of the quarry wall directly west of the proposed site is approximately 100 feet. To the north of the HMA site, the quarry wall drops to approximately 70 feet. Additionally, an existing row of mature evergreen trees exists along a portion of the west property boundary, between the north TH • 63 entrance (across from the 60th Street intersection with TH 63) and Machinery Hill. Due to topography and design of the quarry, it appears the HMA site would be most visible from the east (i.e., east of St. Bridget Road/CR 20). From the west, the visible portion of the HMA site would be the extended bag-house stack, which is proposed to be approximately 130 feet above the quarry floor. Approximately, the upper 30-60 feet would be visible from the west. h) Final Building Design: The final/proposed design would include increasing the height of the existing stack from 130 feet above the quarry floor to 160 feet above the quarry floor. i) Internal Circulation Areas: Internal loading and circulation patterns and site access are not proposed to change from the previous approvals. j) Ordinance Requirements: There should be adequate room on-site for employee parking and internal circulation of truck traffic. This use will be subject to meeting the Industrial Performance Standards of the Rochester Zoning Ordinance and Land Development Manual (Sec. 63.600 et. seq.); and, • 2 • WHEREAS, the Planning Department also reviewed the application using the provisions of R.C.O. §61.146. Section 61.146 states that a development permit authorizing a conditional use must be approved unless one or more of the eight stated findings can be made with respect to the proposed development. The Planning Department concluded none of the eight findings could be made as to this proposed development; and, WHEREAS, the Planning Department recommended approval of the proposed amendment to the Final Plan subject to the satisfaction of the following conditions: 1. Import of materials for processing shall be limited only to that necessary for the hot mix asphalt facility. 2. This use will be subject to meeting the Industrial Performance Standards of the Rochester Zoning Ordinance and Land Development Manual (Section 63.600, et. Seq.,) including the standard applying to odor in the M-1 and M- 2 districts. 3. This permit shall expire one year after the Council's approval. The applicant must go through a complete review process (public hearings) in order to renew the permit; and, • 4. No temporary use permit may be issued without Council approval; and, WHEREAS, on December 14, 2005, the Rochester Planning and Zoning Commission held a public hearing on this restricted development preliminary plan, reviewed the application according to the requirements of Section 62.708, adopted findings of fact that the current solutions/conditions applied to the site are not being met and there is no proof that new conditions of approval would change the impact the business has on the neighboring properties, and recommended denial of the application; and, WHEREAS, the Common Council held a public hearing on the restricted development preliminary plan request on January 9, 2006, and permitted all interested persons to be heard; and, WHEREAS, at the January 9th public hearing, the Council considered the evidence and testimony submitted, as well as the material contained in the meeting agenda (a copy of which is attached and incorporated herein); and, WHEREAS, at the January 9th public hearing, the applicant's representative proposed to take the following additional actions as part of its application for an amendment to and renewal of its Restricted Development Permit: 1. Extend the 130-foot stack another 30 feet to a total of 160 feet from the quarry • 3 • floor. 2. Provide top of silo containment and ductwork with a separate baghouse system to capture the fugitive air from the slat conveyor and top of silos as it is carried from the mixing drum to the storage silo. 3. Provide load-out containment and ductwork with a separate baghouse system to capture the fugitive air from the truck load-out area, as provided in Eau Claire HMA facility, to capture the air as the truck is being loaded; and, WHEREAS, based upon a preponderance of the evidence submitted at the January gth public hearing, the Common Council adopts as its own the Planning Department's recommended findings of fact; and, WHEREAS, based upon a preponderance and substantial weight of the evidence submitted at the January 9th public hearing, the Common Council determines that the Applicant satisfied the criteria of Sections 61.146 and 62.708 subject to the four conditions recommended by the Planning Department. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Common Council of the City of Rochester that the amendment to Type III, Phase III, Restricted Development Permit #05-06, requested by Rochester Sand & Gravel Division of Mathy Construction is in all things approved subject to the above four conditions. • PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE COMMON COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROCHESTER, MINNESOTA, THIS QTN Y OF , 2006. PRESIDENT OF SAID COMMON COUNCIL ATTEST: /A114VIJ CLERK APPROVED THIS 10d4 DAY OF �� , 2006. MAYOR OF SAID CITY (Seal of the City of Rochester, Minnesota) Z.one051RestDevPermitAmd06.0506 • 4 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING DATE: 1-9-06 AGENDA SECTION: ORIGINATING DEPT: ITEM NO. PUBLIC HEARINGS PLANNING ITEM DESCRIPTION: Type III, Phase III Petition to amend and renew Restricted PREPARED BY: Development Permit #05-06, by Rochester Sand and Gravel and Mathy Mitzi A. Baker, Construction. The applicant is proposing to extend the permit for a minimum of Senior Planner one year, and to make additional improvements to the existing Hot Mix Asphalt plant including: extending the 130 foot stack another 30 feet; provide top of silo containment and ductwork to capture fugitive air; and provide load-out containment and ductwork to capture fugitive air. The property is located along the east side of TH 63 S, south of 601h St. SE and northeast of "Machinery Hill". January 3,2006 City Planning and Zoning Commission Recommendation: On March 23, 2005 the City Planning and Zoning Commission held a public hearing to consider Restricted Development #05-06. Mr. Wallace moved to recommend denial of Type III, Phase III Petition to amend and renew Restricted Development Permit #05-06, by Rochester Sand and Gravel and Mathy Construction with the below finding. Mr. Snyder seconded the motion. The motion carried 5-1, with Mr. Burke voting nay. FINDING: The current solutions/conditions applied to the site are not being met and there is no proof that new conditions of approval would change the impact the business has on the neighboring properties. erefore, there is no reason to implement new conditions to renew the permit. Council Action Needed: 1. If the Council wishes to proceed, it should instruct the City Attorney to prepare a resolution either approving, approving with conditions, or denying the Conditional Use Permit request based upon the criteria included in the staff report. Please see the attached staff report dated December 8, 2005, as well as the attached minutes from the Planning Commission meeting. Distribution: 1. City Administrator 2. City Attorney: Legal Description Attached 3. Planning Department File 4. Applicant: This item will be considered some time after 7:00 pm in the Council/Board Chambers at the Government Center on Monday January 9, 2005. OUNCIL ACTION: Motion by: Second by: to: Andy Welt! Mi State Representative nnesota District 30B _ ,f House of �I Wabasha and Olmsted Counties Representatives COMMITTEES: AGRICULTURE AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT GOVERNMENTAL OPERATIONS AND VETERANS AFFAIRS December 15, 2005 ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES Margo and Bill Mestad 1 105 60th St SW Rochester, MN 55902 Dear Margo and Bill Mestad, Nearly one year ago, Margo and Bill Mestad contacted me to voice their concern about a vote that the City Council was going to take granting a one-year permit for Mathy Construction. The vote was going to allow the Hot Mix Asphalt facility(plant#53) to continue operation at its current location across from 60`h St. SW and Hwy. 63 South. After our..initial phone conversation, I met with the Mestads at their home.to see for myself,where.the • facility was located in' relation to their home: It was winter and the facility was not in operation. Margo and Bill showed me a copy of the record they had been keeping as to the days that the odor from the facility had drifted towards their home. Following my visit to the Mestad home, I contacted the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency to find out the history on the facility. I found out that the facility met the standard air quality tests. Although the plant met the air quality standards, the odor of the air generated from the plant was still at issue. Having viewed the location of the facility in relation to the homes of Bill and Margo Mestad, Mary Lou and Jim Soukup, and the nearby homeowners, I could see that with a change in wind direction the odor could become an issue. I told them to let me know when the odor became an issue so that I could better understand what they were experiencing. Margo and Bill contacted me on two occasions during the summer to let me know that the odor was an issue, but I was not able to visit them at the time of the calls. On Saturday, November 5, 2005, I was able to visit the Mestad's home when plume from the Hot Mix Asphalt facility was blowing toward their home. I did notice the odor in the air. Margo informed me that she attempted to contact other elected officials but no one else was able to visit that day to experience the odor. Therefore I wanted to inform you that I had detected the odor upon my visit. Attempts have been made by Mathy Construction to mitigate the odor issue. While the attempts may have led to some relief, an odor issue still exists. Mathy Construction has informed the Mestads that they will be adding approximately 30 feet to the height of the stack and building a structure around part of the facility to once again address the odor issue. • R.R.2 Box 17, Plainview, Minnesota 55964 (507)951-8857 State Office Building. 