Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutSP August 15, 1983 ~ 01 ANDOVER SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING - AUGUST 15, 1983 AGENDA 1 . Call to Order 2. Agenda Approval 3. Special Use Permit - Schriptek, Inc. The Anoka County Board is meeting on Tuesday, August 16 to act on the license for Schriptek, Inc. Andover Planning & Zoning Commission met on August 9 and made the attached recommendation and changes to the County Proposed Conditions. It was the feeling of Mayor Windschitl that the City Council should come to a general consensus on the terms prior to County Board action on Tuesday. This is on the agenda on Tuesday evening for formal Council action. P.S. A copy of the conditions approved by the County Environmental Committee as a recommendation to the County Board this morning (8/11) has just been received and is attached. ~ ~ 01 ANDOVER SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING - AUGUST 15, 1983 MINUTES A Special Meeting of the Andover City Council was called to order by Mayor Jerry Windschitl on August 15, 1983, 7:30 p.m., at the Andover City Hall, 1685 Crosstown Boulevard NW, for the purpose of discussing the Shriptek, Inc., Special Use Permit, the Jim Conroy Building Permit, and the Water Problem in Northwoods Addition. Councilmen present: Elling, Knight (arrived at 8:20), Lachinski (left at 9:44), Ortte 1 Councilmen absent: None Also present: Anoka County Commissioner, Natalie Haas; City Clerk/A. Administrator, P. K. Lindquist; and others SPECIAL USE PERMIT - SHRIPTEK, INC. Commissioner Haas explained the license conditions for Shriptek, Inc., has passed through the Environmental Services Committee and then to the Health and Social Services Board last Thursday. At that time the Andover Planning and Zoning Commission presented some of their recommendations, which appeared to be different from what the Andover City Council might want. But the Health and Social Services Committee stayed very close to what the Planning Commission recommended. She felt there are only two or three items that are of major concern to the Council, and hopefully those can be resolved before it goes to the County Board tomorrow. Council then went through the licensing conditions approved by the County Environmental Services Committee, with the intent being to try to get the City's special use permit requirements for Shriptek Recovery Systems International, Inc., the same as the county's licensing requirements. In going through the items, the Council expressed their concerns for particular items, discussing them with Commissioner Haas, Ray Slaback, President of Shriptek, and Cecil and Patricia Heidelberger. License Conditions General, Item 1: Discussion noted Mr. Slaback's request at the county to be allowed to store up to 25,000 new tires on site at any given time, and the $12,500 bond reflects the 25,000 tires at 50 cents a tire. The Council was concerned with the statement of the cash escrow of $7,OUO, which is less than the $12,500 bond. Commissioner Haas explained the County Attorney has told them that by the time a $12,500 bond is invoked and court costs attained, it is actually worth $7,000 to $8,000 in cash. From that the Committee came up with the recommendation that the performance bond be $12,500 or the cash escrow of $7,000. Mayor Windschitl stated he didn't understand that logic, feeling if the performance bond is written correctly, or a letter of credit received, it will allow the county to draw funds almost immediately. Councilman Orttel also questioned why the cash would be dropped to $7,000 if the $12,500 is what the county or city is looking for. Normally improvement bonds are written for 125 percent of the estimated cost of the project. He also had some problems with the fact that it isn't the city's bond, but the county's; therefore, the city would not be able to draw against the bond. Mr. Slaback stated he is planning to post a performance bond rather than the cash escrow. Discussion returned to this item later in the meeting. Item 2: No controversy. Item 3: Commissioner Haas explained the dates for obtaining the various items required ln the licensing conditions were determined upon the advise of the County Attorney and Planning Commission as to how long it would take to obtain those items. Item 4: No controversy. -~ -.