HomeMy WebLinkAbout02/16/1994 TENTATIVE AGENDA
SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA
COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE
FEBRUARY 16, 1994
Location: City Hall, 129 Holmes Street South
Mayor Gary Laurent presiding
1] Roll Call at 4 : 00 P.M.
2] Approval of Minutes: December 14 , 1993 and January 25, 1994
3] Proposed Zoning Ordinance
4] Adjourn at 6: 00 P.M.
Dennis R. Kraft
City Administrator
OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA
DECEMBER 14, 1993
with
Mayor Laurent called the meeting to order at 7 : OP.M. lso
Councilmembers Vierling, Beard, Lynch and Sweeney present .ty Administrator; Dave Hutton, public
Ci
present : Dennis R. Kraft,
Works Director; Karen Marty, CityAttorney; Gregg Voxland, Finance
Allen Dye, Metropolitan Waste
Director; Judith S. Cox, City Clerk; Attorney for
te
Control Commission Project Manager; and Brian Ohm,
Metropolitan Council . Kevin
Mayor Laurent introduced the city' s new police officer,
Gulden, to councilmembers .
Discussion ensued whether or not to discuss the proposed amendments
to the HRA' s Rehab Grant Program SeParately consensusramong councilmembers
in conjunction with
the downtown proposal . There was a
to discuss the Program after the Chaska Sewer Interceptor• City,ensued on the draft agreement between the
Metropolitan Council, and Metropolitan Waste Control Commission
M P
relative to the Chaska Interceptor. make initial
Mr. Kraft suggest that Mr. Brian Ohm and Mr. Allen Dye
comments followed by: 1) discussion on whether or not the city
wants to connect to the Chaska
for sewers,tor and
andcost
3) then discuss
Mr. Hutton explain the alternativesMetropolitan Council an
Met contractaastee Controltween t Commisshe ion) . P
Metropole in Chaska is at
Mr. Dye explained that the sanitary sewer plantdiverted to
capacity.Chanhassen until it can be phased out . t
As an interim solution the plant is being
He explained that MWCC
Chsite or a new site. They
looked at whether to use the existing plant
decided on a new site since thheBBlue Laked has that capacitye and anew
interceptor will go to Blue Le
. Hewill be abandoned utilizing the lift station constructed nearby.
paid for the updating of the Chaska plant .
Cncl . Lynch asked who plant, MWCC took it over
Mr. Ohm remade daddit ons later.Chaska built the p
later and
to be paying for the
Mr. Ohm explained why Chaska is not going to provide an
Chaska Interceptor. He said that it is the policyr
interceptor to the boarder of cities and e henterceptorcities ild their
i P
be
sewer system within their 'community
built to phase out the Chaska plant and there is no need to require
them to rebuild the system within their community.CncOhm responded
asked when the policy was adopted. Mr Metropolitan
thatl .Sweeney Plan was adopted by phaseditn
in 1988 the Sewer Policy is not being Council . Mr. Ohm stated that the Chaska system
Official Proceedings of the December 14 , 1993
Shakopee City Council Page -2-
out, that they are just replacing the plant . Chaska must get all
of their sewage to the treatment plant .
Cncl . Sweeney asked if Shakopee got all their sewage to L16 would
MWCC provide the updating to L16 . Mr•. Dye responded yes .
Mr. Hutton stated that numerous lift stations would be needed to
get all of Shakopee' s sewage to L16 . He said you don' t want to use
lift stations if you don' t have to. Because of the interceptor at
the bypass, he didn' t look at this as an option. He said the
$1, 300, 000 credit from MWCC is for diverting the Rahr flow from L16
not to re-drain all of Shakopee. He said that we don' t have the
dollars to run all of the sewage to L16 .
Discussion followed on the need to replace the Chaska plant now
when it was updated in 1988 and expected to last until 2010 . Mr.
Ohm explained that the problem wasn' t growth but the strength of
the flow being put through the system. He said that there
shouldn' t be a problem at the Blue Lake plant for 20 years, that it
can handle the increase in strength.
Mayor Laurent stated that we need to calculate into the agreement
the formula for the sewage flow to serve property to be annexed
from Jackson Township. May need a provision to allow transferring
capacity from one area to another.
Mr. Ohm provided Councilmembers with copies of the Metropolitan
Council' s cost sharing policy which is from the Metropolitan
Development and Investment Framework which was adopted in 1986 . He
said that it was developed as a result of the Lake Ann, Lake
Virginia agreement which was the first time that cost sharing was
entered into. He said that the agreement served as the model for
the arrangement where both Chanhassen and Eden Prairie agreed to
pay a portion of the interceptor that was built to deal with an
area South of Lake Minnetonka. Included in this agreement as well
as the agreement for Shakopee is the Council' s rural policy which
promotes a 1 per 10 density as calculated over a 640 acre area.
Mr. Dye explained what the Service Area Charge (SAC) is and what it
is used for.
Mr. Ohm explained that the facility will be used by Shakopee as a
local trunk line . It will have a dual purpose in terms of serving
both as a regional interceptor and as a local trunk line . The
Council and the Commission aren' t in the business of providing a
local system and that is why the City is being asked to pay.
Mr. Dye explained the scheduling concerns for the interceptor
because MnDOT is allowing them to use their right-of-way. He said
that MWCC needs to have the design done in July, 1994 .
14 , 1993
Official Proceedings of the Page December r3-
Shakopee City Council
Cncl . Vierling expressed concern about the transportation issue
tied into the proposed ro osed agreement; the access to the CR-18 which
against
is kind of pushing one community another in terms of
development . Mr. Ohm responded.
t
Ms . Marty explained that City staff informed Mr. Ohm
e that it was
very important to have the paved access ramps
and
it was at our request . She said that it could come out of the
agreement if it is Council' s wish.
' s 1 in
Mr. Kraft asked Mr. Ohm, relatingto
totrequireltownships0ineScott
ppolicy, if there any steps under oy
County to also meet the density policy or will they be allowed to
develo at a higher density in the rural area? Mr. Ohm responded
that before the Scott County Transportation ortation Plan can be reviewed
again that they have to address the rural area concerns and trying
to be consistent with Met . Council' sthat
Cncl . Sweeney
asked if it is considered a taking if a property
can currently be developed into 2 1/2 acre acre lots lotsDiscussionefollowedd so t
itt can only be developed into 10 Cncl . Sweeney, Mr. Ohm stated that Met
In response to a question by ro osed agreement holding
theunit City
would
asow a clause in the p
a resulte of a down zoning suit .
s
Mr. Hutton presented some of the costs aosed sociated to with
various
options . He explained the project being prop
Chaska Treatment Plant . A pump station would be installed and
would be pumped by forcemain to the vicinity of Point "A" and from
the treatment plant .
there there would be gravitysewer to
replacinPrior Lake Interceptor.
They looked at options including to Blue Lake i
The cost to go from Chaska, forcemain, and gravity
estimated at $23 million. To go forcemain all the way, which was
what they were originally eysuggested planning
doing, the cost to MWCC would be
that the City of Shakopee
$13 Million. Originally
should come up with the difference to put in the gravity instead of
the forcemain. As a terwere 14 lng o tions
generated, 12 of which dealt resultwith whe the City would connect and
how much flow we would need. sanitary sewer plan being prepared
from the
Mr. Hutton showed a map Inc He identified four points of
by Short, Elliott, Hendrickson,
nu
of cubic feet
p 'Heossible connection to the intersaidtthat eand lan t estimate has been
prepared to connect at point second flow for each.int D (CR-17) and at point B (CR 79) .
Discussion_ followed on assessing
for the cost, deferment of
assessments, benefit to properties outside the Metropolitan Urban
Service Area (MUSA) , and the immediate cost for something that to toy
not be used for some time to come versus theirnot own hooking
p pipe ase
interceptor but instead the City building
development occurs .
Official Proceedings of the December 14, 1993
Shakopee City Council Page -4-
Mr. Hutton explained the City' s cost sharing options using the MWCC
pipe. If connect at Point "B" (CR-79) with the full \.17 cfs, it
would be the highest cost at $4 million after deducting the $1.3
million credit for improvements the city is making to save them
money down by L-16 . The cost to connect at point "D" (CR-17) would
be $3 . 6 million plus $400, 000 to construct our own sewer back to
CR-17 . Basically it is the same cost to tie in at Point "B" or
Point "D" .
Mr. Hutton explained that part of the trouble with the cost sharing
is the payment plan, how the City pays their share. Staff
originally requested that the City pay our share when we get a MUSA
expansion, so it would be tied into what we could use . They are
uncomfortable with that because some MUSA expansions could be 50
years down the road. Mr. Hutton stated that the financing of any
of the options is a critical factor. They would like the full
$4, 000, 000 to be paid at the end of the 20 year contract .
Cncl . Sweeney questioned the option of a temporary lift station at
CR-17 to the VIP until such time that there is development that
makes the South Shakopee Interceptor desirable. Mr. Hutton
responded.
In summary, Mr. Hutton explained that the City costs for MWCC would
go down as we tie into the East with their share, but our own
system cost to make connects at points East goes up.
Mayor Laurent noted that the cost to connect at Points "B" and "D"
are about the same either way. Mr. Hutton agreed. Mayor Laurent
asked if that would be true as you continue to go to the East . Mr.
Hutton responded that as the City' s cost share of the interceptor
goes down the City' s own cost to service the area will increase and
could be even greater. Two pipes cost more than one larger pipe.
He said that the best cost sharing option with MWCC is at Point "B"
with 17 cfs, which gives the City total flexibility and a total
service area that we would ever need for the green area (area East
of CR-79) .
Mr. Dan Boxrud, Short Elliott Hendrickson, Inc. , explained that he
has done a lot of the background work for the Comprehensive Sewer
Plan and has provided a lot of information to Mr. Hutton and
Council and staff for the discussions with the Waste Control
Commission. He explained that his memo of 10-12-93 to Mr. Hutton
goes into some background on. comparisons and looking at alternative
"B" versus alternative "D" , he has come to the conclusion that it
would cost the City about the same amount of money to go with "B"
or "D" because of the additional cost to the City to construct
their own pipe from "D" back to "B" .
Discussion ensued on funding alternatives for the City.
December 14, 1993
s of the Page -5-
Sh
Official City Proceedings
Shakopee City Met Council
options offered by get from
could
to. Vox City identified licefacilitiesPloan the City from
to the City: o interest rate with a 20 yearthe
of State annual n aymentseor 2)� Met Waste issues bonds with
of equal Pears, th fourn
City
paying annual installments for thefiveteyest plus ould be
principal
of $1, 000, 000 every w
esi tpayments Mr. Ohm said that they
estimated interest rateflout over 30 years .
willing to spread the payment
consensus to discuss the rehab grant program amendments
There was a to continue discussion of the Chaska
interceptora
the Decemagreement atmeeting, to
meeting, and to take comments from
agreement
the audience at tonight' s meeting. Metropolitan
present on behalf of the Metrop with
Cncl . Beard asked those goodm deal for
Council and Metropolitan Waste Control Commission
lis tocome up
whatgiving up and why the agreement
they are on the agreement .
the City of Shakopee for the next meeting
Mayor Laurent gave members of the audience an opportunity to speak.
500, stated that they were concerned
Betty O' Shaughnessy, Shakopee but didn' t come prepared to
potential MUSA land changesCouncil would getp to it
about the opportunity
speak because saidididn' t think Cityke s land area for unit
tonight . She that she d thatlin termsoreserve the °pp issue .
Mr. Kraft responded to that that capacity issue but a MUSA exchange
is not a sewer cap Y
Realtor in Shakopee, acknowledged earlier
comments
r thecost that
at
the Brown, getting much in exchange for paying of
the City is not comments until
MUSA allocation, he would like to defer making
people to the East make comments'e had no interest in real estate .
