Laserfiche WebLink
Metadata
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015 Laserfiche. All rights reserved.
S <br /> gfZ7 lit ra <br /> I'd like to discuss the status of the permit for the proposed Bituminous Roadways asphalt plant to be <br /> located at 2280 Walnut Street in Roseville and the ongoing environmental review being conducted by <br /> the MPCA. I had originally intended to only address the issue of the Council's ability to deny the permit <br /> during the environmental review process. However in light of Mayor Klausing's comments in the Star <br /> Tribune today, I wish to expand my comments. I would like to suggest that it is inappropriate for either <br /> Mr. Roe (on MPR and RIF) or Mr. Klausing (in the interview) to assert the opinion of the Council as a <br /> whole as no vote has ever been taken. <br /> The newspaper article makes the following assertion. "That's because the issue before the Roseville City <br /> Council is only for outdoor storage at the proposed plant. The plant itself doesn't need the council's <br /> approval because the land in question is zoned for heavy industrial purposes, such as manufacturing." <br /> Mr. Klausing is quoted today as saying, "No permission from the council is needed, from a land —use <br /> perspective." He is later quoted "If the issue before the council were simply, 'should there be an asphalt <br /> plant I don't think there is any support for that on the council." <br /> Under Chapter 1014.01, Conditional Use Permits, item D states: <br /> When reviewing an application for a conditional use permit, the planning commission and City <br /> Council shall consider the following criteria: <br /> 1. Impact on traffic. <br /> 2. Impact on parks, streets and other public facilities. <br /> 3. Compatibility of the site plan, internal traffic circulation, landscaping and <br /> structures with contiguous properties. <br /> 4. Impact of the use on the market value of contiguous properties. <br /> 5. Impact on the general public health, safety and welfare. <br /> 6. Compatibility with the city's comprehensive plan. <br /> After reading the 167 Comments sent regarding the EAW, I believe the Council has more than adequate <br /> information and basis for denying a Conditional Use Permit for storage to Bituminous Roadways. <br /> The Star Tribune stated, "The plant itself doesn't need the council's approval because the land in <br /> question is zoned for heavy industrial purposes, such as manufacturing." The reporter was mistaken <br /> because she did not have the information from our current City Code. We have already defined <br /> "manufacturing" through our performance standards in Section 1007 of our Zoning code. Our <br /> performance standards for this industrial area read as follows: <br /> D. Performance Standards: <br /> 1. Noise: Any use established in an industrial district shall be so operated that no noise <br /> resulting from said operation which would constitute a nuisance is perceptible beyond the <br /> premises. This does not apply to incidental traffic, parking and off street loading operations. <br /> 2. Smoke and Particulate Matter: The emission of smoke or particulate matter is prohibited <br /> where such emission is perceptible beyond the premises to the degree as to constitute a <br /> nuisance. <br /> 3. Toxic Or Noxious Matter: No use shall, for any period of time, discharge across the <br />