Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutJCC October 27, 1993 ~ CITY of ANDOVER ANDOVER CITY COUNCIL AND ANDOVER AUTO RECYCLING/JUNK YARD TASK FORCE JOINT MEETING - OCTOBER 27, 1993 MINUTES A Joint Meeting of the Andover City Council and the Andover Auto Recycling/Junk Yard Task Force was called to order by Mayor Jack McKelvey on October 27, 1993, 7:35 p.m., at the Andover City Hall, 1685 Crosstown Boulevard NW, Andover, Minnesota. Councilmembers present: Councilmember Larry Dalien Councilmember Don Jacobson Councilmember Mike Knight Councilmember absent: Councilmember Marge Perry Members present: Andover Auto Recyclers Association members - Penny DeNucci - Anoka Auto Wrecking JoAnne Wilber - wilber's Auto Parts Planning commission Chairperson, Bonnie Dehn Economic Development Committee member, Mike Auger Members absent: Planning Commission member, Jay Squires Economic Development Committee member, Bill Coleman Andover Auto Recyclers Association member - Harry Haluptzok - Best Auto Parts Also present: City Planner, Dave Carlberg Others DISCUSSION WITH MPCA REPRESENTATIVES Gene Soderbeck and Dan Wells - from the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency addressed the members regarding the National Pollutant Discharge Eliminate System (NPDES) Storm Water Permit Program. Mr. Soderbeck reviewed the legislation leading up to the program, that is the 1972 Clean Water Act and the 1987 amendments to that Act having to do with storm water. They are looking at point source discharges for both industries and municipalities. The goal of the EPA was to control storm water run off and the pollutants associated with it, which is the reason for the NPDES Permit. Because only cities of over 100,000 population were required to submit the permit, the only cities in Minnesota that are required to do so are Minneapolis and St. Paul. The EPA identified over 500 indus~rial-type activities and required that any industry that had storm water coming in contact with significant material stored outside must submit the NPDES Storm Water Permit by October, 1992. In Minnesota, the MPCA is handling the program. At this time, the same permit is used for all types of industrial activities. The industries are then to implement a program to prevent that contact with significant material stored outside. That can either be done by either covering the material or by containing all storm water on site. ../'I'1ì.~ ~ óY' " IIf/q'] - -- -> Andover City Council/Auto Recycling Task Force - Joint Meeting Minutes - October 27, 1993 Page 2 (Discussion with MPCA Representatives, Continued) Mr. Soderbeck then explained the industries then have one year from the date of issuance of the permit to implement practices and certify the implementation of those practices. The permit is a general one, but he recognized the auto recyclers are a unique facility. They are a critical component in the whole recycling concept the State is trying to implement, but they do pose a lot of environmental threats. The practices being suggested for the auto recyclers is to have an oil or fluid area, to look at the storage of the fluids, and to have a specific area to dismantle to minimize releasing the contaminates into the soil. It would be a benefit to have a covered area for dismantling to eliminate the infiltration currently taking place. Just installing a storm water retention pond doesn't take care of the infiltration problem. By issuing this permit, they can eliminate the current practice in auto recycling yards of disassembling by having these things done in an enclosed building. Furthermore, when a building is constructed, the contaminated soils are removed without having to use Superfund monies. Mr. Wells related an example of an auto recycling yard in southern Minnesota implementing these practices, taking a pro-active step to reduce storm water contamination. There was discussion with the MPCA representatives as to the agency's role in doing inspections and their recommendations for auto recycling industries. Mr. Soderbeck explained the second phase requires the industries to implement their practices and to certify it to their agency. Because of the limited budget, most will not be inspected. What they have learned, however, is that what works for some industries may not be suitable for others. This is still a learning process, and they are listening to the industries who are making good suggestions. They see the direction as tailoring the permits to specific categories of industries. At this time they do not have any specific requirements for the auto recycling industries, which is one of the higher risk industries for storm water contamination. They will be using the plan developed by John's Auto parts in Blaine as a model. Mr. Soderbeck estimated that it would be about a year and a half before specific requirements for auto recyclers will be in place. In the mean time, he encouraged the enactment of any pro-active plan immediately. He explained that the storage of parts inside also reduces contamination; because if it is stored outside, there is always some residue that eventually ends up in the soil. The next step of the permit will be more explicit and may require the removal of discolored soils first. Ms. Wilber stated they are trying to practice the best management practices now, and that is the reason they are asking for dismantling buildings and places to store their parts. It is also safer for their employees to dismantle inside because all power equipment would be used. She believed one of her employees would not have been injured last week if the dismantling would have been done inside, so it is also a safety issue for their employees. Almost everyone is willing to comply with the regulations to be able to dismantle and store within buildings. They see the requirement coming, and they would like to begin now. - - -.. - Andover City Council/Auto