Mr. James toathet stated
that
ratio, he said that this could be
of greats the 1 perid development South of where
the great issue ifwe were toingo vin.
e rapid
10 acre sites,
won' t City
sewer interceptor the
rCity would be surrendering a lot of power.
grow fast, that he
5240 Valley Industrial Boulevard South, saidhis agreement .
Jon already Albinson, regarding
mailed his comments
ideatoutilize MnDOT right-of-way-
He feels that it is a good estimates o provideto the e
ovi
Mr. Hutton clarified that the City staff costthey are in the
our own sewer does not include easement costs as opposed
cost sharing agreement with MWCC for $4 million,
MnDOT right-of-way' requested by city
to discuss the MWCC agreement : 1)
Mr. Kraft summarized tmeet additional information for annexed land
councilinclude aor the next for
rom ) formula to ,calculate talk about costsharing
trading provisions
from Jackson Township,
Official Proceedings of the December 14 , 1993
Shakopee City Council Page -6-
land within the City not being used for land in Jackson Township,
3) copy of Lake Ann Agreement that Chaska and Chanhassen entered
into, 4) crude number on the diversion sewer from the VIP to L-16,
5) to Brian and Allen to indicate at the next meeting what is MWCC
and Met Council giving up to sell the, agreement to the City.
Cncl . Beard, referencing the land trade (Sec. 6 . 1A of the
agreement) , said that he would like to discuss the 2 for 1 trade as
addressed by Mr. Albinson in his letter. `
Cncl . Sweeney said that he would like some explanation of Sec.
6 . 1A3 on page 3 of the agreement .
Mayor Laurent asked for explanation of some references within the
agreement : Sec. 4A, third black dot, page 8 Sec . 4B, 5, and 6 .
Mayor Laurent asked for a new title to the document to more
accurately identify the agreement .
The next meeting date for a Committee of the Whole to continue
discussion on the Chaska Sewer Interceptor agreement was set for
Tuesday, January 11, 1994 at 7 :00 P.M.
Mayor Laurent adjourned the meeting at 9 :52 P.M.
CtAct4- ()j)6
u' ith S. Cox
City Clerk
Recording Secretary
OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA JANUARY 25, 1994
Mayor Laurent called the meeting to order at 9 : 03 p.m. with
Councilmembers Lynch, Dirks, Beard and Sweeney Marty, Alsois
present : Dennis R. Kraft, City Administrator; Karen
y
Attorney; Lindberg Ekola, City Planner and Judith S. Cox, City
Clerk.
Beard/Lynch moved to approve the Minutes of November 30, 1993 .
Motion carried unanimously.
Beard/Lynch moved the approval of the agenda. Motion carried
unanimously.
Ms . Marty gave a brief presentation on the final two thirds of the
Zoning Ordinance stating what the Planning Commission adopted.
Ms . Marty stated that the "signs" portion has been removed from the
Bung
ce,
land g A consultant for thee and moved into eCityls ggestednaddinglch deals with
st standards for
land use .
each conditional use permit .
Cncl . Sweeney suggested concentrating on the problem areas of the
Planning Commission.
Terry Joos, Planning Commission Chair, commented that Light
Industrial was a problem area for the Planning Commission.
Cncl . Sweeney commented on the proposed conditional use requested
by Valleyfair and that conditional use would fall within the
racetrack zoning special use . He stated another problematic area
was hazardous chemicals as it relates to light and heavy industrial
zones .
Terry Joos stated that the Planning Commission spent a lot of time
on the hazardous chemical issue in the light industrial area.
Mayor Laurent brought
up,
from the legal definition tion it held.section, the word
"morals" and what kind of
Ms. Marty stated that was language from the Statute, but could be
removed.
Mr. Kraft stated a moral issue would be a massage parlor which is
a permitted use, but also a morale issue.
Ms . Marty suggested that Council be prepared to discuss items 1-4
on the outline for the next meeting. She stated that the City
Council does not need to hold a public hearing to adopt the
Ordinance since that was done by the Planning Commission.
Cncl . Sweeney suggested that anyone wishing to make comments on the
proposed zoning ordinance submit them in writing as opposed to an
oral presentation.
January 25, 1994
an
Official Proceedings of the Jane -2-
Shakopee City Council
Councilmembers set dates of : February 2, 7 : 00 p.m. ; February 4, 7-
9 a.m. and March 1, 4-6 p.m. to discuss the proposed zoning
ordinance .
Mayor Laurent adjourned the Committee of the Whole meeting at 10 : 00
p.m. to February 2, 1994 at 7 : 00 p.m.•
"Lik., t) . 0)6,
u ith S. Cox
Ci, y Clerk
Debra Zabel
Recording Secretary
MEMO TO: Shakopee Committee of the Whole
FROM: Lindberg S. Ekola, City Planner
RE: Hazardous Chemical Issues
DATE: February 11, 1994
INTRODUCTION:
The hazardous chemical issue remains an outstanding item in the
Zoning Ordinance update process.
BACKGROUND:
Staff believes that in addition to the hazardous chemicals
discussion, there is also a related but separate and more basic
planning and zoning issue. This issue focuses on the purposes of
the Industrial Zoning districts in the City of Shakopee. This
issue can be summarized in a question format:
1. What are the purposes of the two industrial zoning
districts?
2 . Does the City need two industrial districts in the
future?
3 . What level or amount of manufacturing, fabricating, or
processing should occur in each industrial district?
4 . With the completion of the text update, the mapping
process will need to be initiated. The question to be
asked at that point will be, where should industrial
districts be located?
The planning and zoning questions for the industrial districts
should be addressed in the context of the City's Comprehensive Plan
and the Zoning Ordinance update process as a whole.
DISCUSSION:
As a community, where are we and where have we been with respect to
the industrial zoning topic? What do we want for the future?
■ The 1980 Comprehensive Plan
Several industrial land use policies were adopted in the
1980 plan. The policies include the desire to continue
a strong tax base situation and employment base while
making the industrial development compatible with
adjacent land uses. The 1980 plan also p
rovdesindustrial land use categories (light and heavy
industrial) . As shown on the adopted land use plans, the
Light Industrial land uses separate the Heavy Industrial
uses from residential and commercial areas in the City.
1
The existing Zoning Ordinance
To implement the goals and policies of the 1980 plan, the
current Zoning Ordinance was adopted. This ordinance
includes two industrial districts. The purpose of each
district is listed below:
1. Light Industrial (I-1) - The Light Industrial
District shall serve as a transition between more
intense industrial sites and residential and/or
business land uses. Mixed land uses other than
intense manufacturing and processing shall be
allowed such as warehousing and office space.
2 . Heavy Industrial (I-2) - The Heavy Industrial
District should be located where a full complement
of urban services such as water, sewer, rail and
highway transportation exist to provide support for
intense manufacturing and processing operations.
The permitted and conditional uses for the two
industrial districts are listed in Exhibit A. From
a land use planning and zoning perspective, the
current zoning text and mapping successfully
implements the City's goals and policies for
industrial land uses.
Where are we going?
1990 Comprehensive Plan
The 1990 Comprehensive Plan provided an economic market
analysis which included a section on future industrial
development (pages 5. 5 - 5. 8) . The analysis noted that
over-building of industrial and office space in all areas
of the Twin Cities since the mid 1980s produced a
dramatic decline in new development activity in almost
all areas. The combination of oversupply naturally and
regionally, modest absorption rates, and tax law changes
caused land prices to fall. The analysis concluded the
Shakopee's competitive position was less significant.
Staff would note that this analysis was prepared in 1989
and some recent market growth changes have occurred.
• 1993 Sewer Plan
The draft sewer plan has incorporated the most recent
employment forecasts in determining commercial/industrial
land needs in the upcoming decades. Based on the
forecasts, the City will need approximately 1420 acres of
commercial/industrial land by the year 2040 . Please
refer to Exhibit B.
2
The sewer plan has also addressed the developable land
supply. Within the existing urban service area (MUSA) ,
there are approximately 220 acres of developable
commercial and 1661 acres of developable industrial land.
Staff would note that although these forecasts have been
developed from a regional perspective, the City does have
a large supply of developable commercial/industrial lands
available to service the growing needs of the City for
some time to come. This concept was discussed by the
City Council in the review of the Chaska Interceptor
Agreement.
The land demand or consumption forecast for
commercial/industrial uses assumes a 5 jobs/acre job
density figure. This job density is significantly lower
than the metropolitan average (20 jobs/acre) . This
assumption reflects the warehouse/distribution industrial
activities which will likely tend to dominate the
Shakopee market. The lower job density figure results in
a higher land demand figure (in acres) for the City. City
staff and SEH staff researched the job density issue in
detail which resulted in a successful bargaining item
with the Met Council in the Chaska Interceptor Agreement.
The demand forecasts have not been divided into light and
heavy industrial categories. In general, staff believes
that predominate industrial activities for the future
will tendfocus on distribution rather than
manufactuingExhibit C illustrates the current I-i and
I-2 zoning in the City.
Industrial Zoning Approaches by Other Cities
Most communities have at least two underlying industrial zoning
districts. Although the district titles vary, the basic format of
separating the more intense industrial activities is the general
intent of most ordinances. Performance standards are often
used
sdo
separate manufacturing uses into the "light" and "heavy"
zoning districts. Definitions
szof ling ordinancesavy manufacturing
generally do not exist
The City of Chaska utilizes a planned industrial development
concept for most of the new development in the Jonathan Industrial
Park. The planned development concept allows for the joint
planning of larger blocks of industrial land by developers with
City officials with emphasis on a more flexible process. The
planning and design of larger blocks of land provides the City with
the assurance that necessary street and utility connections in
conjunction with the necessary land use compatibilities can occur.
3
1
The discussions by the ZORC and the Planning Commission have been
directed toward expanding manufacturing, fabricating and processing
uses into the I-1 district. The current I-1 district does not
allow manufacturing activities as a permitted or conditional use.
Where does the discussion lead us? Staff has developed several
alternatives for discussion purposes.
Alternative 1 - Expand manufacturing, fabricating, processing
into the I-1 district as a conditional use. Staff has drafted
a set of potential conditions which could be used to regulate
these types of conditional uses. These draft conditions will
be available at the Committee of the Whole meeting.
Alternative 2 - Consolidate the I-i and I-2 districts into one
industrial zone.
Alternative 3 - Create three industrial districts which could
provide an additional separation in the levels of industrial
intensities. The 1990 plan suggested a business park land use
category. This land use category was intended to provide
locations for offices, office-showrooms, and light industrial
activities which are compatible with office development.
Alternative 4 - Create a planned industrial development
district or expand the mandatory PUD to include the existing
I-1 and I-2 areas.
Alternative 5 - Maintain the existing two industrial district
format. If the need for additional heavy industrial uses grows
beyond the supply, the zoning mapping process could implement
necessary adjustments.
How does the planning and zoning discussion relate to hazardous
chemicals?
Staff has researched the hazardous chemical issue with a variety of
resources including members of the Scott County Environmental
Health Department (SCEH) . SCEH staff identified several important
points. They identified the issues and complexities involved with
defining hazardous chemicals. They noted that through the federal
and state agencies the definition of hazardous chemicals continues
to evolve and become more complicated.
SCEH also identified that the use of hazardous chemicals occurs in
virtually all zoning districts within a city like Shakopee.
Obviously, the residential ' districts tend to have a much less
frequency of use. SCEH staff identified commonly overlooked
districts are the commercial districts. There are numerous uses
such as auto repair and sales, heavy equipment sales, gas stations,
and dry cleaning facilities that utilize a wide range of hazardous
chemicals. In addition, the use of hazardous chemicals in
4
industrial districts seems to be a common consideration for many
communities, yet little regulations have been developed in zoning
ordinances to control these chemicals.
The nature of the current environmental regulations is changing
almost daily. The standards or levels of measurement are
constantly changing. In addition, new technology and new chemicals
are forcing the creation of new regulations nationwide. Controlling
of the use of hazardous chemicals is further complicated inn�thatsno
no
two businesses are alike in terms of storage, use,
tween
haardsnwa to further g enerated a d hazardous materials stored onistinction e
hazardous sites
is becoming more and more cloudy.
Why is the hazardousidentified chemicaldiscussion
factors.n sodifficult?
of these City
SCEH staff id factors
include the following:
1. There are many types of businesses and mixtures of
operations within those businesses which utilize a wide
variety of hazardous chemicals.
