CC_Minutes_2010_0726 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Regular City Council Meeting Monday, July 26, 2010 Page 15 Ms. Kester suggested that, given the existing points of pollution in the com- munity, going "green" on the industrial parcel would be a better choice than adding to the existing industry in the community. Councilmember Pust noted another issue with the proposed land use of the Terminal Road and Walnut Street parcel as parks use would be to address the maintenance cost to the parks system, since the public continually points out that there should be no new parks and recreation facilitates until the City could maintain what they already had. Councilmember Ihlan clarified the status of the asphalt plant application, with the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) scheduling a public meet- ing as part of their environmental review process, currently scheduled for July 29, 2010 from 7:00 - 9:00 p.m. at the Roseville City Hall; and that the City Council was not considering the issue at this time, and would have a vote be- fore approval of any future asphalt plant. Councilmember Ihlan noted that a draft Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) was available on line from the MPCA for members of the public showing interest; and noted the proposed location of the asphalt plant on the displayed map adjacent to the parcel under discussion for a change in land use designation. Steve Dorf, Meritex, land owner representative Mr. Dorf, as manager over the last l0years of the property under discussion for a change in land use designation stated his opposition to any change from Industrial zoning. Mr. Dorf offered to respond to any questions, or provide additional information as requested. Mr. Dorf advised that the property had been marketed over the last three years for any potential future use, with inter- est shown only by potential buyers who were industrial users. Mr. Dorf fur- ther advised that there had been no serious interest from private developers for mixed use or residential uses. Mr. Dorf advised that the property owner would entertain a Purchase Agreement from the City for purchase of the land for park use. Councilmember Pust asked Mr. Dorf of his knowledge of any contamination on site that he would be willing to share. Mr. Dorf advised that the property owner had received a "No Action" letter from the MPCA in 2000 or 2001; and that the property had been used most exclusively for manufacture of circuit board, and minimal office use, but it had served as an industrial factory for the majority of the time it had been oc- cupied. Councilmember Roe questioned if the same property owner owned both sides of Walnut, with Mr. Dorf responding affirmatively.