- Special City Council Meeting August 15, 1983 - Minutes Page 2 (Special Use Permit - Shriptek, Inc., Continued) Item 5: Mr. Slaback stated they expect to have a portable scale and shredder on site unt1l they know how long they will be there. Councilman Elling was concerned with the scale being portable, and felt that should be reviewed after a six-month period. Item 6: Council felt the city as well as the county should be advised of any changes in the operation or management of the facility. Mrs. Heidelberger was concerned with the wording of this item, interpreting it to mean that they cannot even sell their property once the tires are gone without county and city permission. Commissioner Haas stated the county has the right to approve or withdraw the license in terms of what the lessee or lessor agree on. The county needs to know that there is still a valid agreement by the new owner and the person doing the operation. T~re Me a number of legal entanglements that could evolve without that sort of agreement before licensing an operation on someone else's land. Mayor Windschitl felt that Mrs. Heidelberger's concern should be addressed under Site, Item 1. The legal description given is the entire 15 acres as part of the special use permit. The question is if five acres, for example, are permanently cleared of tires, can that portion be sold for another use. Council generally had no problem with that, and considering the possibility of utilities in that area in the future it may be something the Heidelbergers would want to do. Reducing the size of the operation should have no bearing on the licensing. Item 7: No controversy. Site, Item 1: Commissioner Haas had no problem raising the question of reducing the Slze of the operation before the County Board to see what language could be put in there to allow taking out some of the property once the tires are removed from it. Council agreed. Items 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, and 9: No controversy. Item 10: Mayor Windschitl stated the one item of concern for the fire department is the flammability of what is in some of the barrels there, it being a safety question for Mr. Slaback's employees. Item 11: No controversy. Item 12: Mr. Slaback stated there is potable water on site at this time, and they also have a satellite on site. Items 13 and 14: No controversy. Operation, Items 1 and 2: No controversy. Item 3: Mr. Slaback stated there has been a meeting of the minds with the fire department. They have already encountered several different circumstances where they have had to switch directions in their work. They will be having meetings with the department when that happens to determine what can be done. For that reason, it is almost impossible to put a time limit on this item. Mayor Windschitl stressed there must clearly be some progress made on getting the fire lanes put through there. Item 4: No controversy. Item 5: Mayor Windschitl explained in the county's opinion, tons can be measured easier than tires can be measured. The city had originally started with a monthly net reduction of old waste tire inventory of at least five to one, the Planning Commission changed it to three to one, and this document from the county is saying two to one. Discussion was on the amount of tires needed to satisfy Shriptek's contract with the paper company, the maximum market share for tires in the Twin City area, and the unknowns in the tire market. Council generally felt that it should be a three to one ratio. Special City Council Meeting August 15, 1983 - Minutes Page 3 (Special Use Permit - Shriptek, Inc., Continued) Mr. Slaback was concerned with meeting the ratio on a monthly basis as there is a fluctoation in the tire market depending on the time of year. Discussion was on the suggestion of making the three-to-one ratio cumulative or on a quarterly basis to compensate for the seasonal variations, thereby allowing Mr. Slaback some versitility to get credit for those months where more tires are processed. The city's main object is to have the tires on site eliminated in some orderly fashion. Mr. Slaback stated he expects to receive 11,000 to 12,000 new tires a day. It was generally agreed to require a quarterly net reduction of old waste tires of at least three ton for each ton of new waste tires received. (Councilman Knight arrived at this time) After further discussion it was agreed to add the following sentence to this item: However, under no circumstances shall the monthly net reduction of old waste tires exceed a two to one ratio. Items 6, 7, 8, g, and 10: No controversy Item 11: Mayor Windschtil stated they have already encountered hazardous waste barrels, and the county was notified. The PCA has since worked out a plan of storing the barrels in a shallow trench. Mr. Slaback stated to this point his employees have been handling the barrels, but they would like to get a determination from the PCA as to what is in them, his concern being for the safety of his employees. Commissioner Haas stated the third or fourth week of this month the PCA has a meeting with the generators of that hazardous waste and they expect to get an agreement as to what they are going to do. If not, they expect to proceed through the EPA. Item 12: Council agreed the hours of receipt of new waste tires should coincide with the hours set forth in the junkyard license. It was also felt there should be no problem with the hours for processing as long as that occurs inside the building and is not a noise nuisance. Item 13: Mr. Slaback stated he had a problem with the wording of this item, feeling 1t 1S too nebulous, asking just what is expected of him. He was concerned with being made