2 . There are many types of hazardous chemicals and that list
is growing every day.
3 . There are a variety of regulating agencies including
federal - EPA, OSHA; State of Minnesota - MPCA, . DNR,
Department of Health, Department of Ag;
local - Scott
County Environment Health, Shakopee
Building Department.
4 . The number of new chemical products increases as does the
technology to utilize these products and the creation of
waste increases daily. of use
5 . There are many levels of intensity or application
ranging from cleaning supplies to intense manufacturing
and processing.
Staff believes that the use of hazardous chemicals issues are best
regulated by existing agencies such as the EPA, MPCA and SCEH. From
a planning and zoning perspective the level of detail involved with
this issue needs to be coordinated but the regulations should not
be ff believes than ttthe ecfocustshof ulddbeldirecte edotowag rdrthealand
staff believe
use issues facing the City.
From a planning and zoning perspective staff believes that the
focus of the Committee of the Whole's attention should address
fiined that
rst the industeleves that further directions on
adistrictpurposes. f
phazardous
purppose, staff b
chemical issues can be more clearly addressed.
5
EXHIBIT A
INDUSTRIAL USES
X = Permitted I.1 1-2
0 = Conditional Light Industry Heavy Industrial
Animal Hospitals and Clinics 0 �O
Assembly/Storage of:
apoarel 0 X
food products 0 X
glass 0 X
leather 0 X
pottery 0 X
light chemicals X
lumber and wood products 0 X
paper products 0 X
rock and stone products 0 X
textiles 0 X
tobacco products 0 X
fabrication metal products 0 X
machinery and appliances 0 X
transportation equipment 0 X
heavy chemicals X
explosives X
residential accessory X
Bus and Truck Maintenance Garages 0
Commercial Recreation 0 X
Commercial Recreation, Minor 0
Commercial Recreation, Major X
Concrete and Ready Mix Plants 0
Construction and Special Trade Contractor X X
Day Care. Class I 0 X
Day Care, Class II X X
Essential Services X X
Foundry, Forae. Casting, Metal 0
Grain Elevators 0
Heliports, Airport 0 0
Landscaoina Services 0
Manufacturing, Fabrication, Processing of:
apoarel X
food products X
glass X
leather X
pottery X
light chemicals X
lumber and wood products X
paper products X
rock and stone products X
textiles X
tobacco products X
fabrication metal products X
machinery and appliances X
transportation equipment X
1993 ed.
1347
EXHIBIT B
Cd w V-, v
<H •
v o O O O
' O �N Cr) O N
N '--t N '--t
NN tri ' I
'--4
00 O
vl
In In cN1 O
O O O�Nci) '--t U
C O , U
N N ' sCZ
,IS
O
O• T
OO M ,--4GD
NN ,--i c3
0 --
CD CD CD O CO >3
00 O O U
OOO C--N.0 M U
GN O -4'--i M '� CV p,
1.-4 N �+ 77 0
G
r
O 1 'o O C/)
i ' t
O i t O G
O N N.
O Ncle G1 0
O
N U VD G
O p c
G1 v:.�
'� N r
C.\CD r
[/� C7),N
c::) C7),
O r
c:) '---1
0
z syr
'y
Q :3 U r i
,_, U
v 0 v OU
G L, c-•
r: C. U U r-, u' L"
O
C U CiN iT
-c T Z O sG
z L- .� 0 _1 O .r0 G
U U(� U7'
G] Cr;
E O
r-. O 1.- T v.
/� U Ci y =r -
G U O G CZ
0 r c77, o "i1:5 j U tv. >
z O r cz. v
0 G • U Lam.. G
G
O 0 O
C: [r' Oc-. z
tr. [:a
• .,,a
EXHIBIT C
`` < raver i' - - LCD
41
icu\e ICC I
co
. -' NO.. x
rio
. _• i - - I � '
\ - _ uN � I:
e _y
r
1 om•.
SI
-c .: , _,_:. .. -_ z...,..:— -..-.:-....._ ___. _.. o.\-1. x
•s. -. ..: ¢. : - -; ^_ 7 tet- _ _ b
co
n •',. O
ea
• - • �\ T Jaw-_.,-1 `4 ce
''';17-- 13
••,*••,* _• - Z •: Ca D]l=. ICyi Y>•igK v. •, - - .. .• .
" r_ _ f »ter i
• : t• v -s; � < yN a di .its- w - 7- N 1 — _r
es 7
--,..2.i--:i - ate-- __-_ •• t _ C C -0.
O
7-4.
_ >. 'O 'O
.�, • r� is-_•y',•�__'��7 • > ea
O C
i 1 - -a•,,,usw.t. � J 2 �L
\ <. �` •
r ..- _. ...,-__ ._,.-. ••___v__,.._-:",,,_,:..,
r= X^ •_ `.`•,.__ _,:tea .. Ea\
\;• �.,.js� om_- �.._ _y_-__r��f-
75*
I ow
vs
1 es es N y
rn
Cn f0
CI s.,Cw '' flu U
. t ..-4. ...-, --
N ...._
.... .
cs
13
l .n.:.••C. W 73. N
♦ —
• V C
G D -
ct
•
)
O in; 10 C
C G
erg W CO 1
a v
Q ¢
M
e 2
iaao
- I
• [
• s
I ' '
¢.'„• poi . -- ---.---, • \`�' T 4 L
3 = L...•7'— . ' e a) Oil,. 1 ..
. •it .•_. ..._ , .-- .
•
f s
` _ -: r •
- •
•
R
•
7.
71
N - __ _ • .. S O
w=,.� — - . "t• TT
, - �•`_' \V- Q
— ........2.11,....4—....1-:-
ms--•. t `; _ `�, ---
=Tf •
1��.. ` 1 `: ,_a__-- - --' ”
__ C
C o O e
_ S V)
•
N \ `
N
N
m
•:-.. C v a
N —
7 ra
Q G
•
;. Q cc S J
........: ....... 111110 ..R
fii;;:l
February 1, 1994 Council,
Mayor Laurent and Members of the City
City of Shakopee
129 Holmes Street
UNIVERSAL Shakopee, MN 55379
Re: City of Shakopee Zoning Ordinance
FOREST
PRODUCTS. Mr. Mayor and Members of the City Council,
1570 East Highway 101 I am writing today concerning the letter that we at
Shakopee. MN 55379 Universal Forest Products received from the City
Telephone(612)496.3080 Clerk dated January 26 . The letter asks that we
submit in writing any comments regarding
iour
n ruview
A nationwide network of
buildingof the proposed ordinance as it applies •
material distribution
centers. manufacturing case . Section 11.32 Light Industrial Zone (I-1
)
facilities and wood treatment Subdivision 3 Conditional Uses Item A states
plants serving the housing. "assembly, manufacturing, fabrication, or
commercial and industrial processing except those involving the use of
markets. explosive material, hazardous chemicals, or
petroleum products . "
• The Zorc recommendation proposed that "assembly,
manufacturing, fabrication, processing and storage
facilities, except those involving the use of
explosive material, hazardous chemicals or
petroleum products" may be permitted if conducted
in an enclosed building that meets all Federal and
. State guidelines .
Mr. Mayor, Members of the City Council, we are
confused in who we should talk to in regards to our
situation. The City Council established the "Zorc
Committee" to assist the Planning Commission
ssionimn
bC
rewriting the zoning ordinances, every
that the Zorc Committee introduces their "Staff"
recommendations to the Planning Commission,
intervenes with their own version. The confusing
thing is that "Staff" was involved with all
eZorc
ak out
Committee
Meetings .
recommendationslat' thatthey
ti e?
and change
In section 11 .32 Light Industrial Zone (I-1)
Subdivision 2 Permitted Uses Item B "research
laboratories conducted entirely within an enclosed
building" . There is no mention of what is
permissible to do research on. We also plan to have
, a research laboratory in our proposed Treating
Plant . We intend to entirely enclose the laboratory
in our building, in which we will also be storing
A our CCA (Chromated Copper Arsenate) chemical, which
•••' llompaat is odorless, non-flammable and non-explosive .
Company
Mr. Mayor, Members of the City Council, we have been working on
this project since August 20, 1992 . We have done whatever the
Planning Commission and the City Council have asked us to do.
The following are some examples .
A) Addressed the concerns of the neighbors (Shakopee
Village Complex) . (See enclosed letter. ) At our last meeting with
the association, we all came away with a willingness to work the
major issues out . (i .e . , Universal would provide a Green Space
between our plant and the townhomes . )
B) We met with Allen Frechette from Scott County
Environmental Health Department and feel we have addressed his
concerns about storm water run-off . Since the treatment process
will be in a facility that is completely self contained and the
storage of all finished treated material will be under cover. The
risk of storm water run-off will be eliminated.
C) After being turned down initially by the City Council,
it was suggested that we seek a text amendment, which we
proceeded to do. The amendment was then voted down in final
approval because the ordinance was going to be rewritten, and
they would try to implement or write something in the new
ordinance so that we wouldn' t need a Conditional Use Permit .
D) City Planning Staff had offered to help us in
relocating. Due to the length of the zoning process, certain
sites were not suitable for our needs or had been sold. We have
found that property available with rail access in the city of
Shakopee with the correct zoning is very limited and or cost
prohibitive.
E) We had been asked by the Planning Commission for
additional information from OSHA and the EPA on the proper
processing and storage of CCA (Chromated Copper Arsenate) . We
also provided the Universal Forest Products policy manual in
defining guidelines for low hazardous waste generators . (See
enclosed packet . ) We have given the staff information on
Hazardous Materials, information on our treating process, the
methods that we use to build our plants, and we have given the
staff the E.P.A. manual to help better define the guidelines for
low hazardous waste generators .
F) We have offered to all City Council Members, the
Planning Commission Members and City Staff to fly them to one of
our 16 other Wood Treating Plants to see for themselves how we
operate and maintain our equipment and facilities .
G) On November 6th, 1993, Universal Forest Products went
from a privately-held company to a publicly-held company. This
change does not affect our commitment to safety or the
environment it does however, increase our responsibility to many
more stockholders who expect a favorable return on their
investment . This will ensure long-term stability in our treating
practices .
Mr. Mayor, Members of the City Council,
wesare
deSheply
yecconcerned
on the future for Universal Forest Pr
Currently, as it sits today, we have an option on an adjacent
piece of property. With proper zoning, we would be assured that
our future growth would not be held up in red tape . This
acquisition obviously would be contingent on the new zoning
ordinance.
Mr. Mayor, Members heCity Commiss�oncand theseems
City Council muscat a
"dead end" . The Planningproe cedure
decide which direction they are heading. We hope
oth thisppros fdr
can be completed soon so we can initiate our g
1994 .
If anyone has any questions, please feel free to call me at our
office at 496-3080, or lf tansthing regardingtou�me at position.5660 .
We will be ready roto discuss and consideration.
Thank you for you
Sincerely,
UNIVERSAL FOREST PRODUCTS
Sc. t Martini
General Manager of Operations
f
E.I.
UNIVERSAL
FOREST July 27, 1993 •
PRODUCTS
1570 East Highway 101 Mr. Paul D. Holtz
Shakopee, MN 55379 • 1409 East 4th Avenue
Telephone(612)496-3080 Shakopee, Mn 55379 .
A nationwide network of .
building material distribution
centers, manufacturing
facilities and wood treatment Dear Mr. Holtz:
plants serving the housing,
commercial and industrial
markets. We have read your letter to the editor in the Shakopee Valley
News July 23, 1993. We are saddened by your feelings that
our offers of building a berm or even place a strip of land .
between the Shakopee Village and our proposed wood preservation
facility have "vanished". Our plans have not changed. We
are very sensitive to the needs of your neighborhood and
will continue in our effort to make our facility workable
on our land. This includes the possibility of some sort of
buffer yet to be determined by us with your input to take
care of the needs of Shakopee Village as well as Universal
Forest Products.
We invite your input with regard to this as we wish to continue
to be a good neighbor of yours as well as the City of Shakopee!