100 Rev Dr Martin Luther King Jr Blvd. St. Paul. Minnesota 55155-1298 (651)296-4378 �� FAX. (651)296-5071 TTY:(651)296-9896 Email:rep.andy.welti@house.mn (888)858-4753 9 . 1 • I feel that the Mestads, Soukups, and other nearby home owners affected by this stack have the right to know how much longer the facility will be in place. I understand that the city has been granting one-year extensions of the permit, leaving the homeowners without a definite answer as to how long the facility will remain in the same location. I also would urge Council members to work with the residents and Mathy Construction to find ways to deal with the odor issue. Solutions could include moving the Hot Mix Asphalt Facility to the previous site, moving it to a new site located further away from homes, or asking Mathy to pay for central air systems to be installed in the affected homes. The Mestads, Soukups, and many nearby homeowners have lived in this area for many years. The facility was moved into place only three years ago. As City Council-members in charge of renewing a permit for this facility, I urge you to give.strong consideration to the concerns and recommendations that the residents of the city of Rochester have regarding the Hot Mix Asphalt facility located in the quarry across from 601h St. SW and Hwy. 63 South. Resp fully, Andy Welti State Representative District 30B s it rr f y p i � .t4, Li� y��,,J�1�'��ry{�*y�5�,ir � )¢Sa�' 211 � 4'��:, TWA'PT¢i'"f/1SwTiw'.^. �F-..nTiPJ.� 4 \t.ac KiC�SMi.S�.:,�-taw"i J .Mc _�re..Y �Ewr > a tf!..�ks` IN Y,�� 7 r ,� .��4a r,.` °y� �a. i{ � >• '�1"r.L� tl' i �t '` 4s •T��'^ 3+.i7 C�1--- V. A+�a'3 kr {F � .Y{ .. Nit,t 4A;a.-: i ;'.T`.2 ✓� rs: 0.S ,tom.Tiu�t � +' s� s �• I L. i �"� . '„ ' �� ` i�� 72 "F �{., y �! �✓ �j�"'".4 i! r r a ¢,."Kf T jj�� �L�F: +'� /� 1� ,+ :. r�;: 3 r � �' Th T.�.—^.�_;y � •, E-2 �iG€SS�� ��x w.a �dlw1 Ip ?rtayt, It kill 's 3�`J` a�SdF z}177 b /�*��Y • • 1/� K*y♦ �N. .. 7'tS:te� .m dJ; Z4, ✓.*Yr`2.:.. \�qv,��p �I�iy y�l � / 4� � W.sY 'f"i „''r��� �� � Cf r, ,c',z "yr gm I *A� � �`F� � ,r � ,: ��,�F'Y'/i� �y " 4+ "•'f�Y �, Ff rr��e �� r :"y'S� s J . i, f c 3 a i {�',r� +'� `ps' y ;• is fit � s � ,4�� J w lY J� N� * �? E U ++-35, s r ii s !d Z 4A yA},.11 rrj3 ,ydi 4s a� x,a i ♦�� N*'��. ��. Y, , t I S/.f• •`, 7 f Y� JR J { r�k i t ( 1a ^5 E9 '� r ►�sy z J vi AY s w • Y ,tI �� A fi, 1 + 04 �sf� 1 E4 rt L► r*�a ° -`�� '"�- xr�`aSrW"r,>... R7 h✓. K x t Y 1 � i A A;I'll t J['�s '� 7 -. t r :..r�. kA �� p art _ _ '�� D •� ,.� s., .._'t....Sa t'3s�'�`t"' i?� '�'47 ef IVp,.i.'e`1sY`'y �`r } a t.4 't" `•�1'^,5 .. i, t^°""'rs , -- IT II _'_` ----------'------ --- - - -------------- ---- - -- - - ---------- ----- - - - - ---- --- --- -- ---------- -----�' -- -_ � V] 1 /—`_i srvrot o.aan(amarrrarl,, _ 1 , 1 F�1 1-�'1 i �� Mwaurz comma 'i i 4-r C7 oPa�awmu. � � Quarry Face o O ►- � O r I O Tla L-d. a ,ao<cov Silos � Quarry Pace Elevation I 1 �� 4YAay M M IIL[ 1230.25 Control House Drum Demister NCO ® w,w :monad ' Quarry Floor Elevation d l f Bins 1148.41 aghouse I s..rm.rA i Erosion Control Tanks e Sand Q Berms `7 C-, rum aacla j' Screen/ RAP C, I (/ Bin S Tnpu,aphic dal.oa.ined ft.USGS 7.5 Min Quarry lr A Quad Map,. Stack Scale /1tJ C.1—I —1,IDFen 1 Extension O� Section 2.TI OSN-RI/W , HMA Plant Ot—High TnHnehip High fo Cowry,Minnesota 1 i City of Rochester � . o so loo Iso zoo Town of High Forest { Feet tinter See. 2. Mashy Construction is T 10 -R 14W Comm Env itted Protecting Our r Environment andd Natural Resources Retention Pond RECUvEn RL NOV 16 200 ROCHESTER-OLbISTED v, PI.`NNING DEPARTMENT South 63 Quarry rry \ ROCHESTER SAND&GRAVEL °ivi"'ma Ka� Ma Lacout RV-CiiESTER-OLMSTED PLANNING DEPAnfMENT 'OF.ROCHESTEIt.MrNN 2122 Campus Drive SE, Suite 100•Rochester, MN 55904-4744 vvww.olmstedcount com/ lannin �•, °° cour+rr of Y P 9 ' 00 O�NOk.4Pp i:AUGUSC•5•��, j TO: City Planning &Zoning Commission FROM: Mitzi A. Baker, Senior Planner li DATE: December 8, 2005 RE: Type III, Phase III Petition to amend and renew Restricted Development Permit #05-06, by Rochester Sand and Gravel and Mathy Construction. The applicant is proposing to extend the permit for a minimum of one year, and to make additional improvements to the existing Hot Mix Asphalt plant including: extending the 130 foot stack another 30 feet; provide top of silo containment and ductwork to capture fugitive air; and provide load-out containment and ductwork to capture fugitive air. The property is located along the east side of TH 63 S, south of 60th St. SE and northeast of "Machinery Hill". PlanningDepartment p rtment Review Applicant: Rochester Sand&Gravel, Div. Of Mathy Construction Co. • 4105 E. River Road NE Rochester, MN.55906 Property Location: South of 60th St. S. and east of T.H. 63 S. The property address is 5850 Highway 63 South, Rochester, MN 55904. Zoning: The property is zoned R-1 (Mixed Single Family Residential). Attachments: LDM Excerpts Referral Comments Narrative Report (abbreviated version) BACKGROUND & EXPLANATION OF APPLICATION AND REVIEW PROCEDURES: In April 2003 the City Council approved a Restricted Development Conditional Use Permit for a hot mix asphalt facility/bituminous plant on this property. The application was approved to operate for two seasons, and the permit expired January 31, 2005. The applicant had the opportunity to seek an extension of the 2003 permit, but did not take action to do so prior to its expiration. The Council's action to approve this use for only two seasons was to provide the opportunity to gather facts as to how the hot mix asphalt facility operation impacts the adjacent property owners. In February 2005, the applicant filed an application requesting approval of a Restricted Development Conditional Use Permit to permit a hot mix asphalt plant on the property, which would in effect replace the previous permit. The Planning Commission recommended approval with a 2 year limit to the permit (6-0). The City Council • approved the permit in April 2005, subject to four conditions, including one that specified that the permit would BUILDING CODE 507/285-8345 • GIS/ADDRESSING/MAPPING 507/285-8232 • HOUSING/HRA 507/285-8224 mtlaww- PLANNING/ZONING 507/285-8232 • WELUSEPTIC 507/285-8345 T FAX 507/287-2275 •,„ AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY/AFFIRMATIVE ACTION EMPLOYER expire one year after the City Council's approval. This motion passed 5-2, and included waiving the Final Plan phase. OVERVIEW OF USE/PROPOSAL: The hot mix asphalt (HMA) plant is located and proposed on property located east of TH 63 S, west of St. Bridget Road/CR 20 and south of 60"St. SE. The Quarry property extends over several jurisdictions, including the City of Rochester, High Forest Township and Rochester Township. The HMA plant site is in the City of Rochester and therefore subject to the Rochester Zoning Ordinance and Land Development Manual. Access to this property is primarily from the north TH 63 quarry access. This access utilizes the existing frontage road access which is across from the 60'h St. SW access on TH 63. The frontage road also has a south access. Secondary access to the property is from the east side of the quarry, at St. Bridget Road/CR 20. There should be no impact to residential roadways as a result of this application. Following the 2003 approval for a HMA plant at this location, the applicant paved both accesses. A layout of the HMA plant is included in the attached materials. Detailed explanation of the plan, equipment, regulatory controls and monitoring were previously provided and are available upon request. The plant is currently set-up and operational at this site. The HMA plant operation includes the following: • Addition of traffic from this site could be approximately 10 trucks/hour; • Proposed hours of operation are 5:30 a.m.to 9:00 p.m. Monday—Friday, and 5:30 a.m.to 6:00 p.m. Saturday, as needed; • Import of materials originating off-site, as needed for producing and processing the bituminous; • Three full-time employees for the operation of the HMA plant; • Main components of the plant are the drum-dryer, silo, baghouse,tanks (liquid asphalt cement, burner fuel and diesel fuel) and control house. In 2004 the applicant replaced the original"Parallel- • flow"asphalt plant with a"Double Drum"asphalt plant to make use of a different technology. • Paved spill containment barrier to be installed beneath tanks to prevent contact between the product and the ground. • An extended baghouse stack to 130 feet above the quarry floor(completed in 2005) • Installation of a charcoal filter system ("Demister")to capture the hot vapors escaping from the asphalt cement and burner fuel tanks. This demister system operates 24 hours per day to capture tank vapors exiting the tanks as they breathe. Captured vapors are processed in a charcoal filter system. (completed in 2005) With the current petition,the applicant is proposing to further amend the plant site to include the following additional improvements: • Extend the 130-foot stack another 30 feet to a total of 160 feet from the quarry floor. The applicant anticipates this would reduce emissions by an additional 39 percent. • Provide top of silo containment and ductwork with a separate baghouse system to capture the fugitive air from the slat conveyor and top of silos as it is carried from the mixing drum to the storage silo. • Provide load-out containment and ductwork with a separate baghouse system to capture the fugitive air from the truck load-out area,as provided in the Eau Claire HMA facility, to capture the air as the truck is being loaded. Please note that the Planning Department is not aware of any Conditional Use Permits issued by the City or County for operation of the current quarry. The quarry was established many years ago and is considered a grandfathered use. The proposal to establish a HMA plant at the site is a separate use of the property, which is • being proposed through the Restricted Development Conditional Use Permit process. 