responsible to pick up tires along the roadside throughout the entire county or this being a license for people to dump tires along the roadside if they do not want to pay the fee. Council felt this provision worked well with the landfill, that it generally pertains to those tires falling off the hauling trucks, but that the area should be defined. It was agreed to the following: The licensee shall maintain haul routes within one mile to the site free of waste tires. Mr. Slaback agreed with that, stating if it becomes a problem, it can be addressed in the future. Items 14, 15, 16, 17: No controversy Item 18: Mr. Slaback felt this pertains to the operations section, which is the front area. Discussion was on whether or not the easement shown on the east side of the property is within or outside of the legal description. Mr. Slaback stated to his knowledge it is within. Mr. Heidelberger stated the easement is not included in the operation area. Further discussion noted it is included in the storage area. The Mayor asked if the easement on the east side of the property is open at this time. Mr. Heidelberger stated semi trucks are driven back there every day. He also stated Kline's fence goes right up to the easement and possibly a gate could be put across the easement. but the east side would not be fenced. After the tires are taken off that area, it will be bare land and fencing will not be needed. Ihe county permit is to fence just the front part, the processing area. Items 19, 20, 21, 22, 23: No controversy. Recess at 9:09; reconvene at 9:15 p.m. Special City Council Meeting August 15, 1983 - Minutes Page 4 (Special Use Permit - Shriptek, Inc., Continued) Council again reviewed the items of the licensing conditions and agreed to the following changes from the conditions approved by the County Environmental Services Committee: General, Item 1: "A performance bond in the amount of $12,500 with the City of Andover named as co-indemnity shall be provided by September 16, 1983." Item 6: "The licensee shall advise the County and the City of any changes in the operation or management of this facility..." Site. Item 1: It was agreed a reduction clause should be added at the County level. Operation, Item 5: "A quarterly accumulated net reduction of the old waste tire 1nventory of at least three (3) ton of old waste tires processed for each ton of new waste tires received shall be accomplished. However, under no condition shall the monthly net reduction of the old waste tires processed for each ton of new waste tire rece i ved be less than two to one." Item 12: "Receipt of new waste tires shall not occur before 7 a.m. or after 6:00 p.m. or on Sundays and national holidays. Processing of waste tires shall not occur before 6:00 a.m. or after 11 :00 p.m. or on Sundays or national holidays." Item 13: "The licensee shall maintain haul routes within one mile to the site free of waste tires." MOTION by Elling, Seconded by Lachinski, to recommend to the County Commiss1oners the 11censing conditions as amended tonight. Motion carried unanimously. JIM CONROY BUILDING PERMIT Mayor Windschitl explained there appears to be a problem with the large metal building on the Jim Conroy property at 139th and Crosstown Boulevard. It was constructed approxi- mately 15 years ago but was damaged by the July 3 storm. The Building Inspector was on site and there apparently was some discussion about expanding the building. Mr. Conroy thought it was zoned commercial, but the Building Inspector checked and found it to be residential. Mr. Almgren feels he issued a building only for the reconstruction of the existing building and not for the 16x40 addition that has been added to it. Mr. Conroy - stated the original building was 40x90 feet and he is adding 16 feet along the southern side of it, like a lean-to on the side. The Mayor continued that there are no plans on file. The building was reconstructed with the addition, and on Thursday afternoon Mr. Almgren red-tagged the building. But the construction company doing the work did not honor the red tag, which he finds very upsetting. Mr. conrof - stated he didn't know who the contractors were, stating he purchased the bU1 Iding rom Lyman Lumber out of Annandale, who contracted someone to do the construction. Council then reviewed the memo from the Clerk ultimately determining that according to the ordinances, Mr. Conroy had the right to reconstruct the building as it was, that he would have had the right to add to the building, but that the outside would have to be compatible with the principal structure. Right now it is just metal siding. The existing ordinance would require Mr. Conroy to put some type of siding on the lean-to. The Mayor stated he met with Mr. Conroy, and Mr. Conroy has agreed to instead put some rough-sawn cedar on the front of the entire building, that side facing Crosstown Boulevard, rather than on just the lean-to, if the Council would agree. Mr. Conroy - presented a sketch of what the building would look like