If you have any questions please don't hesitate to call us.
Respectfully,
UNIVERSAL FOREST PRODUCTS?UC
. 0
_ 4.24 .
-fines W. Scheible
General Manager of Operations
,
cc: Gary Laurent, Mayor of Shakopee
A Editor, Shakopee Valley News
ail Universal
' Company
-6-1 00
RUBBER INDUSTRIES, INC.
200 CAVANAUGH DRIVE/P.O.BOX 128/SHAKOPEE.MN 55379/TELEPHONE(612)445-1320/FAX(612)445-7934
February 2, 1994
Lindberg Ekola, City Planner
City of Shakopee
129 Holmes Street South
Shakopee, MN 55379-1351
Dear Mr. Ekola:
In our continued effort to expand and grow our business at our present
facility, we at Rubber Industries have put forth all possible efforts to
conform to all safety and environmental standards.
A recent audit by the Scott County Environmental Health Department has
classified RII as a Very Small Generator of hazardous waste material .
This classification is the classification of the smallest generator of
waste material . All manufacturers use or generate at least this amount
of hazardous waste. The audit went well and received 100% approval by
the inspector. She recommended but did not require a few minor changes.
These recommended changes have been completed. A corporate Environmental
Policy is enclosed.
Management and employees at RII request that the City Council members
consider our request that the new zoning ordinance now being considered
will designate the area of our facility to be I-2. A preliminary plan
of our proposed expansion can be made available.
Sincerely,
G' r
Cameron Morningstar
Vice President/Administration
Enclosure
SPECIALIZING IN PRECISION MOLDING OF RUBBER AND THERMOPLASTIC RUBBER PARTS
AID 00
RUBBER INDUSTRIES, INC.
dd
200 CAVANAUGH DRIVE/P.O.BOX 128/SHAKOPEE.MN 55379/TELEPHONE(612)445-1320/FAX(612)445-7934
November 8, 1993
Terry Joos, Chairman
Planning Commission
City of Shakopee
129 Holmes Street South
Shakopee, MN 55379
Dear Mr. Joos:
This letter is to introduce you to Rubber Industries, Inc. , and its
current zoning situation. We wish to enlist your support in the resolu-
tion of the current zoning condition.
The original Rubber Industries building was built in the mid-1960' s
by the Flo-Tronics Corporation and was subsequently purchased by me in
early 1969. The new corporation became Rubber Industries, Inc. Since
that time we have filed twice for building permits to provide expansion
space and were allowed to build both times, once in 1982 and a second time
in 1988. Both of these additions were completed in the years noted, and
we are again rapidly reaching the capacity of our expanded facility.
We now find ourselves in the fortunate situation where we continue
to see our business grow -- and consequently we must expand again. Our
current plan is to add approximately 10,000 square feet of space to our
building sometime in the summer of 1994. Enclosed you will find an out-
line of our current facility and an added sketch of the proposed 10,000
square foot addition as it is currently planned.
We have recently learned that the area in which we are located has
been zoned as I-1 , and that we are considered to be a legal non-conforming
use entity. We understand that this may seriously limit our ability to
expand our manufacturing, technical and office facilities to support our
continued growth, both now and in the future.
On behalf of approximately 60 employees of Rubber Industries, Inc. ,
and myself, we request that the new zoning ordinance now being considered
designate the area of our facility to be I-2. This, we believe, will allow
for the continued growth and health of our small company and allow it to
continue to serve its customers, employees and community.
I am ready to meet with you, your committee and any other interested
parties you choose, to further the growth, expansion and employment oppor-
tunities at Rubber Industries.
Sincerely,
6;-,C -`/701:3
Arthur J. 144
President YK
Enclosures SPECIALIZING IN PRECISION MOLDING OF RUBBER AND THERMOPLASTIC RUBBER PARTS
• wCC
�
. . t-; ;C-) .,i r. r oni-iCVrtt, MN 5;379-1399, (612) 496-81 T7
HAZARDOUS WASTE GENERATOR INSPECTION REPORT
r Based on an inspection this day,the kerns circled below identify violations which must be corrected by the next routine inspection or such shorter period of time as l
I may be specified in witting by Scott County. Failure to comply with any time limits for corrections specified in this notice may result in enforcement action. 1
Generator f�U�f.-.5-.-4 S•ND(-/S T/Z/ES ..--,t-'� j
Insp. Date r//�. /5"'S/ Time ��^'ry Last Insp. /��
Address c76c e 4/4 Nor 1 G H .• D - E •..G^—e�' -4:4- - _,//92----
.
--=-
N�l -
Purpose of Inspection: • Di,closed..4a.zrdous Wast- m • t Stored:
5 . l C P &� M A.7 S 3 '> 9 Initial •
.. • L _• '••51-
.
7
Phone • KG-/-Y ) 'S1ti -/ aO . Routine .e ...zi..��/ .CQe-o\--C:<�-C-
Contact rp'{ -s'T'V/3 Y 777/A-H.' ='r Follow up •
•-, I f 4-e----•-•<-1.--In-e r^. ei - q
EPA ID M I N i D IC:" ''il 5 19 iZ- I 17 I -V J7I Complaint // /_ -�a-<.. .dv" -
Generator size: VSQ G �/ •SQG • LQG - Other • P l C��.e c�s��
•
1 — CJ
Item j x I -• Description i Item r x I Description Item x U -i Description •
ASIC REQUIREMENTS I/OUTDOOR CONTAINERS 1100.1000 KG/MO GENERATOR(SOG)'
1 t nse displayed • - .34 tJ ign' le waste-shaded . • 58 . 3,OCO kg maximum storage
2 I L A ID I ID applied for 35 ' rotected from-rr isture/entry/damage 59 Emergent Coordinator E.C.
3 �-- Waste evaluation • TANKS M/�/� 1 Telephone Postinq
•
•!4----) License/changes submitted • • 36 Daily inspection.-level,monitor& - • 60 E.C.name and phone -
5 ( -niicensed waste:>75 days •• • discharge ecuicment - 61 I Fire/sciil -•uicment location
6 • L -IVCC reports available " - 37 Weekly inspections-leaks&corrosion 62 Fire department number
7 i , ‹cord retention . . 38 I Inspect treatment units 63 . Emergency response
8 Document 75%recycle of FS/BP 39 I Accumulation start date recorded • 64 Employee training documented
• 9 Feedstock/byproduct annual cert. 40 I H.W.marking seen from valves ( RCRA GENERATOR(LOG)
10 I Icense conditions • 141 I Compatible with wastes f Personnel Training
SHIPMENTS 42 1 Proper ignitable/reactive management 65 I Program director .
11 •_,.-I- roper manifest&completion 43 I Spills and overflow protection 66 I Jcb title&employee name • I
12 Wand disposal restrictions 44 - I Tank cert. &secondary containment 67 I Written job description 1
13 I ,....1---Coes available on-site . 45 I I Closure • . . 68 Description of training
14 1„.„..1---S-end initial copy to MPCA(5 days) i I i PROPER WASTE MANAGEMENT 69 New employee training
r'15)' I Serial copy to MPCA(40 days) 146 yRelinquishing control 70 Annual training review
16 I jEbays exception report • • 47 I , . ‹port/recover spills 71 I Training records retained
17 I Feedstock/byproduct: bill of lading I PREPAREDNESS/PREVENTION I Contingency Plan(C.P.)
18I I International shipments 48 L. - Operated to prevent release 72 I C.P.submitted
II ACCUMULATION 491 equate aisle space 73Emergency Coord.familiar w/C.P. f
�
19 I, 5 i 180/270 Days exceeded I I Required Equipment _ 74 I Copies of C.P.on-site
20 I ateilite:55 gallons/3 days SO L„...4--internal/external communication 75 [ C.P.amended if required
21 Ient lead-acid battery storage 51 ,...-!----Communications in waste area 176 I C.P.implemented if necessary
22 I I etranspor',requirements 52 :nergency i spill/fireEmergency Procedures
I I CONTAINERS 531I -VEquipment tested/maintained 77 I Assess:notify/contain
23 1 —Weekly container inspection I I�66CAL AUTHORITY ARRANGEMENTS Post-Emergency Requirements
24 I , j_-e ntainers in good condition 54 I' Po ice i fire/hospital 78 I Clean-up/report
25 I , 1„,26ntainers closed 155 I y(avout/wastes!work areas • I- USED OIL REQUIREMENTS
26 I • cumuiation start date 56 c/r Entrances/evacuation routes 79 I Used oil mixed w/hazardous waste
(2---/-I 'Hazardous Waste-marking 57 t—ccument refusal
I 180 Used til burned on site
�28�% Descriptive name G 81 Other used oil rules
29 ,.:�Contairers compatible with waste r Water/Sewer: t: 82 SQG collection program
30 doper ignitable/reactive management I Recycle/Treat on-site:' �; • 183 [Household battery oolie�ion site
31 I ompatible wastes separated I Fiam.traps 71 Pumped: N 0 N
32 I I Liquids-impermeable surface(curbed if outside) I TANKS: E1A.GT; Size/Contents: / - .=-7'$C7 g- < ,.. -k-- -1 e—_P
rt• 33 I I Closure I BUST Size/Contents: N C A/ 1
ITEM REMARKS -ORDERS-COMPLIANCE DATES /-�
(:::-/---s: . .��..:.�.,t`.•--�v-.e-ad--�..� 7.2.„...„--)........./.„4 j-i.), , , y/p 0-‘,.....“2.../.4<-0(....w.
-c+.f Q ��11-�-W ` . 1,-/ • ) 0 1
_ t�, /
-z I��.c :,(� /,���a(.�� �.....�,��,�.� 3/737 'C/41 .=K.,, ) ca-t,„4.,�
7 •^J d -� f , , -' ) " I )" •,�� - \� /
�'"--s-�IT-�r RSL r'7 (..A-1- ..'�cC- rte-o- Q,o h fc. � � J -, �c.,• . —
�,� .�� �. ,�, '�rt.��,-�v tin i} e_ �4 . ;A\..=--�'
(4,
-� -�.t J
Inspectors Signature / n } U.(�/ Generators Signature Y(. i /`t �-�� f L
Distribution: White-Environmental Health� a Canary-Generator /Q G r ,hilt,,-VIN Pollution Control Agency
01670-2903(9/92) �, { i
POLICY TO PROTECT OUR ENVIRONMENT
It is the policy of Rubber Industries, Inc. , that its corporate manage-
ment, departmental management and all staff and operating personnel will
recognize and practice the operating procedures that assure the ultimate
protection for our land, water and air that we use and that surrounds us.
RII will be properly licensed by the Federal , State, County and Local
entities that are charged with overseeing compliance to environmental
standards.
The management, staff and operations personnel will establish proper
and effective procedures that will be followed at all times to control and
minimize our impact on the environment.
The appropriate procedures will be followed for the identification,
segregation and disposal of hazardous waste materials in the proper manner
and to prescribed locations.
Effective training will be given to those personnel involved with
elements affecting environmental conditions or hazardous materials. All
employees are required to attend "Right-to-Know" programs at least once
each year.
A semi-annual audit will be conducted by the Vice President/Administra-
tion and Vice President/Technical of the corporation. The results of this
audit are presented to the company President and appropriate actions taken
to improve or strengthen the environmental policies and procedures. Special
attention will be given to compliance to this policy by all personnel .
Rubber Industries, Inc.
12/31/93 (Revised)
RUBBER INDUSTRIES, INC.
AOv
•
200 CAVANAUGH DRIVE/P.O.BOX 128/SHAKOPEE,MN 55379/TELEPHONE(612)445-1320/FAX(612)445-7934
February 15, 1994
Members of the City Council
City of Shakopee
129 Holmes Street South
Shakopee, MN 55379-1351
Ladies and Gentlemen of the Council :
In response to the letter from Judy Cox of January 6, we wish to
respond to the proposed zoning ordinance.
We at Rubber Industries wish to submit the following modification
to Section 11 .32. Light Industry Zone (I-1 ) Subdivision 2, Permitted
Uses, Subparagraph A.