12/08/05 3 EXPLANATION OF APPLICATION AND REVIEW PROCEDURE: • The Restricted Development allows certain mixtures of land uses which are not allowed within a given zoning district on a permitted or conditional basis and which can, if regulated, serve both the public interest and allow a more equitable balancing of private interests than that achieved by strict adherence to standard zoning regulations.The regulations of this article recognize and provide encouragement for innovation and experimentation in the development of land that would otherwise not be possible under the zoning district regulations established by this ordinance. CRITERIA & ANALYSIS: Since the Council previously approved this Restricted Development Permit, and waived the Final Plan Phase,this petition to amend is being processed as an amendment to a Final Plan (Type III, Phase III) with a review before the Planning &Zoning Commission and a public hearing before the City Council. Sections 62.706 and 62.708 (1) of the Zoning Ordinance set forth the standards upon which a Restricted Development Final Plan is to be evaluated. The Council shall approve a permit if it finds that the development has addressed and satisfied all of the applicable criteria, or that a practical solution consistent with the public interest can be incorporated into the final plan. Please see the attached excerpt from the Rochester Zoning Ordinance and Land Development Manual for the applicable criteria. The staff suggests the following findings for each of the Final Development Plan: 1) Final Development Plan Criteria: a) Public Facility Design: The proposed hot mix asphalt(HMA)facility will not result in a need • for sanitary sewer or water facilities on-site. Electrical power needed for the facility is available. Olmsted County Public Works will require the applicant to construct a right-turn and by-pass lane on St. Bridget Road/CR 20. I, b) Geologic Hazard: There are no known geologic hazards on the property. c) Access Effect: Access to this property will be primarily from the north TH 63 quarry access. This access utilizes the existing frontage road access which is across from the 601h St. SW access on TH 63. The frontage road also has a south access. Secondary access to the property would be from the east side of the Quarry, at St. Bridget Road/CR 20. There should be no impact to residential roadways as a result of this application. Following the 2003 approval of a CUP for an HMA plant at this location, the applicant paved both accesses. d) Pedestrian Circulation: Pedestrian facilities and pedestrian circulation should not be impacted by this proposal. e) Foundation and Site Plantings: This plant is not a permanent structure and the HMA site sits on the floor of the quarry below grade and out of view from most of the surrounding area (except for silos and stack). Foundation plantings would not be needed nor reasonable considering the use and visibility of plantings that would be located near the equipment site. f) Site Status: This criterion is not applicable to this project. g) Screening and Bufferyards: This site offers unique opportunities for buffering and screening. The height of the quarry wall directly west of the proposed site is approximately 100 feet. To the north of the HMA site, the quarry wall drops to approximately 70 feet. Additionally, an • existing row of mature evergreen trees exists along a portion of the west property boundary, Q/05 between the north TH 63 entrance(across from the 601h St. intersection with TH 63)and Machinery Hill. Due to topography and design of the quarry it appears the HMA site would be • most visible from the east(i.e. east of St. Bridget Road/CR 20). From the west, the visible portion of the HMA site would be the extended bag-house stack, which is proposed to be approximately 130 feet above the quarry floor. Approximately the upper 30-60'would be visible from the west. h) Final Building Design: The final/proposed design would include increasing the height of the existing stack from 130 feet above the quarry floor, to 160 feet above the quarry floor. i) Internal Circulation Areas: Internal loading and circulation patterns and site access are not proposed to change from the previous approvals. j) Ordinance Requirements: There should be adequate room on-site for employee parking and internal circulation of truck traffic. This use will be subject to meeting the Industrial Performance Standards of the Rochester Zoning Ordinance and Land Development Manual (Sec. 63.600 et. seq.). In addition, this application is subject to the criteria for all conditional use permits, as identified in Section 61.146. As identified in 61.146, the zoning administrator, Commission, or Council shall approve a development permit authorizing a conditional use unless one or more of the findings with respect to the proposed development is made as identified in 61.146. 61.146 Standards for Conditional Uses: The zoning administrator, Commission, or Council shall approve a development permit authorizing a conditional use unless one or more of the following findings with respect to the proposed development is made: 1) Provisions for vehicular loading, unloading, parking and for vehicular and pedestrian circulation on . the site and onto adjacent public streets and ways will create hazards to safety, or will impose a significant burden upon public facilities. 2) The intensity, location, operation, or height of proposed buildings and structures will be detrimental to other private development in the neighborhood or will impose undue burdens on the sewers, sanitary and storm drains,water or similar public facilities. 3) The provision for on-site bufferyards and landscaping does not provide adequate protection to neighboring properties from detrimental features of the development. 4) The site plan fails to provide for the soil erosion and drainage problems that may be created by the development. 5) The provisions for exterior lighting create undue hazards to motorists traveling on adjacent public streets or are inadequate for the safety of occupants or users of the site or such provisions damage the value and diminish the usability of adjacent properties. 6) The proposed development will create undue fire safety hazards by not providing adequate access to the site, or to the buildings on the site, for emergency vehicles. 7) In cases where a Phase I plan has been approved, there is a substantial change in the Phase II site plan from the approved Phase I site plan, such that the revised plans will not meet the standards provided by this paragraph. 8) The proposed conditional use does not comply with all the standards applying to permitted uses within the underlying zoning district, or with standards specifically applicable to the type of • conditional use under consideration, or with specific ordinance standards dealing with matters such 12/08/05 5 as signs which are part of the proposed development, and a variance to allow such deviation has not been secured by the applicant. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This permit was approved by the City Council in April 2005 subject to the.conditions listed below. If the Commission and Council support permitting additional modifications of the Plant to further reduce off site impacts,then the permit should be approved, subject to these same conditions. 1) Import of materials for processing shall be limited only to that necessary for the hot mix asphalt facility. 2) This use will be subject to meeting the Industrial Performance Standards of the Rochester Zoning Ordinance and Land Development Manual(Sec. 63.600 et. seq.)including the standard applying to odor in the M-1 and M-2 districts. 3) This permit shall expire one year after the Council's approval. The applicant must go through a complete review process(public hearings)in order to renew the permit;and 4) No temporary use permit may be issued without Council approval Note: The applicant is responsible for securing permits or approvals required by any other regulatory agency prior to operating the HMA plant as proposed. • • STANDARDS FOR EVALUATING THIS PROPOSAL: Multiple standards apply to evaluating this application. The following sections of the LDM apply to the review of this application: 61.145 Matters Under Consideration: The review of a conditional use is necessary to insure that it will not be of detriment to and is designed to be compatible with land uses and the area surrounding its location;and that it is consistent with the objectives and purposes of this ordinance and the comprehensive plan. 61.146 Standards for Conditional Uses: The zoning administrator, Commission, or Council shall approve a development permit authorizing a conditional use unless one or more of the following findings with respect to the proposed development is made: 9) provisions for vehicular loading, unloading, parking and for vehicular and pedestrian circulation on the site and onto adjacent public streets and ways will create hazards to safety, or will impose a significant burden upon public facilities. 