Laserfiche WebLink
a. Approve the Request by Bituminous Roadways for a Conditional Use <br />to allow outdoor storage of aggregate materials and heavy equipment <br />at 2280 Walnut Street (P~'~09-010} <br />Community Development Director Patrick Trudgeon summarized staff s <br />analysis, as detailed in the Request for Council Action dated May 18, <br />2009, of the request of Bituminous Roadways for a CONDITIONAL USE <br />to allow outdoor storage of aggregate materials and heavy equipment as a <br />Conditional Use in support of the operation of an asphalt plant at 2280 <br />Walnut Street. <br />Mr. Trudgeon noted that asphalt processing itself was a permitted <br />manufacturing use in the I-2 District; and that the Conditional Use request <br />was only prompted. by the need for outdoor stockpiles of the aggregate <br />inputs for the asphalt process and the heavy equipment to move it; with <br />the only concerns being related to potential affects of dust and noise of <br />that storage. <br />Mr. Trudgeon noted that applicant representatives were present at <br />tonight's meeting. <br />Councilmember Ihlan requested the scope of notice provided to <br />surrounding property owners. <br />Mr. Trudgeon advised that the standard 500' notice had been provided. <br />Councilmember Ihlan opined that this notice scope did not provide <br />sufficient notice to those residences across I-35 that may be impacted by <br />dust, noise, fumes and/or smoke from the asphalt plant; and further opined <br />that she was leery to give approval for permanent use without providing <br />notice to a larger area of residents and businesses that could be <br />significantly impacted. <br />Councilmember Roe clarified with staff that the Building Permit process <br />would address approval of location of buildings, structures and equipment <br />on site. <br />Councilmember Thlan questioned if this request. had been considered by <br />any other advisory commission other than the Planning Commission (i.e., <br />Public Works, Environment, and Transportation Commission}; with Mr. <br />Trudgeon. responding negatively, based on the construction, operation and <br />compliance monitoring criteria provided by the applicant based on the <br />Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (Ml'CA) guidelines. <br />Councilmember Ihlan advised that she had reviewed the packet materials; <br />and opined that she had a broad range of environmental concerns related <br />to the asphalt plant, and that additional environmental. review was <br />