Subdivision 2, Permitted Uses. Within the light industry zone no
structure or land use shall be used except for one or more of the
following uses:
A. Warehousing, wholesaling and the manufacture and assembly
of rubber components conducted entirely within an enclosed
building or buildings except those involving the use of
explosive material , infectious waste, hazardous chemicals
or petroleum products. Explosive material , hazardous
chemicals or petroleum products may be allowed in small
quantities for incidental uses, such as processing aids
or cleaning.
An alternative suggestion would be to zone our location as I-2.
We would be pleased if the Council approved either of these recom-
mended changes. Either of the undersigned would welcome the opportunity
to discuss this with the City Council at any time of your choosing.
We hope to be informed of your acceptance of one of the above
recommendations as your approval process progresses.
Respectfully submitted,
0 , /
...
Arthur J. Hatch, P, iden // '
�, .....\/.\` C
ameron 'ornings ar, Tice •res 'i en
SPECIALIZING IN PRECISION MOLDING OF RUBBER AND THERMOPLASTIC RUBBER PARTS
SCOTT COUNTY
PLANNING, INSPECTIONS& ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH
irCOURTHOUSE A102
428 S. HOLMES ST.
SHAKOPEE, MN 55379-1393 (612) 496-8353
February 10, 1994
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN:
Pursuant to provisions of Minnesota Statute 394.26, the Scott County Board
of Commissioners will hold a Public Hearing on Tuesday, March 1, 1994 at
10:00 a.m. or soon thereafter in the Commissioners Meeting Room (#109) of
the Scott County Courthouse, 428 South Holmes St., Shakopee, Minnesota to
consider the adoption of AN INTERIM DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE TEMPORARILY
PROHIBITING THE REZONING OF PROPERTY TO RESIDENTIAL, R-1 AND R-4 TO CREATE
LOTS LESS THAN 10 ACRES IN SIZE, TO PROHIBIT FURTHER SUBDIVISION OF
EXISTING RESIDENTIALLY ZONED PROPERTIES, THE CREATION OF BUILDABLE LOTS
ANYWHERE WITHIN THE UNINCORPORATED AREAS OF THE COUNTY FOR PARCELS WITHOUT
. A MINIMUM LOT WIDTH OF 300 FEET FOR THE ENTIRE LENGTH OF THE PROPERTY AND
CONTROLLING ACCESS FROM PROPERTIES TO COUNTY ROADS.
rj-01/t, WAILX51--
Jon Westlake
Planning Director
Scott County Courthouse
Shakopee, Mn. 55379
•
An Equal Opportunity'Affirmative Action Employer
ORDINANCE NO.
SCOTT COUNTY, MINNESOTA
AN INTERIM DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE TEMPORARILY PROHIBITING THE REZONING
OF PROPERTY TO RESIDENTIAL, R-1 OR R-4 TO, CREATE LOTS OF LESS THAN
10 ACRES IN SIZE, TO PROHIBIT FURTHER SUBDIVISION OF EXISTING
RESIDENTIALLY ZONED PROPERTIES, THE CR .ATION OF BUILDABLE LOTS
ANYWHERE WITHIN THE UNINCORPORATED AREAS OF THE COUNTY FOR PARCELS
WITHOUT A MINIMUM
WIDTH
ACCESS3FROMFEET
PROPERTIES TOENTIRE
COUNTYLENGTH
OF
THE
PROPERTY AND CONTROLLINGROADS
The County of Scott ordains as follows:
Section 1. Intent.
It is the intent of this Ordinance to allow the County to complete an
update of the Comprehensive Plan, as well as all of the official
controls that effectuate it. In particular, a complete evaluation of
the status of land parcelization will be conducted to determine the
efficiency of land use and the availability of rational corridors for
future roadways.
Section 2 . Temporary Prohibition.
Pending the completion of the above referenced study and the adoption
of appropriate official controls, no applications will be accepted
for rezoning of lands to Residential R-1 or R-4 to create any new
•
parcels of less than 10 acres in size. Current Residentially zoned
properties shall be prohibited from further subdivision.
Additionally, Agriculturally or Residentially zoned parcels of 10
acres or greater in size shall require a minimum lot width of 300
feet for the entire length of the property. No more than one access
to a County road shall be approved from any newly developed quarter
quarter section. In any area of pre-existing quarter quarter section
development, the County Highway Engineer shall retain the right to
grant additional accesses as deemed appropriate.
Section 3 . Effective Date.
This ordinance shall take effect from and after its passage and
publication and shall remain in effect until the date of the adoption
of the official controls contemplated hereunder, or March 1, 1995,
whichever occurs first.
Passed and duly adopted by the Board of Commissioners of Scott County
this 1st day of March, 1994.
SCOTT COUNTY
By:
Chairman
Attest:
County Administrator
MEMORANDUM
TO: MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
FROM: Karen Marty, City Attorney
DATE: February 15, 1994
RE: Hazardous Materials Regulation in Zoning Ordinance
BACKGROUND:
For zoning, we are concerned with land use compatibilities .
The goal is to locate similar uses near each other, which is done
through the listing of uses . Environmental matters come into play
only in determining whether a use is compatible with others.
ANALYSIS OF ENVIRONMENTAL MATTERS :
After reviewing numerous statutes, rules, and ordinances
relating to hazardous materials, I am recommending that the
hazardous materials language be revised as shown on the attached
page. These revisions draw a line between uses with some hazardous
materials, and those with such a significant potential
environmental impact that an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS)
is mandatory. These uses generally are the larger or more
potentially dangerous ones . The state rule listing Mandatory EIS
Categories is attached for your information.
No other distinction is drawn regarding environmental matters
between the I-1 and I-2 zones. Existing regulation through the
PCA, EPA, OSHA, the Uniform Fire Code, and others provides
substantial protection to residents and workers . Since those
regulatory provisions were written by experts in environmental
matters, I am willing to assume that they have incorporated
appropriate protections .
Some other environmental matters do need to be addressed,
however. Therefore, the conditions for the conditional use permits
require environmental compliance, and put the applicant at risk for
proceeding prior to completion of the environmental review. The
performance standards also are recommended for revision,
referencing to the state rules requiring an Environmental
Assessment Worksheet (EAW) . I am unsure
st whether
r hichwan EAW actually
have been obtaining EAWs for all projects
supposed to be mandatory. Additional environmental concerns could
be handled by the City requiring EAWs on more projects. The City
has the authority to do that under the state Rules. We can work to
improve our environmental review through staff training.
ALTERNATIVES :
1 . Approve the attached language relating to hazardous
materials .
1
2 . Revise and then approve, as revised, the attached language
relating to hazardous materials .
3 . Return the matter to staff for further drafting.
RECOMMENDATION:
Approve the attached language relating to hazardous materials .
[ACHAZARD]
Attachment
-2-
Permitted I-i
A. warehousing, wholesaling, and assembly conducted entirely
within an enclosed building, except those involving a
project that fits within one of the Mandatory EIS
Categories under Minn. Rules 4410 . 4400;
Conditional I-1
A. manufacturing, fabrication, or processing, except those
involving a project that fits within one of the Mandatory
EIS Categories under Minn. Rules 4410 .4400;
Permitted I-2
B. manufacturing, fabrication, processing, assembly, and
storage operations, except those involving a project that
fits within one of the Mandatory EIS Categories under
Minn. Rules 4410 .4400;
E. research laboratories, except those involving a project
that fits within one of the Mandatory EIS Categories
under Minn. Rules 4410 .4400 ;
Conditional I-2
A. manufacturing, fabrication, processing, assembly, and
storage operations that fit within one of the Mandatory
EIS Categories under Minn. Rules 4410 .4400;
Performance Standards
Subd. 15 . Hazardous Materials or Waste, Infectious Waste, and
Pollutants. Each use involving hazardous materials or waste,
infectious waste, or pollutants, shall comply with all applicable
laws and regulations of the United States Environmental Protection
Agency, the Office of Safety and Health Administration, the
Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, the Minnesota Department of
Health, and any other applicable federal, state, and local
regulatory provisions. Any project for which an EAW is mandatory
under Minn. Rule 4410 .4300 shall request an EAW from the
Responsible Governmental Unit specified in that Rule. The project
shall not be developed until all environmental issues have been
resolved to the satisfaction of the Responsible Governmental Unit,
including incorporating any mitigation measures into the project .
CUP conditions :
B. manufacturing, fabrication, or processing, except those
involving a project that fits within one of the Mandatory
EIS Categories under Minn. Rules 4410 .4400 :
1. shall meet all federal, state, and City health code
requirements;
2 . shall meet all federal, state, and City
environmental code requirements; and
3 . shall not begin operation until any applicable
environmental review, including an environmental
assessment worksheet or an environmental impact
statement, is completed and all mitigation measures
incorporated into the use . Any construction prior
to the completion of the environmental review and
incorporation of all mitigation measures is at the
applicant' s risk; and
4 . shall provide the City with information regarding
the nature and location of all explosive materials,
and keep such information current .
T. manufacturing, fabrication, processing, assembly, and
storage operations that fit within one of the Mandatory
EIS Categories under Minn. Rules 4410 .4400 :
1. shall meet all federal, state, and City health code
requirements;
2 . shall meet all federal, state, and City
environmental code requirements;
3 . shall not begin operation until the environmental
impact statement is completed and all mitigation
measures incorporated into the use . Any
construction prior to the completion of the
environmental impact statement and incorporation of
all mitigation measures is at the applicant' s risk;
and
4 . shall provide the City with information regarding
the nature and location of all explosive materials,
and keep such information current .
[ACHAZARD]
•1
•
•
1
r 4410.4300 ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW; CRITICAL AREAS 3452
oped land use,the local government unit shall be the RGU,except that this item
does not apply to agricultural land inside the boundary of the Metropolitan
Urban Service Area established by the Metropolitan Council.
Subp. 29.Animal feedlots.For the construction of an animal feedlot facility
with a capacity of 1,000 animal units or more or the expansion of an existing
'•.i :
facility by 1,000 animal units or more or construction of a total confinement ani-
,
. .; mal feedlot facility of 2,000 animal units or more or the expansion of an animal
feedlot facility by 2,000 animal units or more if the expansion is a total confine-
1. ment facility, the PCA shall be the RGU.
Subp. 30. Natural areas. For projects resulting in the permanent physical .
1 . encroachment on lands within a national park, state park,wilderness area, state
lands and waters within the boundaries of the Boundary Waters Canoe Area,sci-
( ' entific and natural area,or state trail corridor when the encroachment is inconsis-
1 tent with laws applicable to or the management plan prepared for the recreational
1i unit, the DNR or local government unit shall be the RGU.
Subp. 31.Historical places.For destruction of a property that is listed on the
National Register of Historic Places, the permitting state agency or local unit of
1; government shall be the RGU.
Subp. 32. Mixed residential and industrial-commercial projects. If a project
1 includes both residential and industrial-commercial components, the project
must have an EAW prepared if the sum of the quotient obtained by dividing the
I number of residential units by the applicable residential threshold of subpart 19,
plus the quotient obtained by dividing the amount of industrial-commercial gross
floor space by the applicable industrial-commercial threshold of subpart 14,
equals or exceeds one. The local governmental unit is the RGU.
' Subp. 33. Communications towers. For construction of a communications
tower equal to or in excess of 500 feet in height, the local governmental unit is
the RGU.
Subp. 34.Sports or entertainment facilities.For construction of a new sports
or entertainment facility designed for or expected to accommodate a peak atten-
dance of 5,000 or more persons, or the expansion of an existing sports or enter-
'= tainment facility by this amount, the local governmental unit is the RGU.
•j Statutory Authority: MS s 116D.04; 116D.045
History: 11 SR 714; 13 SR 1437; 13 SR 2046
4410.4400 MANDATORY EIS CATEGORIES.
i Subpart 1. Threshold test. An EIS must be prepared for projects that meet
or exceed the threshold of any of subparts 2 to 24. Multiple projects and multiple
Er stages of a single project that are connected actions or phased actions must be
,i considered in total when comparing the project or projects to the thresholds of
this part.