10) The intensity, location, operation, or height of proposed buildings and structures will be detrimental to other private development in the neighborhood or will impose undue burdens on the sewers,sanitary and storm drains,water or similar public facilities. 11) The provision for on-site bufferyards and landscaping does not provide adequate protection to neighboring properties from detrimental features of the development. • 12) The site plan fails to provide for the soil erosion and drainage problems that may be created by the development. 13) The provisions for exterior lighting create undue hazards to motorists traveling on adjacent public streets or are inadequate for the safety of occupants or users of the site or such provisions damage the value and diminish the usability of adjacent properties. 14) The proposed development will create undue fire safety hazards by not providing adequate access to the site, or to the buildings on the site,for emergency vehicles. 15) In cases where a Phase I plan has been approved,there is a substantial change in the Phase II site plan from the approved Phase I site plan, such that the revised plans will not meet the standards provided by this paragraph. 16) The proposed conditional use does not comply with all the standards applying to permitted uses within the underlying zoning district,or with standards specifically applicable to the type of conditional use under consideration, or with specific ordinance standards dealing with matters such as signs which are part of the proposed development, and a variance to allow such deviation has not been secured by the applicant. 61.147 Conditions on Approval: In considering an application for a development permit to allow a Conditional Use,the designated hearing body shall consider and may impose modifications or conditions to the extent that such modifications or conditions are necessary to insure compliance with the criteria of Paragraph 61.146. • 12/08/05 7 RESTRICTED DEVELOPMENT: 62.706 Standards for Approval, Preliminary Development Plan: The Council shall approve a preliminary development plan if it finds that the development has addressed and satisfied all the criteria listed in Paragraph 62.708(1), or that a practical solution consistent with the public interest can be incorporated into the final development plan, or a modification for unmet criteria has been granted as provided for in Paragraph 62.712. 62.707 Standards for Approval, Final Development Plan: The Council shall grant final approval to a Type III Restricted Development if it finds that, in addition to satisfying the Preliminary Development Plan Standards for Approval listed in the preceding paragraph, the development has satisfied all the applicable criteria listed in Paragraph 62.708(2) or a modification for any unmet criteria has been granted as provided for in Paragraph 62.712. 62.708 Criteria for Type III Developments: In determining whether to approve, deny, or approve with conditions an application, the Commission and Council shall be guided by the following criteria: 2) Preliminary Development Plan Criteria: a) Capacity of Public Facilities: The existing or future planned utilities in the area are adequate to serve the proposed development. b) Geologic Hazards: The existence of areas of natural or geologic hazard, such as unstable slopes,sinkholes,floodplain, etc., have been identified and the development of these areas has been taken into account or will be addressed in the Phase II plans. • c) Natural Features: For developments involving new construction,the arrangement of buildings, paved areas and open space has,to the extent practical, utilized the existing topography and existing desirable vegetation of the site. d) Residential Traffic Impact: When located in a residential area, the proposed development: 1) Will not cause traffic volumes to exceed planned capacities on local residential streets; 2) Will not generate frequent truck traffic on local residential streets; 3) Will not create additional traffic during evening and nighttime hours on local residential streets; e) Traffic Generation Impact: Anticipated traffic generated by the development will not cause the capacity of adjacent streets to be exceeded, and conceptual improvements to reduce the impact of access points on the traffic flow of adjacent streets have been identified where needed. f) Height Impacts: For developments involving new construction, the heights and placement of proposed structures are compatible with the surrounding development. Factors to consider include: 1) Will the structure block sunlight from reaching adjacent properties during a majority of the day for over four(4) months out of the year; • 12/08/05 8 • 2) Will siting of the structure substantially block vistas from the primary exposures of adjacent residential dwellings created due to differences in elevation. g) Setbacks: For developments involving new construction, proposed setbacks are related to building height and bulk in a manner consistent with that required for permitted uses in the underlying zoning district. h) Internal Site Design: For developments involving new construction,the preliminary site layout indicates adequate building separation and desirable orientation of the buildings to open spaces,street frontages or other focal points. i) Screening and Buffering: The conceptual screening and bufferyards proposed are adequate to protect the privacy of residents in the development or surrounding residential areas from the impact of interior traffic circulation and parking areas, utility areas such as refuse storage, noise or glare exceeding permissible standards, potential safety hazards, unwanted pedestrian/bicycle access, or to subdue differences in architecture and bulk between adjacent land uses. j) Ordinance Requirements: The proposed development includes adequate amounts of off-street parking and loading areas and, in the case of new construction, there is adequate landscaped area to meet ordinance requirements. k) General Compatibility: The relationship of the actual appearance, general density and overall site design of the proposed development should be compared to the established pattern of zoning,the character of the surrounding neighborhood and the existing land forms of the area to determine the general compatibility of the • development with its surroundings. 3) Final Development Plan Criteria: a) Public Facility Design: The design of private and public utility facilities meet the requirements and specifications which the applicable utility has adopted. b) Geologic Hazard: Engineering means to deal with areas of geologic hazard have been incorporated into the development plan or such areas have been set aside from development. c) Access Effect: Ingress and egress points have been designed and located so as to: 1) Provide adequate separation from existing street intersections and adjacent private driveways so that traffic circulation problems in public right-of-ways are minimized; 2) Not adversely impact adjacent residential properties with factors such as noise from accelerating or idling vehicles or the glare of headlights from vehicles entering or leaving the site. In addition, where the preliminary development plan identified potential problems in the operation of access points, plans for private improvements or evidence of planned public improvements which will alleviate the problems have been provided. d) Pedestrian Circulation: The plan includes elements to assure that pedestrians can move safely both within the site and across the site between properties and 12/08/05 9 activities within the neighborhood area, and, where appropriate, accommodations • for transit access are provided. e) Foundation and Site Plantings: A landscape plan for the site has been prepared which indicates the finished site will be consistent with the landscape character of the surrounding area. f) Site Status: Adequate measures have been taken to insure the future maintenance and ownership pattern of the project, including common areas, the completion of any platting activities, and the provision of adequate assurance to guarantee the installation of required public improvements, screening and landscaping. g) Screening and Bufferyards: The final screening and bufferyard design contains earth forms, structures and plant materials which are adequate to satisfy the needs identified in Phase I for the project. h) Final Building Design: The final building design is consistent with the principles identified in preliminary development plan relative to Height Impact, Setbacks, and Internal Site Design. i) Internal Circulation Areas: Plans for off-street parking and loading areas and circulation aisles to serve these areas meet ordinance requirements in terms of design. j) Ordinance Requirements: The proposed development is consistent with the requirements of the underlying zoning district for similar uses in regards to signage • and other appearance controls, and with general standards such as traffic visibility and emergency access. 62.712 Modifications: The Council may waive the need to satisfy certain approval criteria during the Type III review if it finds: 1) The applicant has demonstrated that the plan as submitted adequately compensates for failing to address the criterion in question. 2) The strict application of any provision would result in exceptional practical difficulties to, or exceptional and undue hardship upon,the owner of such property, provided the modification may be granted without substantial detriment to the public good and without substantially impairing the purposes of this ordinance or the policies of the Land Use Plan. II i Er F�^ a� ,1 i+rhn .' ',.Y' v"L ,;k'fir . 