Recycling Task Force - Joint Meeting Minutes - October 27, 1993 Page 3 (Discussion with MPCA Representatives, Continued) Mr. Soderbeck stated everyone wins if the current practice of recycling which causes an environmental hazard now is changed. Under this proposal, remediation takes place at the same time business is taking place. Otherwise the businesses would have to be closed and would end up in Superfund activities. Mayor McKelvey explained the situation at a point is either waiting until the State comes forth with its regulations or becoming innovative and allow the Andover recyclers to move ahead environmentally. It was his opinion that the City should move in the direction of best management practices now, using John's Auto Parts in Blaine as the prime example, for both environmental reasons and for the beautification of the City. Mr. Soderbeck stated 75 to 90 percent of all pollutants result in the disassembly area of the recyclers. Just putting a cover over that area reduces the amount of pollutants by that much. Mr. Wells felt it is safe to say that that requirement is eventually coming. Councilmember Jacobson didn't think the Council had a problem with dismantling inside, but more with the fact that the yards are nonconforming now and also with the storage of parts inside versus the reduction in the size of the outdoor storage. DISCUSSION: PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO ALLOW ENVIRONMENTAL AND STORAGE BUILDINGS Mr. Soderbeck and Mr. Wells left the meeting at this time, after which the Council and Task Force discussed the two concerns brought up by Councilmember Jacobson. Ms. Wilber stated that John's Auto Parts does dismantling and storage of parts inside, but there is still 14 acres of cars outside. The parts that cannot be stored inside must be put outside, plus they still need so many cars for customers to pick the parts from. plus they need storage for cars as they are brought in because all cars brought in cannot be dismantled at once. The carcasses are actually a commodity and are crushed and moved out when the price is high, crushed and stored when the price is low. The question is how much they would be required to reduce the size. She questioned the equity of requiring those with larger acreages to reduce their outside storage, yet what happens to those yards that have very little storage now? The other question is what do they do with their property once it is cleared of carcasses? She would still have to pay taxes on it but would not be allowed to use it for her business. Ms. Wilber also noted that she is required to have insurance on her buildings; yet according to the ordinance, she would not be able to rebuild them if they were destroyed. The nonconformance status also raises questions with the ability to get mortgages on the buildings. Mayor McKelvey felt there is a greater potential for development of the rear portion of Anoka Auto Wrecking within the near future. The rear portions of Wilber's and Commercial's would not be developable until Commercial Boulevard is put through with another street constructed to . - -..-- -- --.-0 Andover City Council/Auto Recycling Task Force - Joint Meeting Minutes - October 27, 1993 Page 4 (Discussion: Proposed Amendment, Continued) the north to Bunker Lake Boulevard behind those recycling yards. The timetable for that proposal is not known. He didn't think the size of the yards could be reduced without having the buildings to store the parts. He suggested the City first takes the initiative to allow the recyclers to construct the buildings, which becomes a benefit to the City environmentally and aesthetically. Then the size of the yards could be reduced, say by 25 percent. The placement of the buildings could be such to provide a buffer. Between the buildings and berming, the Mayor felt the yards could be satisfactorily buffered to improve the area aesthetically. Councilmember Knight felt the greatest dilemma is the aesthetics of the recycling area. He would like to see the size reduced when the parts are stored inside. Mr. Auger asked if the City really wants to accomplish replacing the yards with tax-paying industrial property. By allowing the buildings, the lives of those businesses are being extended. Mayor MCKelvey felt that some of the existing yards will be replaced, as eight yards are not needed; but he didn't believe all of the yards must be replaced. Mr. Carlberg asked by allowing the environmental buildings to be reconstructed if destroyed, would the City also allow all other buildings to be reconstructed as well? The original goal was a redevelopment of this area, which means a change in uses. This allows those same uses to remain. He thought the City Attorney was addressing the environmental buildings only when he advised they could be allowed to be reconstructed if destroyed, but that he was not looking at the yards themselves. Mayor McKelvey didn't think it made much sense to allow the environmental buildings to be reconstructed but not the office buildings. He also did not get the same impression from the City Attorney on the reconstruction of buildings. Councilmember Jacobson stated the proposed changes allows the reconstruction of buildings if destroyed and allows the construction of structures to remove, drain and dismantle cars and storage of parts inside. It doesn't change anything else. If destroyed, however, the reconstruction must meet all existing codes of the City. Mayor McKelvey interpreted it as allowing reconstruction of all buildings, not just the environmental ones. The recyclers have already agreed to meet existing codes for construction of new buildings and reconstruction if estroyed. Ms. DeNucci agreed, stating she has also agreed to place a new front on their older buildings before constructing the new environmental buildings. Ms. Wilber also agreed that if destroyed, new or old buildings, they