I Subp. 2. Nuclear fuels and nuclear waste. Items A to D designate the RGU
;i for the type of project listed:
A. For the construction or expansion of a nuclear fuel or nuclear waste
i• processing facility, including fuel fabrication facilities, reprocessing plants, and
uranium mills,the DNR shall be the RGU for uranium mills;otherwise,the PCA
shall be the RGU.
B. For construction of a high level nuclear waste disposal site, the EQB
shall be the RGU.
C. For construction of an away-from-reactor facility for temporary stor-
age of spent nuclear fuel, the EQB shall be the RGU.
D. For construction of a low level nuclear waste disposal site,the MDH
shall be the RGU.
Subp. 3. Electric generating facilities. For construction of a large electric
power generating plant pursuant to part 4410.7000, the EQB shall be the RGU.
ii`. .
a
3453 ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW; CRITICAL AREAS 4410.4400
•
Subp. 4. Petroleum refineries. For construction of a new petroleum refinery
facility, the PCA shall be the RGU.
Subp. 5. Fuel conversion facilities.Items A and B designate the RGU for the
type of project listed:
A. For construction of a facility for the conversion of coal,peat,or bio-
mass sources to gaseous, liquid, or solid fuels if that facility has the capacity to
utilize 250,000 dry tons or more per year of input, the PCA shall be the RGU.
B. For construction or expansion of a facility for the production of alco-
hol fuels which would have or would increase its capacity by 50,000,
000 or more
gallons per year of alcohol produced, the PCA shall be the RGU.
'' Subp. 6.Transmission lines.For construction of a high voltage transmission
• line pursuant to part 4410.7400, the EQB shall be the RGU.
<, Subp.7.Underground storage.Items A and B designate the RGU for the type
of project listed:
A. For construction of an underground storage facility for gases or liq-
uids that requires a permit pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, section 84.57, the
DNR shall be the RGU.
• B. For construction of an underground storage facility for gases or liq-
uids,using naturally occurring rock materials,that requires a permit pursuant to
• Minnesota Statutes, section 84.621, the DNR shall be the RGU.
Subp. 8.Metallic mineral mining and processing.Items A to C designate the
RGU for the type of project listed:
•
A.For mineral deposit evaluation involving the extraction of 1,000 tons
or more of material that is of interest to the proposer principally due to its radio-
active characteristics, the DNR shall be the RGU.
• B. For construction of a new facility for mining metallic minerals or for
the disposal of tailings from a metallic mineral mine,the DNR shall be the RGU.
C. For construction of a new metallic mineral processing facility, the
DNR shall be the RGU.
Subp. 9. Nonmetallic mineral mining.Items A and B designate the RGU for
the type of project listed:
A. For development of a facility for the extraction or mining of peat
which will utilize 320 acres of land or more during its existence, the DNR shall
be the RGU.
B. For development of a facility for the extraction or mining of sand,
gravel,stone,or other nonmetallic minerals,other than peat,which will excavate
• 160 acres of land or more to a mean depth of ten feet or more during its existence,
the local government unit shall be the RGU.
Subp. 10. Paper or pulp processing.For construction of a new paper or pulp
•' processing mill, the PCA shall be the RGU.
Subp. 11. Industrial,commercial, and institutional facilities.Items A, B, and
C designate the RGU for the type of project listed, except as provided in items
D and E:
A. For construction of a new or expansion of an existing warehousing
t or light industrial facility equal to or in excess of the following thresholds,
expressed as gross floor space, the local governmental unit is the RGU:
(l) unincorporated area, 375,000;
(2) third or fourth class city, 750,000;
(3) second class city, 1,000,000;
T•
(4) first class city, 1,500,000.
B.For construction of a new or expansion of an existing industrial,com-
mercial,or institutional facility,other than a warehousing or light industrial facil-
ity, gthe local governmentto or in excess f the unit shalllbe following
RGU�ds, expressed as gross floor
space,
r
•
1_
,
•
• 4410.4400 ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW; CRITICAL AREAS 3454
a
1 (1) unincorporated area, 250,000 square feet;
(2) third or fourth class city, 500,000 square feet; ;
1,I i (3) second class city, 750,000 square feet;
o'! ' (4) first class city, 1,000,000 square feet.
i
ci 1C.For construction of a new or expansion of an existing industrial,corn-
.
h•� �y ! mercial, or institutional facility of 100,000 or more square feet of ground area, • i
4 ' . if the local governmental unit has not adopted approved water-related land use
,1 ! management district ordinances or plans, as applicable, and either the project
y
i , involves riparian frontage or 100,000 or more square feet of ground area to be
,3 ; developed is within a water-related land use management district, the local gov- `
a ernment unit shall be the RGU. However, this item only applies to shoreland ,' '
areas, floodplains, and state wild and scenic rivers land use districts if the local
governmental unit has received official notice from the Department of Natural
Resources that it must adopt applicable land use management ordinances within
a specified period of time.
9 D. This subpart applies to any industrial, commercial, or institutional
project which includes multiple components, if there are mandatory categories
specified in subparts 2 to 10, 12, 13, 15, or 17, or part 4410.4300, subparts 2 to
1 13, 16, 17, 20, 21, 23, 25, or 29 for two or more of the components, regardless
•
of whether the project in question meets or exceeds any threshold specified in
those subparts.In those cases,the entire project must be compared to the thresh-
1 : olds specified in items A and B to determine the need for an EIS. If the project
meets or exceeds the thresholds specified in any other subparts as well as those r.
in item A or B,the RGU must be determined as provided in part 4410.0500,sub- •
-
i part 1.
E. This subpart does not apply to projects for which there is a single
mandatory category specified in subparts 2 to 10, 12, 13, 17, or 22, or part
4410.4300, subparts 2 to 13, 16, 17, 20, 23, 25, 29, or 34, regardless of whether
the project in question meets or exceeds any threshold specified in those subparts.
• In those cases,the need for an EIS or an EAW must be determined by comparison
of the project to the threshold specified in the applicable subpart, and the RGU
must be the governmental unit assigned by that subpart.
•i Subp. 12. Hazardous waste. Items A to C designate the RGU for the type of ' -
project listed:
A. For construction or expansion of a hazardous waste disposal facility
for 1,000 or more kilograms per month, the PCA shall be the RGU.
B.For the construction or expansion of a hazardous waste disposal facil-
ity in a water-related land use management district, or in an area characterized
by soluble bedrock, the PCA shall be the RGU. ,
C. For construction or expansion of a hazardous waste processing facil-
ity if the facility is located in a water-related land use management district, or
in an area characterized by soluble bedrock, the PCA shall be the RGU.
r. Subp. 13.Solid waste.For the type of projects listed in items A to E,the PCA •
•
is the RGU unless the project will be constructed within the seven-county Twin
Cities metropolitan area, in which case the Metropolitan Council is the RGU.
A. Construction of a mixed municipal solid waste disposal facility for
100,000 cubic yards or more of waste fill per year.
B.Construction or expansion of a mixed municipal solid waste disposal
facility in a water-related land use management district,or in an area character-
t _
ized by soluble bedrock. _
`s:f C. Construction or expansion of a mixed municipal solid waste energy
recovery facility or incinerator, or the utilization of an existing facility for the .
combustion of mixed municipal solid waste or refuse-derived fuel,with a capac- -
ity of 250 or more tons per day of input. :•
�:I
t
•
. '` . .. cy
..G 1
1
- • 3455 ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW; CRITICAL AREAS 4410.4400
D.Construction or expansion of a mixed municipal solid waste compost
facility or a refuse-derived fuel production facility with a capacity of 500 or more
tons per day of input.
E. Expansion by 25 percent or more of previous capacity of a mixed
municipal solid waste disposal facility for 100,000 cubic yards or more of waste
fill per year.
Subp. 14. Residential development. An EIS is required for residential devel-
opment if the total number of units that the proposer may ultimately develop on
.A•- all contiguous land owned by the proposer or for which the proposer has an
4_ option to purchase,and that is zoned for residential development or is identified
for residential development by an applicable comprehehsive plan, equals or
., exceeds a threshold of this subpart. In counting the total number of ultimate
units, the RGU shall include the number of units in any plans of the proposer;
_ for land for which the proposer has not yet prepared plans, the RGU shall use
•:;t as the number of units the product of the number of acres multiplied by the maxi-
mum number of units per acre allowable under the applicable zoning ordinance.
If the total project requires review but future phases are uncertain,the RGU may
review the ultimate project sequentially in accordance with part 4410.2000, sub-
part 4.
The RGU may review an initial stage of the project,that may not exceed ten
' percent of the applicable EIS threshold, by means of the procedures of parts
4410.1200 to 4410.1700 instead of the procedures of parts 4410.2000 to
_s' : 4410.2800. If the RGU determines that this stage requires preparation of an EIS
under part 4410.1700, it may be reviewed through a separate EIS or through an
EIS that also covers later stages of the project.
' If a project consists of mixed unattached and attached units, an EIS must be
prepared if the sum of the quotient obtained by dividing the number of unat-
tached units by the applicable unattached unit threshold of item A or B, plus the
.,--
quotient obtained by dividing the number of attached units by the applicable
attached unit threshold of item A or B,equals or exceeds one.Items A and B des-
::':.'
es-
ignate the RGU for the type of project listed.
A.The local governmental unit is the RGU for construction of a perma-
nent or potentially permanent residential development of:
(1) 100 or more unattached or 150 or more attached units in an
unsewered unincorporated area or 400 unattached units or 600 attached units in
a sewered unincorporated area; ,
(2) 400 unattached units or 600 attached units in a city that does
•
not meet the conditions of subitem (4);
(3)400 unattached units or 600 attached units in a city meeting the
conditions of subitem(4)if the project is not consistent with the adopted compre-
hensive plan; or
(4) 1,000 unattached units or 1,500 attached units in a city within
the seven-county Twin Cities metropolitan area that has adopted a comprehen-
sive plan under Minnesota Statutes, section 473.859, or in a city not located
within the seven-county Twin Cities metropolitan area that has filed with the
EQB chair a certification that it has adopted a comprehensive plan containing
the following elements: -
`' (i) a land use plan designating the existing and proposed loca- .
tion,intensity,and extent of use of land and water for residential,industrial,agri-
cultural, and other public and private purposes;
(ii) a transportation plan describing, designating, and schedul-
''• ing the location, extent, function, and capacity of existing and proposed local •
public and private transportation facilities and services;
(iii)a sewage collection system policy plan describing,designat- .
,.. ing, and scheduling the areas to be served by the public system, the existing and
4410.4400 ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW; CRITICAL AREAS 3456 3'
planned capacities of the public system,and the standards and conditions under ti
which the installation of private sewage treatment systems will be permitted;
• • • •• (iv) a capital improvements plan for public facilities; and c:. R
(v) an implementation plan describing public programs, fiscal
I.6I;
devices, and other actions to be undertaken to implement the comprehensive
9 plan,and a description of official controls addressing the matters of zoning,sub- 4
t, division, private sewage systems, and a schedule for the implementation of the
• controls.The EQB chair may specify the form to be used for making a certifica-
tion under this subitem. f
B.For construction of apermanent or potentiallyr
•� permanent residential � r
;;i development of 40 or more unattached units or of 60 or more attached units, if s
3 the local governmental unit has not adopted approved water-related land use I
i ; management district ordinances or plans, as applicable, and either the project
.1
' involves riparian frontage or ten or more acres of the development are within a .
water-related land use management district, the local government unit shall be 4
the RGU. However, this item only applies to shorcland areas, floodplains, and
r state wild and scenic rivers land use districts if the local governmental unit has
! . received official notice from the Department of Natural Resources that it must l
adopt applicable land use management district ordinances within a specific
period of time. '
.f t Subp. 15. Airport runway projects. For construction of a paved and lighted s':
•
i 0 airport runway of 5,000 feet of length or greater, the DOT or local government
i 6 unit shall be the RGU.
•z Subp. 16. Highway projects. For construction of a road on a new location ..
I which is four or more lanes in width and two or more miles in length, the DOT
1 or local government unit shall be the RGU.