'E n� J. py���}^ .�'' ✓ *.Ok F -�^�E h!�1 E R*'�Y'J� ..c�yY`3 Sv^�y'.-L`'s��'�.p'� � a�R' >,:• !t '^ �� � � r � v +—s•.'^y 1L+4't*��.Sw°,�.' .� T� v `"^3.ks�.E„•'t y�. ^'h " . r v �sit-s r r s i ✓ "33,, � � � � �` ¢ r t� . 441 Ull AMM 64 ZO m t� � r aw 4 6f'M4�pp ?`+i + 46 ,fie Y A% { Yytir tis WANW �"•; Y f ,��/ 4�►l 5f P#.y i¢(s`� °�"t"'"�,'�`r, ".E g" w� � �#S '.� �+' �E�,,n j�' < y ad..!:+....v .,.:.:_ _" -�5 ...�s .:�`'� �.a.��'�'X,nwa-S�.�tEi`�as• L �4 � r lKw 4 ` 1111.'>i�r�se 1 q T �Ar im VW S y v 1 t 9 APPLICATION MATERIALS & INFORMATION ac ester n7 and +ooz ucy'uau ) G auel 4105 East River Road NE Phone 507-288-7447 Rochester, MN 55906-3424 Fax 507-252-3477 November 15, 2005 Rochester—Olmsted Planning Department Attn: Mrs. Mitzi Baker 2122 Campus Drive, SE, Suite 100 Rochester, MN 55904 Re: Renewal& Amendment Application to CUP 05-06 5850 Highway 63 South, Rochester Dear Mrs. Baker, Rochester Sand& Gravel, a Division of Mathy Construction Company, is applying for a renewal, along with an amendment, of our CUP#05-06 currently in place to operate a hot mix asphalt plant in the City of Rochester,High Forest Township, in Olmsted County. The Criteria for Type III Development, as outlined in our letter dated February 22, 2005, shall remain the same. (See Attachment# 1 for a copy of the letter.) • This amendment request will not change the basic traffic flow, site layout and drainage, plant layout, or plant capacity. Please reference our previous application for information regarding our MPCA permits, Minnesota Emergency Response Commission notification, Spill Prevention Plan,Daily Environmental Tracking forms, and our Environmental Programs Resource Guide, all of which are not changing due to this Amendment Proposal. Since we have started operating under the current 2005 CUP#05-06, we have voluntarily made the following environmental improvements to the Hot Mix Asphalt (HMA) processing plant: • As proposed in our previous application, the baghouse stack was extended to 130 feet above the quarry floor. (See attachment#2 for an illustration of the 130 foot stack.) • In June, we installed a charcoal filter system(a"Demister", manufactured by Ceco Corporation) to capture the hot vapors escaping from the asphalt cement and burner fuel tanks. (See Attachment#3 for an illustration of the installed charcoal filter system.) This demister system operates 24 hours per day capturing tank vapors exiting the tanks as they breathe. Captured vapors are processed in a charcoal filter system. We feel these measures have exceeded our original intent and have been successful beyond our initial expectations. RECEIVED nC hEST=ri-C,-P:STEC An Equal Opportunity Employer I 'tiN' ti�� ti�GEFART'';EtiT Mrs. Mitzi Baker November 15, 2005 Page 2 As we move forward, we continue to work with the neighbors, addressing their concerns. We are focusing on further improvement of the baghouse stack dispersal, as well as capturing fugitive emissions from our Silo Truck Load-out and at the top of Silos, where mix is transferred from the BMA drum to the storage and distribution silos. We propose that the current CUP#05-06 be renewed for a minimum of one(1)year and amended to include the following additional improvements: 1. Extend the 130-foot stack another 30 feet to a total of 160 feet from the quarry floor. Our original stack extension measuring 130 feet total reduced emissions by 80%. An extension of 30 additional feet(for a total of 160 feet)will reduce the current emissions by an additional 39%. To accomplish the additional 30 foot extension,we have to boost the air system fan and provide guywires from the stack for structural support. 2. Provide top of silo containment and ductwork with a separate baghouse system to capture the fugitive air from the slat conveyor and top of silos as it is carried from the mixing drum to the storage silo. 3. Provide load-out containment and ductwork with a separate baghouse system to capture the fugitive air from the truck load-out area, as you were shown in our Eau Claire HMA facility.Pictures of that facility are included for • illustration(see Attachment#4). This would capture the air as the truck is being loaded, but, of course, can not account for the vapors after the truck has left the HMA facility. By adding the proposed controls listed above, our plant will have engineering controls on all possible aspects of this facility, providing control standards far exceeding HMA plants operating in the Midwest. We are respectfully submitting a request that the Rochester City Council waive the final plan review. Please find a check for the filing fee in the amount of$1,120.00, made payable to Olmsted County, six(6) copies of the application documents, six(6)reduced size copies of the site plans, and six(6) sets of Attachments 1,2, 3, &4. If you have any questions, you may contact me at(507) 288-7447 or via e-mail at ppgtersonra?mathyxom. R sp lly, RECEIVED at Peterson NOV 16 2005 Vice President ROCHESTER-OLMSTED • Rochester Sand& Gravel _F '.NNWG DEPARTMENT ATTACIIIvIENTS 3 Date: December 02, 2005 To: Brent Svenby, Senior Planner, Planning &Zoning From: Pat Peterson,Division Manager,Rochester Sand & Gravel Re: Questions &Responses to Rich Peter's questions dated 11-18-05 The following are our responses to Rich Peter's questions. I repeated the questions for everyone's convenience. If you could pass them back, we would appreciate it. Question #1: How many and how large are the spills of oils that have been associated with the hot mix operation at this plant since it started operating? Response#1: We have had one Asphalt Cement tank overflow at this HMA facility since it started operating at this site in 2003. This spill consisted of approximately 1.35 tons of AC spilling onto the ground (caused by an un-seated valve &subsequent • overflow), cooling to ambient temperature, and easily cleaned up in a solid form. Question #2: What is their system for storing and transferring the heavy oils into the hot mix that controls fugitive emissions? Response#2: We have 2 Asphalt Cement (AC)tanks on site totaling a storage capacity of 50,000 gallons of AC on site. These tanks are kept heated at approximately 260 degrees and the AC is pumped directly into the HMA outer mixing drum during the production process. Tanker trucks deliver the AC in approximately 7,000 gallon increments. We also have a 15,000 gallon burning oil tank used to store fuel for the HMA process. We have installed a charcoal filter system to capture the hot vapors escaping from the AC and burner fuel tanks. This demister system operates 24 hours per day during the production season, capturing the fugitive vapors exiting the tanks as they breathe. These captured vapors are processed in a charcoal filter system. Question#3: What type and how effective are the drapes and covers for preventing escape of fugitive hot mix fumes when mixing hot mix? Response#3: The system we are proposing would enclose the top of the storage silos with a sealed containment chamber. By creating negative pressure, the fugitive air from the top of the storage silos and the HMA transfer conveyors are drawn into an • independent baghouse system. The containment system in place at our Eau Claire, WI, HMA facility has shown that this technology is very effective. III • Question#4: What type and how effective are the drapes and covers for preventing escape of fugitive hot mix fumes when transferring hot mix into waiting trucks? Response#4: We would enclose the sides of the loading area (long enough to contain the whole truck) and install ductwork to allow us to capture the fugitive air as the HMA falls from the storage silo into the truck. The load-out enclosure ends are not sealed, but the fugitive air is drawn inward by another independent baghouse. Again, our load-out containment system in place at our Eau Claire Hot Mix Asphalt facility has shown that this technology is very effective. Question #5: What type and how effective are the drapes and covers for preventing escape of fugitive hot mix fumes from the loaded transport truck as they leave the plant site? Response#5: Most of the HMA trucks use a tarp system that is placed over the top of the load after leaving the load-out containment. It is our Company policy for trucks to tarp every load, but, unfortuneately, we cannot enforce the City, County, or other customers to tarp their loads as it is not a state law. While these tarps help to contain the • heat and fugitive air, they are not totally sealed and some fugitive air will leave these trucks as they travel down the roadway. This is the standard of the industry. Question #6: What type and how effective are the drapes and covers for preventing escape of fugitive hot mix fumes from residual products left in the returning emptied transport trucks? Response#6: Empty trucks do not cover their boxes. The fugitive air is generated from the HMA, which is usually around 270 degrees as it is carried to the laydown crews. The empty truck cools very rapidly to ambient temperatures and is consequently no longer a source of fugitive hot mix fumes. In July we took representatives from the Planning &Zoning Commission, City Council, and a citizen from the Environmental Commission to witness and observe our Eau Claire HMA facility while it operated. They were able to make their own assessments of the effectiveness of the air controls we have in place there and are proposing to install under the CUP#05-06. If you have any additional questions, I can be reached via e-mail at ppeterson@mathy.com. It would be best to run any questions through Planning &Zoning for proper documentation. • . - — 0C ster D�rJ and p0%gC1CWLE i Gravel 4105 East River Road NE Phone 507-288-7447 Rochester, MN 55906-3424 Fax 507-252-3477 ATTACHMENT #1 February 22, 2005 ,ECEYti'ED Rochester—Olmsted Planning Department 6 ZQQS 2122 Campus Drive SE , Suite 100 Nov 1 Rochester, MN 55904 E TER-0 mSTED RpCN, S p- �.NNiNG DEPARTMENT RE: Type III,Phase II Development Application Criteria for Type III Development I A) Capacity for Public Facilities: Existing line-power of capacity capable of handling energy needs exists on site. No water or sewer utilities are required for the HMA operation. • 113) Geologic Hazards: No geological hazards exist on the site, using stable quarry floor as foundation for HMA plant. IC) Natural Features: The HMA plant has been constructed in an existing quarry, which will predominantly screen and shelter the operation from surrounding neighbors. Also a vegetative berm extends along the northwest site of the quarry to aid as a visual and sound barrier. 