with the rough- sawn cedar four feet high in the front and along the door and window openings. He stated the lean-to will be used to park his trai ler and his children's cars. He wouldn't mind siding the lean-to, but the south only faces into a swamp and the east is not seen by anyone. Special City Council Meeting August 15, 1983 - Minutes Page 5 (Jim Conroy Building Permit, Continued) After further discussion it was generally agreed that Mr" Conroy should be permitted to place the rough-sawn cedar along the entire front as proposed, with the addition of that cedar also being placed along the roof line on the fascia board, rather than along the southern and eastern walls of the addition to the building. The question was on the proper procedure that would be required, whether it could be a Council-initiated variance or whether it would need to go through the Planning and Zoning Commission. MOTION by Orttel, Seconded by Lachinski, that the Council make the recommendation that James Conroy apply for a variance from the provisions of Section 81 of Ordinance 8, Accessory Buildings, that requires a similiar facing material similiar to the home on the accessory buildings, and in lieu of that that the front of the building, that being the west side that faces Crosstown Boulevard, be decorated in some fashion to be determined by the Planning and Zoning Commission. Motion carried unanimously. The Clerk was also asked to contact the City Attorney as to whether or not the Council could initiate the variance without going through the Planning Commission. If the Council can simply act on it, it can be placed on tomorrow night's Agenda. (Councilman Lachinski left at this time, 9:44 p.m.) WATER PROBLEMS IN NORTHWOODS Mayor Windschitl reported that four or five wells have gone bad in the Northwoods Addition, it appearing that an acquifer is being lost in that area. Two we lls have failed, and there are two or three more that are having trouble. And because of the extra requirements for well drilling placed in this area by the State Health Department, the costs for redrilling these wells has almost doubled, making the cost almost pro- hi bit i ve. Councilman Orttel questioned whether the well dried up or if it malfunctioned because it is an old well, stating those items need to be determined before making any decisions. Mayor Windschitl stated the people are asking if they could get some help with the additional expense. Commissioner Haas felt for the county or city to use community block grant dollars would require the people to be in the low-income category. She did receive one call from a man along this line and she asked him to call the county, but she has not heard anything further about it. Councilman Elling stated he asked about low-interest money available for bad wells relating to the landfill problem, intending that anybody within the hazardous health area be eligible for a low-interest loan. If residents in that area have to pay $5,000 to $6,000 for a new well, he felt either the county or the city should be able to help them out. Mayor Windschitl stated the people are also concerned that even if they dig the new wells at the additional cost, there is no guarantee there will not be problems with contamination and/or the installation of municipal water down the road. Counc ilman Orttel stated if the people in the area want municipal water, they should petition for it, again stressing the importance of finding out whether the problem is the acquifer or maintenance. Commissioner Haas stated she will follow through with this tomorrow and find out in terms of wells failing if there is anything available from community block grant dollars or low-interest short-term loan type of thing. And she will get some information to the city in writing. Council discussion noted the State Health Agency placed the well drilling restriction in the area, and this shows the urgency of getting the cooperative agreement signed. The city is being forced to two extremes. The State, without knowledge, is saying the cost of drilling wells in the area must be doubled, and they then turn around and say they won't do the water feasibility study because they haven't proved that the water Special City Council Meeting August 15, 1983 - Minutes Page 6 (Water Problems in Northwoods, Continued) is contaminated. Councilman Elling also reported a house in Northwoods was for sale last year for $74,90D, and it just sold two weeks ago for $59,900 but will be used for rental property. He felt there is enough of a case to get the tax assessor to reassess property in that area to reflect those decreased values. There was some discussion as to the status of the cooperative agreement, with Commissioner Haas stating she would research that further tomorrow. MOTION by Orttel, Seconded by Elling, to adjourn. Motion carried on a 4-Yes, 1- Absent (Lachinski) vote. Meeting adjourned at 10:01 p.m. Respectfully submitted, 'Î . ---....-...-...-.--? \r\[Io~ ¿~--'\£~~ , Marce 11 a A. Pe ach Recotding Secretary