# Subp. 17.Barge fleeting facilities.For construction of a barge fleeting facility
at a new off-channel location that involves the dredging of 1,000 or more cubic r
i yards, the DOT or port authority shall be the RGU.
Subp. 18. Water appropriation and impoundments. For construction of a
;1 Subp.
Class I dam, the DNR shall be the RGU.
i t Subp. 19. Marinas. For construction of a new or expansion of an existing t
;E marina, harbor, or mooring project on a state or federally designated wild and .
;f scenic river, the local government unit shall be the RGU.
Subp. 20. Wetlands and protected waters. For projects that will eliminate a
.7!1 protected water or protected wetland except for those to be drained without a per- ''
mit pursuant to Minnesota Statutes,section 105.391,subdivision 3,the local gov- ,-{ :'
ernment unit shall be the RGU. :.- ;;`
Subp. 21. Mixed residential and commercial-industrial projects. If a project 4s
includes both residential and commercial-industrial components, the project
• must have an EIS prepared if the sum of the quotient obtained by dividing the :. •>
number of residential units by the applicable residential threshold of subpart 14,
i plus the quotient obtained by dividing the amount of industrial-commercial gross '
• floor space by the applicable industrial-commercial threshold of subpart 11, •
equals or exceeds one. ' _;'
Subp• . 22. Sports or entertainment facilities. For construction of a new out- '
door sports or entertainment facility designed for or expected to accommodate ;` ;'
t a peak attendance of 20,000 or more persons or a new indoor sports or entertain- ,'
• c; ment facility designed for or expected to accommodate a peak attendance of ;i
30,000 or more persons,or the expansion of an existing facility by these amounts,
the local governmental unit is the RGU. .'t; -::
Subp. 23. Water diversions. For a diversion of waters of the state to an ulti- ..".'
mate location outside the state in an amount equal to or greater than 2,000,000 �?
gallons per day, expressed as a daily average over any 30-day period, the DNR
is the RGU. ..
i
• i
y. • .
3457 ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW; CRITICAL AREAS 4410.4600
Subp. 24. Pipelines. For routing of a pipeline subject to the full route selec-
r, tion procedures under Minnesota Statutes, section 116I.015, the EQB is the
RGU.
Statutory Authority: MS s 116D.04; 116D.045
c;. History: 11 SR 714; 13 SR 1437; 13 SR 2046
4410.4500 DISCRETIONARY EAW.
4 . A governmental unit with jurisdiction may order the preparation of an EAW
•
for any project that does not exceed the mandatory thresholds designated in part
-� 4410.4300 or 4410.4400 if the governmental unit determines that because of the
Y• nature or location of the proposed project the project may have the potential for
'',: significant environmental effects, and the project is not exempted pursuant to
;;; part 4410.4600.
"�ti
Statutory Authority: MS s 116D.04 subd 5a
;. 4410.4600 EXEMPTIONS.
Subpart 1. Scope of exemption. Projects within subpart 2 are exempt from
-,� parts 4410.0200 to 4410.6500. Projects within subparts 3 to 26 are exempt from
.r:: parts 4410.0200 to 4410.6500, unless they have characteristics which meet or
exceed any of the thresholds specified in part 4410.4300 or 4410.4400.
ii ., Subp. 2. Standard exemptions.The following projects are standard exemp-
tions:
1 , A. projects for which no governmental decisions are required;
-s. B. projects for which all governmental decisions have been made.How-
_ ever, this exemption does not in any way alter the prohibitions on final govern-
mental decisions to approve a project under part 4410.3100;
C. projects for which, and so long as, a governmental unit has denied
a required governmental approval;
D. projects for which a substantial portion of the project has been corn-
i.-
_ pleted and an EIS would not influence remaining implementation or construc-
tion; and
E. projects for which environmental review has already been initiated
{
under the prior rules or for which environmental review is being conducted pur-
suant to part 4410.3600 or 4410.3700.
Subp. 3. Electric generating facilities.Construction of an electric generating
. plant or combination of plants at a single site with a combined capacity of less
2than five megawatts is exempt.
. '. Subp. 4. Fuel conversion facilities.Expansion of a facility for the production
;f.. of alcohol fuels that would have or would increase its capacity by less than
500,000 gallons per year of alcohol produced is exempt.
Subp. 5.Transmission lines.Construction of a transmission line with a nom- .
inal capacity of 69 kilovolts or less is exempt.
-�f Subp. 6.Transfer facilities.Construction of a facility designed for or capable
of transferring less than 30 tons of coal per hour or with an annual throughput
of less than 50,000 tons of coal from one mode of transportation to a similar or
different mode of transportation,or the expansion of an existing facility by these
respective amounts, is exempt.
Subp. 7. Storage facilities.Construction of a facility designed for or capable
of storing less than 750 tons of coal or more, with an annual throughput of less
than 12,500 tons of coal, or the expansion of an existing facility by these respec-
• tive amounts, is exempt.
�` Subp. 8. Mining. The following projects are exempt:
A. General mine site evaluation activities that do not result in a perma-
nent alteration of the environment, including mapping, aerial surveying, visual
02/16/9.1 16:05 $612 337 5601 DSU. INC. 444 VALLEY GREEN 2001/009
DAHLGREN
SHARDLOW
AND -
Post-It'°brandfax transmittal memo toil of pages ).
CONSULT:NC P: To 30‘..% M \V6cyl� From Int\ C�t�`�d"`
:.ANDSC SPE .SRC
30u HRST AV EN Co. V\{.al}_ vceN\ Co. .may
MEMORANDUM SUiTE 210 Dept. 11(x /J
} l`•il Phone*
MINNEAPOLIS,
612•;.39•13:1n Fax ? Fars
DATE: February 16, 1994
TO: Jon Albinson,Valley Green Business Park
FROM: Philip Carlson, AICP; Dahlgren, Shardlow, and Uban, Inc.
RE: I-1 &1-2 Zoning; Uses, Hazardous Materials
You have asked me to review recent City information and to comment on the I-1 and I-2 zoning
districts, the uses allowed in them, and the issue of hazardous materials and environmental concerns
involved in these uses. My comments are brief and without the benefit of exhaustive research.
First, in my experience I have never seen ordinance language tying the permitted and conditional
uses to the EAW/EIS process, as suggested by Ms. Marty. It should be understood that projects of a
certain size or type will require this review and it shouldn't have to be in the ordinance. To state that
a use will only be approved after it has gone through the appropriate review according to the EQB
Rules is redundant: the Rules themselves state that a City is prohibited from giving final approval to a
project involved under its review until after the EQB has signed off on it
Second,the EIS process mentions many unique types of projects (nuclear waste, hazardous waste,
pipelines, airports), but doesn't address many of the more common day-to-day concerns that were
addressed in Lindberg's recommendations in the November 16 memo. For example,the EIS
mandatory categories do not mention any type of explosives; a use could involve explosives and not
be involved in any review under the EQB Rules as suggested by Marty's proposed ordinance
language.
Third, the use of the EIS thresholds doesn't necessarily translate into uses that are detrimental to the
community. Some of the categories are for very typical development(commercial,industrial,
office/warehouse) but on a very large scale. Valley Green and the City of Shakopee would be
thrilled,I imagine, to host a development of over 500,000 square feet of commercial-industrial
development in one project. The City may even look for ways to avoid the EIS process for such a
large use.
My recommendation: delete the references to the EIS process -it doesn't do much for the City in
terms of zoning, and may not address the real environmental and safety concerns that are being
discussed.
I have attached some excerpts from other ordinances we have worked with in other cities. It is more
typical to talk about the effects of hazardous materials, rather than their mere presence. The same is
true on the issue of specific uses- assembly vs. manufacturing,processing vs. warehousing, etc.I
would start with what you want the effects to be, or what specifics effects you don't want (traffic,
noise,vibration, explosions, smoke, odors, etc.), and then figure out language to define the uses that
fit that description.
02/16/94 16:06 $612 337 5601 DSt', INC. VALLEY GREEN [, J 002/009
Prior Lake Business Park District Page 4
Covered parking facilities/day (minimum):
General parking &pedestrian areas 5 foot candles
Ramps & corners 10 foot candles
Entrances & exits 50 foot candles
Stairwells 20 foot candles
Signage. No advertising or identification signage shall.be permitted on any building exterior in the
BP District, except for address numbers no taller than twelve inches high nor less than four inches
high. Each property shall be allowed one free-standing ground sign no higher than six feet off the
ground and no more than 80 square feet in area, as well as a reasonable number of directional signs,
each no more than six square feet in area and no taller than six feet, for the purpose of indicating
entries and exits, and other information necessary to direct people to areas on site.
k Noxious Matter. The emission of noxious matter shall be controlled so that no such emission
/ crosses the lot line of the property from which it originates. Noxious matter shall mean any solid,
liquid or gaseous material, including but not limited to gases,vapors, odor, dusts,fumes, mists, or
combinations thereof,the emission of which is detrimental to or endangers the public health, safety,
comfort or general welfare, or causes damage to property. The operator of the facility shall comply
with a regular inspection schedule as approved by the City and shall submit reports of such
inspections to the City.
Restricted Operations. Uses which because of the nature of their operation are accompanied by an
excess of noise, vibration,dust, dirt, smoke, odor,noxious gases, glare or wastes shall not be
permitted_ Noise, odors, smoke and particulate matter shall not exceed Minnesota Pollution Control
Agency standards. Glare,whether directed or reflected, such as from spotlights or high temperature
processes, as differentiated from general illumination, shall not be visible beyond the lot line of the
property from which it originates.
Exceptions for Legal Non-Conforming Structures. For properties with existing development that
are rezoned to BP, the following exceptions will apply. For legal non-conforming structures in the
BP District, new construction projects for repairs,remodeling, or additions to the structure do not
need to meet the standards in this section if the construction increases the size of the building by less
than ten percent, or if it increases the assessor's market value by less than twenty percent
Construction projects involving a building expansion between ten and fifty percent of the size of the
building or an increase in assessor's market value between twenty and fifty percent of its value need
not meet all the standards of this section,but will be required to meet a reasonable proportion of the
requirements as determined by the DRC.
For the purposes of determining compliance with the standards in this section, site work not
involving the structures on site shall be considered separately from work on the structures. For legal
non-conforming uses in the BP District, new construction projects for repairs,remodeling, or
additions to the parking lot, outdoor spaces, landscaping, or other exterior areas do not need to meet
the standards in this section if the construction increases the size of these areas by less than ten
percent Construction projects involving an expansion of exterior space between ten and fifty percent
of the size of the parking lot or other outdoor space need not meet all the standards of this section,but
will be required to meet a reasonable proportion of the requirements as determined by the DRC. For
the purposes of this section, adding one inch or more of new material to an existing parking lot
surface shall be considered an increase of 100 percent of the area involved.
02/16/91 16:06 $612 337 3601 DSU, VALLEY GREEN [j003/009
10 . 125
ZONING CODE
10. 125 . Van Pooling Programs.
Where a van pooling program exists for employees of a user of
property in an Industrial District and such program reduces the
need for parking spaces, the number of parking spaces not needed
because of such program may be reduced from the requirements of
Section 10. 120 . Space sufficient to accommodate such reduced
number of parking spaces shall be maintained as open space, and
shall be converted to parking spaces in the event that the
program is terminated or if its effectiveness in reducing
parking space needs drops. Approval and continuation of such
reduced parking space plan shall be made by the Inspection
Superintendent.
10. 130 . Off Street Loading Space.
One loading space shall be provided in all Industrial Districts
in connection with all buildings or additions hereafter erected,
having a gross floor area of 10, 000 square feet or more, which
is to be occupied by a use or uses requiring the receipt or
distribution by vehicles of material. One additional space shall
be provided for each 20 , 000 square feet or major fraction
thereof over the original 10, 000 square feet.
10. 160. Prohibited Uses in Industrial Districts.
Prohibited uses include all uses not specifically enumerated in
Sections 10.270 through 10. 320 as permitted or accessory uses or
uses by special permit. Residential, commercial and public uses
such as schools and churches fall into the prohibited use class.
10 . 170. Noise in Industrial Districts.