1D) Residential Traffic Impact: Traffic for the HMA plant operation will use State Highway 63 as the primary road. Access to State Highway 63 is by frontage road located on the east side of State Highway 63. This frontage road is used by three other Businesses located on the south end of the frontage road. There is a second access point to State Highway 63 at the south end of the frontage road. The volume of traffic generated by the HMA operation will have no effect of the business that shares access to the frontage road. 1 E) Traffic Generation Impact: Traffic generated by the HMA operations is estimated to be about 10 +/- trucks per hour of operation, on average. This traffic already exists, having been shifted from the St. Bridgets Road operation prior to 2003 to this location since May of 2003. is This volume of trucks should have no adverse impact on the Capacity of State Highway 63. An Equal Opportunity Employer • Criteria for Type III Development(page 2) 1F Height Impacts: Placement of HMA plant will be within an existing limestone u with Sh P P g quarry highwalls of 70 to 100 feet. The HMA plant will be predominantly screened from view by these quarry highwalls from the West, with the exception of the proposed extended bag-house stack. 1 G) Setbacks: No setbacks are required at this site. 111) Internal Site Design: HMA plant layout is explained in more detail in Section 2 of submitted application booklet. 1I) Screening and Buffering: Locating HMA plant inside the limestone quarry creates a natural screening and buffering environment. The quarry highwall and vegetative berms screen the operation from view and also is an effective noise buffer for the HMA operation. The • majority of residences of the area are located on the west side of State Highway 63 and screened from view by these quarry highwalls and vegetative berms.. In Ordinance Requirements: All employee parking is located on site. We will not exceed the maximum noise levels provided for in the Ordinance. IK) General Compatibility: Surrounding business are industrial in nature. There is an active limestone quarry at the HMA site. Sincer 1 Pat Peterson. Vice President,Rochester Sand&Gravel III, • Attachment 42 130' Bag house Stack t 4.t1 Ir y3 Y\x--i�3s� •�t��. �, to b� Y �w.� ra -.' 'k�',r-i•°i�i,, fa l #. 'c.i k.`S s.. ' .cx5 Y""`'••-ti• d � � `k3,t rti 1 r 4 4 �t}JI �3 iY J ; rn .f P�y s i lam, t�Z ' � �.r-'"�.^s t-`i� {er t 4.v� '3w �.§�•w, Y� 'vYP.Y in 1 } -t r r.. r c"y kt ? � �� e,sr3�1 +-... \YiM$ `xG t H.;r+ '�$ r7.k r.✓.,.� r� "fi �N t 1 .r• r s��t7 .i.» � ws'L r w"`��4�4, 't S°ti l� "���d�kr���.� i�. �.rvrt t �y�t Y+^'•A'F',vFr`. g s r x ^� rt�✓' �A sy iz'cT`'pw ri7 l c-h."" �i"ry F,kfttl (+h7i<�xa� 4Adr u 7'fi Ala\ }� '`45�.4a� >Y� R.� ,„.Fvt�.R ,� r a r sad xy v i�` ai t�, ��t � .'F � ro rA4.Y�y �- w ✓°``�,��,P'r„ ;Vt7� i t\ky',r} .Y•ae z����'�"C7�'Lp,ai 11 1 �1 h �4 P7��{ri+ � ��A°b� �rt�{ llry� v/•R i} r� �� ft h'6° 7� fb dS��4} ���.i:.�. yt nfa NtvcE�',:� a��h•5��� ' 4.i1 iT ✓e xi*,r.h i *'ra.d�°15•�, Sig." • - 5tr r<�`� [f S`r 'TI�t{.S t4 ��f ti�in�tfF iFJ �. R��Skr "nr'�'� - i4�f*5 '4 5--;r 4 s A s..+pp��i �«-C f+.% _.s ✓x.i�s �ya'r'z' a iz:r .'3 '� f ,T rt ?�S 2.tt�w '•! �1'".-�t 2. �prr rr L i ¢n 130' Stack Extension p .�+'� � � ��'f �.'v.... T.rt. *y:,s �d'..A!«.•+v -C_ aiyt ;(V'.r�' qq Approximately 100 feet of stack extension was added to the existing baghouse stack in the spring of 2005 in a effort to increase stack emission dispersion. The current stack height is 1310 feet above the quarry floor. Attachment #3 Tank Vapor Collection System -Demister Demister System Frat Y� , Co_11 ecoon + 4� Rzy�y VCss M1 r1 t 1 0Od a (� t 4 3 � .'k r c �y yy i't r r„ e p -�.7 t t� � r - c��.:it �.�ti `..�r c.,,t.� r�:LL� <! 1;i� ♦ e r .x zl� ti,7}' a a. is _ 1]� 1� �y k'k .•i 4 _ MIt r � a MI4' J.IM ON _ A new technology currently used at oil refineries & terminals, was applied to the asphalt cement and burning oil tanks in the summer of 2005. The tank vapors collection system, called a "Demister", captures tank vapors exiting the tanks as they breathe. Captured vapors are processed in a charcoal filter s*m. • Attachnlnt #4 i Top of Silo /Enclosed Truck Loadout System (Baghouse Filter) To of Silo fumes collected .Collection z h n '- Duct Y � y ,� : R- ,_- by ductwork and directed N into a baghouse filter similar + n,13 =t: in method as the enclosed truck a irT.t 1 �l 4 '. y . � 1 *{ WN : 't �`i4 y+ fi � 3 load out system. g ~ '& :!�; � it i. 11 z Il is j �t z �` t 3: "� r 3,L;✓`T h-. `f' 1 T j.: ItJj' Ibt:i'! *'add a i c'}y a- to -t,.:.� Truck Loadout I ill >, r K ! , rn c 'i `?- 2115+ Y'. - =E6 Enclosure t� F w,4 �IF � w 1 f 11 � � 1 ':.a ''" 4a� F.tS_ .i y.�+d��rr '`� -t �+ax�,.-w-- :1• is R-; .sraa I `;t �:� yy � -�`r sr ♦ 7k ppYd -+� r� riS'." �,�•«w r3.y � i�:+: 1 i f 7 1'u °,y tyl 5> .si7 N,SkS " �''��"�, _,.s..:::s.:�..z3s..zs•:_�z..� ....`rr""`.'Lw3"x�-r,�t�`z�� - —tx. �T-`. k`t. Truck Loadout Baghouse Filter 1. , Enclosed Truck Loadout System/Baghouse Filter. The illistration depicts an enclosed truck loadout system complete with a baghouse filter system capturing vapors from the loading of trucks. A similar system is used to capture silo vapors emitted from the top of the storage silos. i LECEND a y,,,a 1 .ao um aaara.ow 1 in ; Le.'`'4y ualruo I � � 1 ,r-._i eaa.ne[ow.tn tM10Ya1iGR1 I I I 1 �� a+tatm]a coxtoul �; i 0 � nvaraot aamu Quarry Face o i 03 t I twra IM 1 I Silos I marm.n.a 1 Quarry Face Elevation _ ! 7t 123025 Control House Drum Demister CO 1 Quarry Floor Elevation I i 1148.41 Bins ag Dose Erosion Control b D1¢lm"of_ 1 _ Sand p Tanks Berms Screen/ RAP COS I / Bin Quarry sir Qn. p. ((( Topgnphie d.ta obtained from uses T.S Alin e hl. Stack Scale �O Cm—laem11 In Fed Extension Section?,TI01N-RNW l High Portrt Toxmhip HMA P l ant O mne.d Cnwry.h,me,oa _ Q City of Rochester w ' o so l00 Iso 200 Town of High Forest { inter Sec. 2 Feet i Mathy Construction is Committed tc Protecting Our ! T105, -R 14 W Environment and Nature)Resources Retention Pond � - \\ South 63 Quarry R(=STERSAND&GRAVELLr �olw+me tln.. .---"^----------•--- � 1;1 Site Lwow • REFERRAL COMMENTS ,DO�pNESpTgyoF Minnesota Department of Transportation Minnesota Department of Transportation-District 6 F yQ° 2900 48`h Street N.W. Office Tel: 507-280-3188 . °FTM'a Rochester,MN 55901-5848 Fax: 507-285-7279 E-mail:chris.moates@dot.state.mn.us December 1,2005 Jennifer Garness Rochester-Olmsted Planning Department 2122 Campus Drive SE, Suite 100 Rochester, MN 55904 RE: Type III,Phase HI Petition to amend and renew Restricted Development Permit#05-06, by Rochester Sand and Gravel by Mathy Construction. The applicant is proposing to extend the permit for a minimum of one year,and to make improvements to the existing Hot Asphalt plan. The property is located along the east side of TH 63 S,south of 60`h St. SE and northeast of"Machinery Hill." Amendment to Final Plat #03-11 to be known as Maine Street Development by Maine Street Development of Rochester LLC. The applicant is proposing to subdivide 98.89 acres of land into 11 lots for commercial-industrial development and 11 Outlots. The plat also dedicates public right-of-way for public roadways. The property is located east of TH 63,north of 481h Street SE and west of St.Bridget Road. US 63 CS 5509 Dear Ms. Garness: • The Minnesota Department of Transportation (Mn/DOT) has received for review the above described amendments to developments along US Highway 63. These proposals are consistent with previous reviews and are acceptable with Mn/DOT. These developments should be monitored by the City of Rochester for cumulative impacts to US 63. If there are any questions, you may contact Fred Sandal, Principal Planner, at (507) 285-7369 or Debbie Bement, Transportation Specialist, at (507)281-7777. Sincerely, Chris Moates District 6 Planning Director cc: Rochester Sand & Gravel, a division of Mathy Construction Co. 4105 East River Road NE,Rochester,MN 55906 Maine Street Development Company of Rochester LLC 4325 Garden Court SE, Rochester, MN 55904 Debbie Bement Fred Sandal Tracy Schnell File DOC S-#461494 CALENDAR NOTES FROM MARGO MESTAD Z7 Zll-� e.911.,Lo . l e h . QO �� • �,//J�1 L r/+/ r / L'� L `/! ���//r .�Ci��f�I L+'iv � ..c�G'�--cam LC.14, / _yam►ll/�t1I �Cp , '�'L`�-c-� ✓y L�/LL;2.r l„La- (• - nL-�-�-e r C�C "�'�-two Y, ,I �ir�G A•�/. O C' -Q° .,�1.