would be rebuilt to meet the current standards. Councilmember Jacobson stated in the beginning the discussion was on environmental buildings for dismantling, which he thought no one objected to. Now it has expanded to buildings for storage of parts, and he questioned the need to regulate the size and the storage of hazardous material, adding that verbiage into the proposed amendment. Ms. DeNucci Andover City Council/Auto Recycling Task Force - Joint Meeting Minutes - October 27, 1993 Page 5 (Discussion: Proposed Amendment, Continued) explained that was added because the City stressed the reduction of the size of the yards. The only way they can do that is by warehousing the parts. Mr. Carlberg stated the size is already regulated by the Zoning Ordinance in regard to coverage of the property. The hazardous material is regulated by the county. Several people representing the recylcers explained the county license, which every yard should have, and the regulations involved, noting they keep track of every gallon of fluid, every battery, every tire. Mr. Carlberg proposed Ordinance 44 be amended to require the junkyards to show proof of having a hazardous waste license from Anoka County before obtaining their yearly city license. Councilmember Jacobson also suggested a reference be made to the Zoning Ordinance in the proposed amendment in regard to the construction of buildings. Councilmember Jacobson was also concerned with the phrase in the proposed amendment that if destroyed over 50 percent, the building can be reconstructed upon the approval of the City Council. What criteria would the Council use to approve it? He felt it is too vague. Either define it or take it out. Mayor McKelvey didn't think that decision should be made by the Council. Councilmember Jacobson also stated the proposed five-year plan should be tied to something. Many of the things are already required by ordinance, so what does the City gain? Ms. Wilber asked what does the City want. Councilmember Knight thought to reduce the size of the yards. Ms. Wilber again asked if it is fair to the larger yards to reduce when the smaller yards can't? There was then a discussion on some of the problems seen in some yards with cars parked in the right of way or parked outside after hours, etc. Ms. DeNucci noted those are ordinance violations by some yards that the City must address. Those of them who run a good business and want to improve should not be punished because others do not comply. It is not their job to make others comply. They are making an effort to do what the City wants, but they cannot do it for other people. Mayor McKelvey noted of the three yards represented this evening, all of them have completed the first phase of the proposed five-year plan. Councilmember Jacobson suggested this plan or something everyone can agree to be tied into a longer-range clean-up or some change in the form of operation -- specifics the yards and the City agree to and the dates in exchange for allowing the environmental and storage buildings. Mr. Wilber stated there are really only two yards that have problems and are not always in compliance, and a third that is not really being operated. councilmember Knight felt something must be done to allow the operations to continue but to curb the sprawling of the storage of vehicles that makes the area unattractive. He didn't know how that could be done. Ms. Wilber didn't know either. They have regulations to meet for the MPCA and EPA, and they'd like some plan that the City would want them to do that they could work with; but they cannot control the other people moving into the City. Andover City Council/Auto Recycling Task Force - Joint Meeting Minutes - October 27, 1993 Page 6 (Discussion: Proposed Amendment, Continued) Councilmember Jacobson stated he marked suggested changes on the proposed amendment and suggested everyone else do the same. Copies of those changes could be sent to everyone, then meet again to discuss a final proposal. He is not opposed to the concept of environmental and storage buildings, but he felt the verbiage has to be accurately stated in the amendment. There was some discussion on whether the definition of environmental also includes the warehousing and storage of parts. Councilmember Jacobson stated the two structures are separated in the proposed amendment. Ms. DeNucci didn't see a problem with the definition of environmental including dismantling, removal of fluids, and warehousing. The Mayor noted everything that is off the ground is making the area more environmentally sound. Councilmember Jacobson is not against a building to store parts, but he again expressed the opinion that the verbiage in the amendment must be reconsidered and the issue of reduction be addressed. Councilmember Knight also had no problem with the buildings but would like to see the sizes reduced as the storage is brought inside. Mr. Carlberg stated the reduction must be tied to some way for them to utilize the land. Possibly it could be tied to a specific size reduction within six months of a public street being constructed. Ms. Dehn stated some yards would like to do this and others will not cooperate. She suggested the City set out the criteria a yard must meet regarding the improvement of the site before getting a building permit for the environmental and storage buildings if there is a problem with compliance. At this point, everyone agreed to submit to Mr. Carlberg suggested changes and additions to the proposed amendment to Ordinance 44 by November 5. He will supply all Task Force members with copies of those recommendations. It was agreed to hold another joint meeting of the City Council and Auto Recycling Task Force on Thursday, November 18, 1993, 7:30 p.m. at the Public Works Building. Mayor McKelvey adjourned the meeting at 9:54 p.m. Respectfully submitted, =- ' CJ-V-JL~L cl~cL Mar ella A. Peach Recor ing Secretary