Laserfiche WebLink
<br />Gb. Planning File 3197. A request by Ryan Companies US, Inc. for the vacation of a portion of the utility and drainage <br />easement lying on a part Lot 6, Block 1, Centre Pointe Business Park. <br /> <br />The request for vacation of certain easements was withdrawn by the applicant, Ryan Companies US, Inc. <br /> <br />Gc. Planning File 319G. A request by the City of Roseville for an Interim Use Permit to allow a temporary concrete <br />recycling operation on the Ramsey County Public Works Kent Street Yard for reconstruction of Larpenteur Avenue. <br /> <br />Chair Klausing opened the hearing and requested Thomas Paschke to provide a verbal summary of the project report <br />dated March 8, 2000. He explained the background and surrounding land uses. <br /> <br />Thomas Paschke explained the crushing operations proposed and noted no significant impacts. Staff recommended <br />approval based on the following findings: <br /> <br />As a condition of the approval, the County must provide property dust control through screening and wetting <br />the material, as well as erosion control. <br /> <br />The requested permit is to allow concrete recycling for two phases of the Larpenteur Avenue reconstruction <br />project. Phase One is from Arona Street to Oxford Street in 2000. Phase Two is from Oxford Street to Dale <br />Street in 2001. The request is to allow concrete recycling a maximum of 15 working days in each year. <br />Crushing operations would be limited to 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. Monday to Friday. <br /> <br />Member Olson asked for the history of crushing requests. Public Works Director, Karl Keel, explained history and use of <br />crushing equipment at Dale and Highway 36. The savings for locating near Larpenteur is $300,000 to $500,000. Karl Keel <br />noted that within 1000 feet more people were located along Dale/36 than Kent Street. The schedule is to be 15 days per <br />year for two years. <br /> <br />Member Mulder asked for detail of road reconstruction. <br /> <br />Member Olson asked what would happen to current stockpiles of concrete (use on Larpenteur Avenue). <br /> <br />Member Egli asked if notice had been given to new duplexes along the south side of Larpenteur Avenue (yes). How did <br />15 days get established (by County Engineers). Would the County be able to predict when crushing will occur (mailed <br />notice up to two days in advance). <br /> <br />Member Olson asked if the next two phases would extend beyond two years. Karl Keel suggested limitations to two years. <br />Member Olson asked if more concrete had been placed on this site this year (no verification). <br /> <br />Member Wilke noted that the quality of material is high. Karl Keel noted it is good quality, but no batch mixing will occur on <br />this site. <br /> <br />Member Egli asked if other projects are near this site to use this site again. Karl Keel was unaware of other nearby roads. <br />The County has not indicated this site would be used further. <br /> <br />Elliot James, 497 Wagner, asked if Larpenteur Avenue redevelopment is only planned to Dale, but no with plans to <br />construct from Dale to Rice. <br /> <br />Elliot James suggested that the two-year plan is only the beginning; it will become an on-going use. Karl Keel suggested <br />the Planning Commission will always have to balance the needs for road reconstruction, impacts and funding. <br /> <br />Mr. James asked for details of the cost estimates. Karl Keel responded that no firm bids have been received to date, but <br />savings would be at least $200,000. <br /> <br />Gene Aulk, 516 Glenwood Avenue, provided history of Ramsey County use of site, as very sporadic, during emergencies. <br />In 1999, the County Public Works began stockpiling and grinding material; then the County requested an NSP stump <br />grinding operation, which was denied by the City Council. There were significant erosion issues on the site. The Kent <br />Street Yard is used at night. Mr. Aulk calls the Roseville police when this happens. <br /> <br />Mr. Aulk expressed concern for one versus two years of use. <br /> <br />No further public comment was offered. The hearing was closed. <br />