�„'�.u.C..C� � ��v.G�-Lo'l'L2- �CLAJL� Fy. kwa-& /4 a r - �71 a . _ � � dL lid i z /77 -10 vo 77 7W7 now 14 np ipjc r � Q r l.00, • 0 ,nvc �ruaL�✓t�7� T1'. nap k Y7 ��,W7 , 72�z_ 7T, A�7 El 7� V -f/�`'�r 'a-D;,�2G, -pry �''���✓� / ��L �d'� � /�' / ° � �►�-��� �YrrP � �a�'� �' ? �-J per'' ,�� �i �.,-�- • Comments from Area Neighbors • MARY LOU SOUKUP 5905 Hwy 63 So. Rochester MN 55904 507.288.5339 mlous@msn.com December 7,2005 TO: Planning and Zoning Commission Rochester City Council RE: Conditional Use Permit for HMA Facility South Hwy 63,Rochester Rochester Sand and Gravel/Mathy Construction, in their request for renewal of their operating permit, are proposing to make more changes to their present facility. Please note that changes made the past three asphalt seasons have not resolved the problems of smell and pollution in our neighborhood. Mr. Pat Peterson stated one day this summer (September 15)that the odor was"not acceptable." That was one day of many when we've had unacceptable odors (see 2005 calendar attached). This calendar contains our observations. In the lower left comer of each day we've noted wind direction/speed as reported on KTTC-TV news. Significantly,please note that in the month of November, for example,there is one notation of wind direction,and only four days with odor problems:,because the wind was mainly NW and we weren't bothered by these odors even when the plant was operating. In contrast, during spring, summer and early fall there are many notations of bad smells with a south or southeast wind involved. So far nothing has altered the problems as we all hoped. This facility simply does not belong in a residential neighborhood. Thank you for considering this statement. Sincerely, Mary Lou and Jim Soukup RECEIVED DEC ... 6 2005 ROCHESTER-OLMSTED PLANNING DEPARTMENT y,� �e• t it'{ t �s p�-�tti t v 5 t4 a. ljj r i��t�i�1''...!�? G�,,m.:'i x��'i•'Li .;,.k��� `��'�.i'r"�ys"��'e�� t'��:yT'� I � � lc'. Sunday Monday Tuesday Wednesda Thursday sday Friday Saturday Law Day 1 German Unconditional Surrender to Italian Allies p945I National Teachers'Day 3 L 4 r Fall of Corregidor�I942) C .1/�(j]'�y .�, Kentucky Derby RualCS J �JvlO�I�I�% -rA-U', , >A}- 71 1 rkcti 1 � oe-41ci,�, "roe, ; Mother's Day /s/� 1 ,Q G VE Remembrance Day �/�i(/�1 L -V0 9 `�Y'�""T� )G` -n-1go ����j 11 1 Z IA4ayll.1945I P 1 t 1 ✓�) V 5 mvYSL 5-r �� 14 I D M 5 r j e— L ;4,14fi W t(-t-T `.f A-kD SITA Pigeon River Street Oays, 1 C r( p 4 rtri L � ��� Clintonville,WI J aL t ` jM �✓ k�;-2,L o I med Forres D' 21 fN i - � ' 0 0 PrYri u Iwo ' Green Bay Marathon, "� � ..(� t1. J e�Lm Green Wyk" Z Z 1 3`., 9 U W�'t ' Awake the Lakes,Alexandria, h 4 7 ;4m r� I,, ® �r ' ! d •G �J�? L MN thru 5/28 I6 28 5 M E L �' 1 l Q✓1 �` g� C J Q 2h Annual North Iowa Band Festival l/ thru 5/30 I-� � o��vo v LA ,�o r L.?� t/✓• Ful Noon � VDY 500,Indianapolis,IN "�9 Memorial D �'�p A,M C1 me� m L � �Q J 'ace into Summer,Swan City " 4 'ark,Beaver Dam,ttq ��� 1q-9 P -L -� eLkwr gavvNiq ��' APRIL JUNE 5 M T W T F S S M T W T F S 1 2. 1 2 3 4 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 5 6 7 8 9 10 II unawer 10 11 12 13 14 1516 12 13 14 15 9 17 18 Mills Fleet Farm Open Barn 5pm �(j " TA /t° 17 18 19 20 21 22 2� 19 20 210242S �j�- 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 2627 28 ' r -i` fY: — s • — 1 • � Stt T;s '++I.r rfl` T�,r��' �� �C�4r � "PM��, PT JJ`` ) 'j�FI t/�+� ✓``+.K tA�, ".��t i� f:. 3:' � i „)� iyr fe' .. ;. `� 1�I�„-':yF+clt+ yr 1 Yr�Y��r 1 ,4 :1 ,tf,��.r l tiAi'(•:,IYe FS•�.5:,}IL;s s <,.. 031 W:r�/edn��esv/day Thursday Friday Saturday ''1BV.� ,4-\rY ✓�'G J : y '—� r�. Ell IA Annual lour Ot takes L tt Y _ /1 �J Y-a y, , ,r r Q l�tN�V f 25th Arm i st Ma hfietd, `t �' 1(ja� ,t ..: ( 8•�� Y 'Di7� e �� n � WlthruY�S �•L B'.cleRidJBrainerd,MN �P�i�1 ID L1 F 1 Y s Y. t 1� WYK a aces, o d 1 ca, ,pp h' ^( 1� � kna Y n91TEd"v Q�,M_ STf�DIL�Oft ( �� -tiV1�'yM�l�+l. J m�G1rl- eaL�y✓i nsinCheeseFesti�� ��uNLim t� Y w 4W V 31 ° 7�" - L#?j� t eChutey� rJ� � ��Tt1Ge�`1 r M h D-DayAllied Invasion Of Europe /_ D"oC.� t��4 L S t7 n 9 i J 7 Q West 11WGB Campus. Walleye Weekend, f 11 p GC In v Green Bay,WI thnr b/12 Fond du lac,WI thru 6/12 1 O Bellin Run,Green Bay,WI y �1� ✓�+ ©� Waite Park S ass Tag fun da 54th Annual Flag Day parade, 1 f n-L,it t` l�J' s P 91 nl Downtown Appleton,WI rt- -. +�(y r �� i� y-� `�. -Festival,Community Park,Wait Park, (t�`T� t O q :Z/ Not 0G MN thcu-bfii r ArnvN�t#� �c ----- �wyST - S�r 0 q + - 12 D t1 m - ./\ 1 11 Flag Day 5115 5 -I S 14 Winona Steamboat Days, 1 V U.S.Nmy Founded(1775( Winona,MN thru 6A 1 S 1 6 Strawberry Fest Waupaca,WI a+y�� ��� �� P�.�1�� or;n A-t1 - 17 18 �A&�L j •ro tie�D- �u N IDS I��-�'' ( '� ���1Y 6Yrd� 1 .b•�JI �'r� L-. Celebration,Rochester,h1N thru 6R6 Father's Day 19 O`l First Day of Summer 2 1 Pledge of Allegiance ) Juneteenth Day 1suYlYmr salYkrl L L "')� 56th Annual Haywand Recognized by Con ress L Musky Festival Hayward,WI Z�� Korean War Began(1950( C Swan City Car Show,Swan City Park, L ny w+.�'r' �� (1942);-y l,J9 1 5 Beaver Darn,WI / `�f( D 6P.,0, thru 6/26 P t�'1 _S �0 c d7'SrAGD SCGi June Sprints•,Road America, © (� G, &v g,;evo Elkhart Lake.WI thru 6/26 Milwaukee Mile NASCAR Weekend„ State Fair Park,West Allis,Wt thru 4/25 11 TYrJ N� k:: 5 l rikingland Band Festival "�/ r',Ut� ^�l ', ' �-1 S O 140,"'�-44um�D Vexan ria.MNitiorL L(J 2 r rj �'SIY1 -)O l 1 ,( n Ilexandria,MN _ �/ L O "1 i 1 O end Annual Roger Marts Fargo, �; r!' Lr 1- q L��. -m—r �j el)ru h Golf Tournament,Fargo,ND p 1 iJ" �,J�'�t7 S VaL1-6f JD "��'Y �� L iru 6/27 -i r pr 1�� fi�o7'd'f�u►�,C 5 =iv° �U ., --------- - (ro 1� 3, a rvt ''A /''�ICr t fl / • • 0 11e I't 51 IL Sunday Monday Thursd ay Friday Saturday JUNE AUGUST s M T W r r s Borneo Campaign Ended U.S.Arm Air 1 2 3 4 S M T W T F S Unopposed p945) 1 (1926) Y ' Corps Established21 5 6 7 8 g 10 11 1 2 3 4 5 6 Northeastern Wisconsin Salmon Derby, 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Manitowoc Marina,Manitowoc,VA 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 thru 7/3 19 2021 2223 24 25 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 2627 28 29 30 28 29 30 31 Independence Day V17m Aphelion 1 %3 Q � Beaver Dam Lake Days Q inelv�su Nr EaIA)orbit take k fartlry rvay hom C(k('. ,t�� ( `C1� c-r r�-q j—7 Beaver Dam,WI thru 7110 V - 9 me wry �)Iv 6 �1 R 32nd Annual Iola Old Car Show,y7�f�m V�(� Iola,WI thru 7/l0 � Mill Fleet Farm Open Bam-Spm (� (�iiLl — 10 Wisconsin Farm Technology n+ Days,Loyal,WI thru 7/I4 1 2 J ,i v A-m- 1 3 International Challenge p q 1 Mill Street Festival, 1 n� n9 1 4 Minnea olis A uate u 7/ 1 `�I�E L5 Elkhart Lake WI thru7�a T Minneapolis,MN thru 7R4 Plymouth WI �o v Coo �luvrt tv=?; t1E,U ipleton Auto Show&Swap 1 U.S.Bank Championship PGq 1 Q ;; _et,Pierce Park Q 19 North Iowa Fair,Mason City rpleton,Un Golf Tournament Brown Deer Show Tou State Water Ski 1 North Dakota State Fair, 2"7 t z u®I A-M� Park Golf Course,Milwaukee fA thru 7R4r, .o Show Tournament ,[ WI thru 1Rq C t r I F. ti Wisconsin Rapids.WI thru 7R4 r knot NO thru 7/3 a ,LLS (4I T4� 3';31 prM D15i I N� 1:.a� m E S4,gv t 14- �rr1S;1.L. �l�f�r�1 c�S-ewb �' — Tl C:r4L r11,e7�3�— Naukee Mile IRL IndyCar 2/€ EMAirVenture,Wittman " J b� y 'es Race,State Fair Park `C Field,Oshkosh,WI thru 7131 2 �' j 1 "��~ 6 National Korean War Ended ^ oil. �O st Allis,WI f) 11953) 2 7 L Lumberjack World )(� L. 0 5 L 'Il `t^ _r �i LV141T& S�,y'(lIS Championships,Hayward, 2 i i�l w( r I t.&L rLrirr �.i�1 t1, National Korean War Veterans WI thru 7/3I 6��1�c�V v L Armistice Day 31 ��� Y'� I�Ir✓t J (l 14 th Annual Antique Wood Boat t ;7 h G�41r>✓� t1+( Show,Minocqua,WI thru 1/3 3.5 �� •r�1�1-t1, ;Z; 3DPfrI.��-I��I� L�- + vu� fir' � -r ssanE�t a�- 3 Ro�� -tgac �>� Gar C. GRr'� ��Ilfrf� 1-fC)C.J����.� V R ff►-� • ; 1h q ` C17N WIT4 D"01% c ✓ L0 ' Ng" I �Itj& L%N'i`{L.. rv& � /�cr«IN,♦ �p `—�I �/�� (��y YA, I��r if ,Cj V O1& IT I�v�A 4/IJ�'��v V# 1+1 r ro[/� f a.�8,. -,9'�G Sn.P; °'` 4in. e;LF':e;"". 'y a`fi' �CyC �I7 Ct C )�I .�1ar�gy m�-��y�rIl��,IL_ 5�.�T',►,I u-lK5 14 vE , ge r4nos, 'p�•-.>�)-�I - T esday Wednesday Thursday _-�-r�`'►-���� �'�T, Wn � � w� v�/�.c�� �►� D(Ar L v 1. J�,nn�/�� y ✓Q r yitionn Desk SI�Be n 2 7� �Q (�}'j--r Wisconsin State Fair,State Fair 1990 . : V FT s j s,_.. Park,WestAllfs,WI Ihru 19 `yt O f.M v h� e, r(t.1. f7t�(Af ff I pv& ; Crow Wing County Fair,Brainerd,MN i d r' y �� �e(Q� ? $Z1t_L 5MCi-05 thru en i1 °9 �.'J"`�}'► , ;:>04-m -- " `I ISYv 9��va�►- Iv � � 1 �a0uNp 4,30, 3! 9 LM - wlpj Battle of Guadalcanal 11942) C V►�3 C,a.�y� -- 24th Annual NHRA Nationals FiremanY Festival,Clintonville,' 7 Iola Vintage Military b Gun 8 9 1 O Orag Races at Brainerd WI thru 8/14 L Show with Old Working Wheels,1 3 International Raceway,Brainerd, Iola,WI thru 8/14 N thruBLl9_ Perseids Meteor Shower Iowa State Fair,Des Moines,IA thru 8/21 � ikrt Warta VJ Remembrance Day /1 Allied Invasion of Southern C 3�' yL1-�1.�� / ����• l� �f ���{1� \ y p� q Japan surrendered,Ending 4 Frarx11944) ) (� ���^'i�� J m Q�L1Q N.E.WIAn[tue Power Assoc �� Waupaca Area Triathlon, "7O WWII[August I9',1915) -I.. S7 f� rM 1, Plat t. ^� )� V Thresheree Horse 6 Tractor Pu1i Wau aca,VA L 49th Boulder Junction Musky ti �4 �{JI f C. �.T4 t{�V)--- ` ' G� ~C�� Sturgeon Bay.WI thru 8/2I p Jamboree,Boulder Junction,WI ✓�1 1-)V?b vb r�t v �.+ ri (n �.. j pr (�-1 r American Le Mans Series Races,Road Nisswa Pioneer Day,Nisswa,MN _ �4-T&V a mcd-I I v pj 'Z� (r� �1 N 5 g America',Elkhart Lake,WI thru 8121 't �- , �7Sp�-; L g i-{ ~ Ducks Unlimited Great Outdoors �., Festival,FAA Grounds,Oshkosh,WI _ S�. 3 —S�m,P�k •� (�.�r17 �, �' � thru 8121 .84r t f� 'I'll. Z 1 �,5 b -qd-'W Z Z ,�� ' `�G✓Z 3 �lq r�j �,+Iw�b(� Z Minnesota State Fair,MN C thru 8 2 Green Bay 1V1 I ht K j ` �+ State Fairgrounds,St.Paul, L 5 thru 8/2B 26 Z 7 �Ct1�L.1— J{r►t 51�`rl. ��tn�, J�f70�(fit MNth3m 14 I U arnesville Potato Days,Barnesville, ' ,n tad.