Any use established in an Industrial District shall be so
operated that no noise resulting from said operation which would
constitute a nuisance is perceptible beyond the premises. This
section does not apply to incidental traffic, parking and off
street loading operations.
} 10. 180 . Smoke in Industrial Districts.
The emission of smoke or particulate matter is prohibited where
such emission is perceptible beyond the premises to the degree
as to constitute a nuisance.
10. 190. Toxic Matter.
No use shall , for any period of time, discharge across the
boundaries of the lot wherein it is located, ' toxic or noxious
matter of such concentration as to be detrimental to or endanger
the public health, safety, comfort or welfare, or cause injury
or damage to property or business.
10. 200. Odors.
The emission of odorous matter in such quantities as to be
readily detectable beyond the boundaries of the immediate site
• is prohibited.
66
02/16/94 16:07 $612 337 5601 DSE, INC. 444 VALLEY GREEN f,6001/009
744442_ 10 . 260
ZONING CODE
10. 210. Vibrations.
Any use creating periodic earthshaking vibrations, such as are
created by heavy drop forges or heavy hydraulic surges, shall be
' prohibited if such vibrations are perceptible beyond the
boundaries of the immediate site.
10.220. Glare or Heat.
Any operation producing intense glare or heat shall be performed
within a completely enclosed building.
10. 230 . Explosives.
No activities involving the storage, utilization or manufacture
of materials or products which could decompose by detonation
shall be permitted except such as are specifically licensed by
the Council . Such materials shall include, but not be confined
to, all primary explosives such as lead oxide and lead sulfate;
all high explosives and boosters such as TNT, RDS, tetryl and
ammonium nitrate; propellants and components thereof such as
nitrocellulose, black powder , ammonium perchlorate and
nitroglycerin; blasting explosives such as dynamite, powdered
' magnesium, potassium chlorate, potassium permanganates and
potassium nitrate, and nuclear fuels and reactor elements such
as uranium 235 and plutonium.
10.240. Off Street Loading.
No loading berth for vehicles over two ton capacity shall be
closer than 100 feet to any Residence District unless completely
enclosed by building walls not less than 8 feet in height.
10.250. Yards.
Between each newly erected building and the street upon which it
faces, there shall be provided a front yard which shall be
landscaped and kept clear of all structures, storage, and
employee parking spaces as noted in Sections 10. 020 through
10. 160. This front yard shall be not less than 40 feet in depth.
Grass, shrubs and trees shall be provided and maintained by the
owner and/or his/her tenants.
10.260 . Screening1 Plans To Be Submitted For Approval.
Screening must be provided and maintained by the owner of an
industrial building adjacent to a residential area. Such
screening, either of planting fence or wall, shall substantially
block eye level vision between the residential and industrial
areas. Plans for screening must be filed, with building plans,
with the Inspection Superintendent, and must be referred to the
Council for approval. The Council may refer the screening plan
to the Planning Commission for review and recommendation. A bond
shall be provided as required by Section 12 . 060 .
•
67
02/16/94 16:07 $612 337 5601 DSL', INC. 444 VALLEY GREEN 0005/009
10-24-1 10-24-1
CHAPTER 24
1-1 INDUSTRIAL PARK DISTRICT
SECTION:
10-24-1: Permitted Uses
10-24-2: Permitted Accessory Uses
10-24-3: Conditional Uses
10-24-3A: Interim Uses
10-24-4: Lot Area, Lot Widths and Yard Requirements
10-24-1: PERMITTED USES: Within any 1-1 Industrial Park District,
no structure or land shall be used except for one or more of
the following uses:
Conducting a process, fabricating, wholesale operation or providing a
service including any of the following meeting the performance standards
applicable to the I-1 District.
Automobile upholstery, tire recapping and major repair when conducted
entirely within an enclosed building.
Bottling works.
Day: care nursery.
• Laundries. •
Machine shops.
Motor vehicle terminal and maintenance garage. •
Off-street parking and loading.
592
City of Burnsville
02/16/94 16:08 $612 337 3601 DSE, INC. VALLEY GREEN 2 006/009
7)itArVIYVk
10-24-1 10-24-3
Office warehouse.
Paper products from previously processed paper.
Radio and television studios.
Research laboratories.
Temporary/seasonal outdoor sales uses, subject to the provisions of
Section 10-19-2-1 of this Title.
Trade or business school.
Warehousing and wholesaling. (Ord. 244, 11-15-82; amd. Ord. 315,
3-21-88; Ord. 411 , 5-20-91)
10-24-2: PERMITTED ACCESSORY USES: Within the I-1 Industrial
Park District, the following uses shall be permitted
accessory uses:
Off-street parking and loading as regulated by this Title. •
Residential structures and related residential uses necessary for security
and safety reasons in relation to a principal use.
Signs as regulated by this Title. (Ord. 244, 11-15-82; amd. Ord. 328,
9-19-88; Ord. 402, 2-19-91)
10-24-3: CONDITIONAL USES: Within the I-1 Industrial Park District,
no structure or land shall be used for the following uses
except by conditional use permit:
Armories, convention halls, sports arenas and stadiums.
Conditional uses as allowed in the 8-3 District.
Contractors' yards when contained within a building or a completely
fenced area.
Essential service structures.
Firearm range.
592
City of Burnsville
02/16/94 16: 08 $612 337 5601 DSC, INC. -4-.- VALLEY GREEN Z007/009
10-24-3 ►✓' '
10-24-3A
Heliports.
\X Medical waste transfer facility, as defined under Section 10-4-2 of this
Title, provided that the containerization of the waste shall be conducted
entirely within a building, that the facility shall be the sole occupant of
the building, that the building shall not be located adjacent to or across
the street from any residential or commercial districts or uses, and that
the operator of the facility provide evidence that the facility is in
compliance with all applicable State and Federal regulations_
Open sales rental and storage lots.
Outdoor accessory merchandise display, subject to the provisions of
Section 10-23-4 of this Title.
Radio and television transmitting towers.
Recycling center, nonhazardous resource recovery facility, when
conducted entirely wiin a building.
Religious assembly when incorporated into a multi-tenant building, and
where the use or multiple religious assembly uses do not occupy more
than forty nine percent (49%) of the total square footage of the building.
Retail sales. (Ord. 244, 11-15-82; amd. Ord. 328, 9-19-88; Ord_ 402,
2-19-91; Ord. 421, 8-19-91; Ord. 429, 11-18-91)
10-24-3A: INTERIM USES: Within any i-1 Industrial Park District, no
structure or land shalLbe used for the following uses except
1 by interim use permit:
Interim uses permitted in the B-1 District, not including target, trap and
skeet shooting ranges.
•
Land reclamation, mining and soil processing.
{ Miniature golf courses.
Required structures need not be accessory structures and . need not
comply with paragraph 2 of the special minimum requirements of
subsection 10-23-1(A). The landscaping requirements of subsection
10-23-1(B) may be waived where appropriate.
592
City of Burnsville
02/16/94 16:08 $612 337 5601 DSL , INC. 44-, VALLEY GREEN 0 003!009
10-25-1 51/ 51/1�"- ) 10-25-2
CHAPTER 25
1-2 GENERAL INDUSTRY DISTRICT
SECTION:
10-25-1 : Permitted Uses
10-25-2: Permitted Accessory Uses
10-25-3: Conditional Uses
10-25-3A: Interim Uses
10-25-4: Lot Area, Lot Width and Yard Requirements
10-25-1 : PERMITTED USES: Within any 1-2 Industry District, no
structure or land shall be used except for one or more of
the following uses:
Any use permitted in the 1-1 District as regulated therein.
Crude oil, gasoline or other liquid storage tanks.
Manufacturing, compounding, assembly, packaging, treatment or storage
of the following products or materials: brewing, cement, concrete, stone
cutting, brick, glass, batteries (wet cell), ceramic products, mill working,
metal polishing and plating, paint (pigment manufacturing), rubber
products, plastics, meat packing, flour, feed, grain milling, sawmill, lime,
plaster of paris, cloth, adhesives.
1.0-25-2: PERMITTED ACCESSORY USES: Within any 1-2 General
• Industry District, the following uses shall be permitted ac-
cessory uses: •
Accessory uses permitted in 1-1 Industrial Park District.
592
City of Burnsville
02/16/94 16: 09 $612 337 3601 DSL', INC. VALLEY GREEN Z009/009
10-25-3
?7INVO, 10-25-3A
10-25-3; CONDITIONAL USES: Within the 1-2 General Industry
District, no structure or land shall be used for the following
uses except by conditional use permit:
Acid manufacture.
Any conditional use permitted in the 1-1 District.
Auto wrecking, junk yard, used auto parts (open storage).
.' Explosives including all uses, storage or manufacture of materials or
products such as TNT or dynamite which would decompose by detona-
tion.
Firearm range.
Incineration or reduction of waste material other than customarily inci-
dental to a principal use.
Kilns or other heat processes fired by means other than electricity.
Open storage (primary or secondary use).
Rail unloading facility.
Refuse and garbage disposal.
Storage, use or manufacture of materials or products which could de-
compose by detonation.
Truck or freight terminal. (Ord. 244, 11-15-82; amd. Ord. 275, 4-1-85)
10-25-3A: INTERIM USES: Within any 1-2 General Industry District, no
structure or land shall be used for the following uses except •
by interim use permit:
Interim uses permitted In the I-1 District.
An accessory structure authorized by conditional use permit under
subsection 10-23-3(A) of this Title may be occupied by personnel as an
Interim use for a period not to exceed one year to facilitate the expansion
of the principle structure, provided that the accessory structure complies
with all applicable requirements of the Building and Fire Codes pertaining
to the proposed occupancy and use. (Ord. 375, 7-2-90; amd. Ord. 438,
2-18-92)
592
City of Burnsville
Suggested language for Industrial District(s)
A.
Manufacturing, production, precessing, cleaning, storage, servicing, repair or testing of
materials, goods or products that is wholly contained within a building and which meets
and maintains all applicable standards established by the State of Minnesota.
B.
Fabrication, manufacturing, production, processing and storage of materials, goods, or
products within an enclosed building, subject to performance standards and to all
environmental standards established by the Minnesota PCA
Light Industrial v. Heavy Industrial
Heavy industrial would be those that may cause a public nuisance such as:
noise, odor, smoke, insect, dust, dirt, vibration, heat and cold etc.
or in other words, "those requiring isolation". Also, heavy industry would include those
that could not be wholly contained within a building. Heavy industrial uses must still
comply with all applicable standards established by the state or federal government.
Language contained in Other Cities' Codes
Lakeville -
11 - Warehouse - Light Industrial
12 - Heavy Industrial - "those requiring isolation"
Burnsville -
I1 - Processing, fabrication or wholesale
12 - I1 + acid manufacturing
13 - Office and Industrial see A. above for specific text
Savage
One zone see B. above
Osseo
One zone allowing all fabrication, manufacturing, production, process and storage.
Manufacturing of chemicals as a conditional use. Also contained in the conditional use
language: "Uses not specifically set forth herein which in the opinion of the Council
would be compatible with the area in which located and which would not constitute a
public nuisance and which would not materially affect sewer capacity".
Eden Prairie
One zone allowing all manufacturing, processing, production and so on as long as
conducted within a building.
Chaska
One general zone for manufacturing, processing;fabrication etc. A special permit is
required for hazardous materials or flamable materials in excess of 50 gallons.
A separate restricted industrial zone is set aside for warehouse type uses. This zone is
not serviced with sewer or water.
New Brighton
II - Light Industrial - aesthetically pleasing in appearance, have all processing within
the buildings.
Special permit - The Council may permit any use in industrial districts (except
residential) by means of a Special Use permit as long as it meets all standards
assigned to zone.
12 - Heavy Industrial - large bulky materials needing outside storage of large equipment,
material or some outside processing or assembly. Special permit language same as
above.
13 - Limited Industrial Districts -transition between intense industrial districts and
residential or recreational districts.
Roseville
Also refers to industrial categories in terms of public nuisance.
Prior Lake
Categorizes industrial uses according to the nuisance to the public that would be
created.