• .tg� G'tg'��� V��..t� +/"��1�l/ 1� �'• � N thru 8R7 r 43Fcm 5TiL.Sri ty �2uN1�'��fGr;,� 3 0 Q f, 8 I� r 1-7, IvA2 9 n 5©vv� 1; 1,0 grif� I�'J✓2�` Kbe ! -� �S l�� feu ra� 10�1��� t�� JULY SEPTEMBER d S M T W T F S S M T W T F S QA U+ v s'm L. ����,�Vj" ,3 a J GUAR 2 1 2 3 {'Y ��/� Baler Twine m 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 ii 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 If 12 13 14 15 16 17 1r �¢ 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 18 19 20 21 2223 24 1f V � :__,$ 3 i 25 26 27 28 29 30 25 26 27 28 29 30 � I m C) eV e 76 ,:>•.:�""i�•"4`. � �o i —M 2 tier .q +J Oa Q'i - V IL CD .:m a� _�� 'L. ti "ram�• � 1 ��� � � �y. > sz� y -e e 1 � N Ln w 3 4---k LL ul �,�-Al w s FE Ig i 1 \1�.J1WW.J 0� �r�-,<�t ram• � � 3 m_ !I^ �l� c v Elw A . ,� +y� ` ti ► N (� �/V � � /`11 C 4, 1 ✓ Wr /•� �1 ♦ S N 1 P �M1�y J _ LL 1- iE ? L }A`';i>w�;�`�,�.;�jpF�a ge4y�s.� tn' .:�1 x.... .j.s .i •x-r r QA .> ~ i' j1 y'fit °•}�iiiirie i. �� i� ,, ,�. rF;'t ti' �+�.Is, ,7 _.'c�p.�r�y`j�E'ik7f'' '.��X��#s�'�,p- ;*z..�','�� �,K. any,, ;�`,. t•�:}a.:+�`r,��1r� : .��r�1R..F y �I'iC:.•,,,.• ..fir.�'x+s�'�. :.��a,��'a %��•,�s��r'�. y! ee�� y 5- •'� °�, ' f'� ) �u.,�. _ _ •' J��139e,Y�a 1 •.iu,,1 jY�,�i�la _ ,}�.J a{?�YYi�J 9� �y A'� _ �X' f- :j�•- '��3f� i�q4- .f �:�. �: -Y�'.r Fl�,�'']�) pp' d � . •W ,"r(1,1, 9r• {9;�tf!' ;i'�` 'i ; .ra. ' M;. dr+k�f: JJ,q"r1*i ,� e4�:.%a I ,k'+.. `.^°t IT Iy r.!.t J'R at.F` y,�' Zf'7F,�k.� �1N�"" .( isa ^, 3' '�,9�-``.NA+.:. .'ty. _,,x :� s3 rr�}�tr'�',�, �;e'y;�=,i,,: P,,,k�',r^,.:.I,.�..i+T:�4'. F.,•ud. •r`lid7��' ;•.,�,��;'n�h't, :. F ?zat+ ,,y -K++ w e,, ?;f :�. L• .,:ax 1r.. +,` �,+} y tt' 4 ,g` r.L (y1 ,gp Y•f r i .,rr 3. ,'' i' '�'.jyl' e•t: 1R �T�'6 '.( `i"'t *: ,+.-o, '•' _r. may; k, ` tl+;7 'Sf. i^r^' ..�!. •linl N'd f. l" �� :� 1 .F��.3 N,� ;�'�S'�j-�1 .f't.'' ��j`� .��+� #,,..�. �'�.,}'Yi, j'.i '�• 'F'1.9i .,�pM�.�s 'I�ly;i4�'.,�r,�� :f •� s� � , r ?ty..-. 'i'%i�}...a..t:3:�L..,�• ���.+.e�y' .F +21f�f• ,.+{..�. A '+4 �:.,�ai 4 :erfj�, . - �.l.J ch.:;.11}}y...� ..c •.'1 - A!..•i ;%`sr. ��. r.- ' :+r.s�, ..nrs7�i..y 'i�. :3' � `�.� G u •.�.>�.5.;-i.. �; +a .�- -- `2_ � k. •yyL.i+�- .jaf �i 'S� �� M -`t� - a�.�,. ���.-i': ;ij�^:n�'� a rJji�.t� } S:dj•r 3t+?. 1 ;9:;+" a '%yY' �,e'�,. x. .�1,.c?: 'tl. '�� ,x.. '� •'j1'�w�.'f"� �. .S. •.r ,7� Y•, .4,.., :f�+c a ;yy� � �t�yg! y��• :`j'i. �;%1"� .{ ni�L� � � ;� 3."��� �l^•^r ,,E:3 ¢a'rJ 'F� ,�'�5�.�� � � tE �yi_,�';���+M .I,i' � F '� !j i kzr17�.!(-vaN'1� 5,{1S.Yj�� 't��"�"�,�Pk �,L'��"i / .1.���^- -.�. tP.. •''�'i4r ��#�' -'s ��w� i.. ���� r ;,i} � ,�S'_r�.Fl. ' I�h`�i t fr. y� �lh'iy r� ,a�f,�l--z, k "1�t;, ,'o. 4 � �,"* ;•- f':�-1 �? �"4;V;'4• I �i'� �'��3;..y.ra�9.,�..rF�� v>xj�ji".f+�%e'�'�k�t;� �: �.1� ;i;'J}h °, z c�'.w ��`i �.. `���tG z i'�� ��..�<2.'�x4. SC !ia{ :.t, '4• x 'a.a :r. n? .o*. �� h:, `r�Fj{.�P'� �}s it��yl,r .,r<.• -r_ :,� .,fit. •}s;�!! !II�I, /�[ +, fi. NY .z ..•4s�.f4i,L�rriA:{��st'kr�i��Y`v.:4i,�`F., ,�'s:"�l`{a76d�� �,•F`,�t,.� !},'1����i' 3r,.yyfi �9": n.?,•y ;y':+,+. 4i/;'�1 .�,�..F�''s... }i3 � /� . • . _ °Ca }'1��-. '.n5pd,lM:+, 71.�1iFCR`.;Y '�Y�S:V�}�r�d�'�„Sf� -rJrv.,.L ���l'4I-yE{�S.IL'A.I�'A'��� � ��k ,f�A�4�' Da T,,(saving Time Ends . i 1 1 �3�i �+'�}`. '`37t�,�,�"' r� `7 Y1 '�� �f'F."a~3�4.3y%,• r 1 r J t' Ili t � � I D � r r • s *l Q � f t�� �.• �p.w` p s r` �5 � :: + h 3z. 4. x°rl Eft K S,t�•-t-i:�rr. • I / r ��' k:'� l �'1 lam• �J PF . 7 Sunday Monday Tuesday. Wednesday Thursday Friday Saturday All Saints'Day 1 28th Annual National Farm Toy /1 ,, 5 Show,Dyersville,IA thru 1l,6 `7 r, 0111111 INUUAKO .VO 9, VC Ov�6- .I 6 ��j 9�,TRL\G�y7 Election Day 8 q:3 vN M— r� U.S.Marine Corps Established 1 o VeteranY Day 11 1 L p M VbR q V 1 I'�1. e uA e GAT` IT7751 .� � Signing of WWIArmistlst 11918) a 0�-a 5 C GS-�.r (�O )-VEf'JcurS 8.9� ) �Voc yj `C'l���vC� I ALK�S?w tT4� P � 1- a r(n—�kv P,✓;�R�orr psi _VC, N r c . 13 �` �'9 1"7' "�' 14 % ��T��y° 15. 16 17 Eeonids Meteor Shower 18 1 e� him- 351h Annual Tinsel Trail 2 0 2 1 2 2 5T-��.,�,. 7 3 Thanksgiving Day 2 4 2 5 2 6 Craft Show, L L Stevens Point WI 0 Mills Fleet Farm Closed Advent 27 28 29 30 OCTOBER DECEMBER C'IU, I SMTWT F S S M T W T F S l 1 1 2 3 /n p��((�'r'��}� L� 2 3 4 5, 6 7 8 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 `0l ugh 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 16 17 18 19 2021 22 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 3031 A �. c� Sunday Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Friday Saturday NOVEMBER JANUARY 1 2 3 SMTWTFS SMTWTFS ©Pq"rV-}-r (A1G 7 8 9 2 MILKHOUSE . ,, BRAND® 8 9 0 ; 3 4 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 / 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 70 21 22 23 24 25 26 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 27 28 29 30 . �/ 293031 ® 2� New Moan 4 C St.Nicholas Day / Pead Harbor Remembrance Day 7 Q — / 1 0 lJ tJ — � 10 11 1'7 1 Geminids Meteor Shower 14 1 5 attl of the Bulge Began 16 17 L 1944 ' i O aaYy NA Moan 18 19 2 0 �Dorstkel tenter 21 2 2 2 3 Christmas Eve 24 uvo Mills Fleet Farm Open Barr," Christmas 2 C Boxing Day lcznaaal' 2 6 2 7 2 8 2 % 3 0 New YearY Eve 31 Hanukkah pgig at sundown) thru 112 New Moon Mills Fleet Farm Closed * Mills Fleet Farm Open Sam-Spm t' MINUTES OF THE CITY OF ROCHESTER PLANNING COMMISSION • 2122 CAMPUS DRIVE SE — SUITE 100 ROCHESTER MN 55904 Minutes of the regularly scheduled meeting of the City Planning and Zoning Commission held on Wednesday, December 14, 2005, at 7:00 p.m. in the Council/Board Chambers of the Government Center, 151 4th Street SE, Rochester, MN. Members Present: Mr. Robert Haeussinger, Chair; Mr. Jay Burke, Vice Chair; Mr. Jesse Wallace; Mr. Paul Ohly; Mr. Vince Barry; and Mr. Bruce Snyder Members Absent: Ms. Leslie Rivas; Ms. Lisa Wiesner; and Mr. Michael Quinn Staff Present: Mr. Brent Svenby and Ms. Jennifer Garness Other City Staff Present: Ms. Pat Alfredson, City Attorney SET ORDER OF AGENDA: Mr. Burke moved to approve the agenda, as written. Mr. Snyder seconded the motion. The motion carried unanimously. CONSENT AGENDA: Mr. Wallace moved to remove Type III, Phase III Petition to amend and renew Restricted Development Permit#05-06, by Rochester.Sand and Gravel and Mathy Construction from the consent agenda. Mr. Burke seconded the motion. The motion carried 6-0. Mr. Barry made a motion to approve the November 9, 2005 minutes. Mr. Burke seconded the motion. The motion carried 6-0. REVIEW ITEM (taken off of the consent agenda as stated above): Type III, Phase III Petition to amend and renew Restricted Development Permit#05-06, by Rochester Sand and Gravel and Mathy Construction: Mr. Wallace stated that the permit was before the Commission approximately 9 months ago. At this time, there is no reason that the proposed changes would have a significant improvement with regard to odor, noise, etc. Mr. Burke explained that he did some research checking with neighbors, builders, and developers questioning if there was a significant change in odor, noise, etc. There is consideration of sending a petition around to gather further information. Mr. Wallace stated that, during the summer, he drove to Stewartville several times. He explained that the odor was obvious while driving, even with the window closed. Page 2 City Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes Hearing Date: December 14,2005 • Mr. Haeussinger concurred with Mr. Wallace. He explained that he was reluctant to deny the request, but also had reservations about approving it. To him, it appeared that this would be the last and final attempt at fixing the issues. Mr. Burke stated that, if the applicant had not brought forth a proposal to improve the environmental issues, he would also be hesitant to approve the request. However, the proposal is trying to address odor, noise, etc. He explained that it did seem as though it is the final attempt to solve the problems. If it did not solve the current problems/concerns, it could be concluded that the business is not placed in the correct site location. Mr. Wallace and Ms. Alfredson discussed findings that current solutions/conditions applied to the site are not being met and that there is no proof that new conditions of approval would change the impact the business has on the neighboring properties. Therefore, there is no reason to implement new conditions to renew the permit. Mr. Wallace moved to recommend denial of.Type lll, Phase III.Petition to amend and renew Restricted Development Permit.#05-06, by'Rochester Sand and Gravel and Mathy Construction with the below finding ..Mr Snyder seconded the motion. the motion .. carried 5-1, with Mr .Burke voting nay FINDING: : i The current solutions/conditions applied to the site are not being me and there is no proof that new conditions of approval would change the impact the business has on the neighboring properties Therefore, here soreason o lentnew conditions m to; . .renew e:permit. . . Mr. Haeussinger explained that the City Council has the final decision and that they would take public testimony. CONTINUED ITEMS: Land Use Plan Amendment#05-08 and Zoninci D' trict Amendment#05-14 initiated by the Rochester Planning and Zoning Com ission tclamend the designation of land located alon-q the east side of St. Bridget Roadiland soufh of 40th Street SE from the "industrial" classification and from M-1 Mixed CornkerciallAndustrial zoning to "commercial" on the Land Use Plan and 13-1 Restricted Com erc' I on the Zoning Map. Mr. Brent Svenby presented the staff reAfronriB cember 1, 2005, to the Commission. The staff report is on file at the Rochester-Og Department. With no one else wishing to be hearnger closed the public hearing. Mr. Svenby stated that a fax was receivacobsen, & Stevens dated December 13, 2005. This fax is on file at the Rochestnning Department. Mr. Burke moved to recommend.ap oval`of Lan , se Plan Amendment#05-08, initiated . 0 by the Rochester Planning and ZonffigCommission, with the staff-recommended findings. Mr. Barry seconded the motion. The motion carried 6=0.