PLAN COMMISSION

March 4, 2010                                                                                                                   

                                                                                                                                                               

Members present:  Knudson, Yoerg, Burchill, Olson and Selissen

 

Others present:  Marie Roe, Rick Lambert, Craig Shirley, Jack Breault, Ron Garrison, Dick Erickson, Tony Tomashek, Larry Lemke, Dick Stout, Dick Grekoff, Roger Humphrey, Steve Harl, Pat Swenson, Gordon Conard, Randy Hanson, Denny Darnold and others

 

The meeting was called to order by Chairman Knudson at 7:00 p.m.

 

A motion was made by Yoerg, seconded by Burchill to approve the January 28, 2010 meeting minutes.

Motion carried.

 

Public hearing and consideration of an application for a conditional use permit to expand the area for non-metallic mining in the St. Croix Business Park from 9.3 to 18.9 acres, Outlot 1, St. Croix Business Park – Milestone Materials.  Chairman Knudson reviewed the hearing notice and called the hearing to order.  Knudson suggested a presentation by Milestone Materials and then public comment.  Ron Garrison, representing Milestone Materials reviewed a Power Point presentation noting that Milestone currently has a permit to quarry up to 9.3 acres of the St. Croix Business Park (SCBP) area and is requesting to be able to extend that area to the north and east up to a total of 18.9 acres.  The St. Croix Business Park Corporation has agreed to allow the mining, upon city approval, for a ten year period with two, five-year renewal provisions for a total of 20 years.  Garrison noted that Milestone Materials has operated the Mimbach Quarry since 1996.  The quarry is entirely in the city of Hudson, Garrison explained.  The rock is Oneota Dolomite and is up to 75 feet thick.  Garrison reviewed an aerial photo showing the location of the proposed operations on the SCBP property and that the direction of the proposed mining operations will be from south to north / northeast.  Operation permits that are required of non-metallic mining operations include air quality, ground and stormwater runoff, safety and health and blasting, Garrison noted.  The reclamation plan will include the removal and stockpiling of topsoil and soil to later be used in reclamation; the soils replaced will be seeded; grading will be completed to assure proper drainage; and the site reclaimed for potential industrial use.  A cross-section of the quarry area was shown illustrating the existing conditions and conditions after reclamation.  The east facing bluff will be lowered by approximately 40 feet.

 

Yoerg asked about the life expectancy of the quarry in the proposed 18.9 acres.  Garrison noted that the life expectancy of the 18.9 acre area is 20 years.  A total of approximately 900,000 cubic yards of rock exist in that area.  Yoerg asked why not go deeper in the existing quarry.  Garrison noted that sandstone exists underneath, and the quarry can only go so deep.

 

Rick Lambert, 405 New Century Drive (town of Hudson) commented that the blasting that occurs is very disruptive and has done damage to his residence located south of the quarry.  He is not pleased that the quarry may be expanded and that trees on the east bluff will disappear.  Olson asked how long he has resided in the area.  Lambert answered since 2001.

 

Craig Shirley, owner of the Special Children Center facility (located at the west end of Enloe Street in the St. Croix Business Park) stated that he was advised, by Denny Darnold, when the property was purchased that trees may possibly be removed.  He expressed concern that his property is in close

 

Page 2, Plan Commission

March 4, 2010

 

proximity to the quarry operation and that the blasts are disruptive and that the scenic value of the east facing bluff will be disturbed, noting that the bluff will be lowered in height by about 45 feet from an elevation of 960 feet to 915 feet.  Shirley commented that the proposed berm may look nice depending on the investment and the amount of trees planted.  He noted that investment will later be removed to spread the topsoil and other soils on the floor of the quarried areas.

 

Shirley noted that noise is not the issue, but the shaking of the ground and building improvements is disruptive to the children that are at the center for treatment of autistic kids.  Shirley expressed concern that the property values will decline due to the expansion of the mining operations.  Shirley asked about the proposed buffer / berm.  Will the berm and landscaping shield the view of the quarry, so that it cannot be seen?

 

It was discussed that the floor of the quarry will be at 876 feet and the top of the quarried area on the east side of the quarry will be at 915 feet or about 39 feet from the floor to the top.

 

Tony Tomashek, Milestone Materials noted that the removal of trees and the construction of the berm will be completed in phases.

 

Marie Roe, 407 New Century Drive (town of Hudson) commented that she resides south of Tower Road and south of the quarry.  She noted that when she bought her home she was not aware of the quarry, and it was not disclosed to her by the realtor.  She commented that the blasting is very disruptive and that the house shakes and damage has occurred due to the blasting.  As blasting continues, the value of the home will decline.  She stated the proposal is not acceptable.  She asked why blasting occurred in recent weeks.  Dick Erickson, Milestone Materials commented that they blast as rock is needed.

 

Jack Breault, St. Croix Business Park Corporation (SCBPC) stated the corporation has worked with nearby residents to address any issues that they may have; however, only a few complaints have been received over the years.  Complaints or concerns should be reviewed with the city, SCBPC and Milestone Materials.

 

Rick Lambert asked if the SCBPC would be willing to address damage issues caused by the blasting.  Breault answered yes if it can be determined that the damage has been caused by the blasting at the quarry.  Breault reiterated the SCBPC has been cooperative in working with nearby residents in addressing their concerns.

 

Knudson asked if there were any additional comments.  None were received.  A motion was made by Yoerg, seconded by Selissen to close the public hearing.  Motion carried.  7:36 p.m.

 

Yoerg asked if the time of year, with frozen ground conditions, may have contributed to the recent concerns expressed by nearby residents and businesses.  He asked if technology has advanced to allow blasting to be more efficient to address the expressed concerns and minimize the effects of blasting.

 

Tomashek stated that they blast within the guidelines of the state code.  He noted that vibrations will travel through ground well below the elevation of the blasting.  He noted that damage to homes may be

 

 

Page 3, Plan Commission

March 4, 2010                                                                                                                                   

 

caused by a number of reasons such as heat, humidity or natural settling.  Tomashek explained that they will send out an independent inspector to review the structures if damage is thought to be caused by the blasting.  Blasts generally occur in mid-day.  He noted that blasting has only occurred four times each of the last three years and two times so far in 2010.

 

Burchill asked how many times a year blasts occur.  Tomashek explained that blasts occur in a 6 to 8 month time period when the quarry is active, generally March through October.  Olson asked how many blasts may occur in 2010.  Tomashek responded possibly 4 to 5 total, including the two that have already occurred.

 

Knudson noted that the direction of mining operations will be north and east or away from the residences.

 

Tomashek explained that when mining is oriented east / west and blasts occur the vibrations are more strongly felt north or south of the blasting area.

 

Knudson opined that there will not be a significant change in view.

 

Shirley commented that the expansion will rid a pastoral view of the area west of the business park with the proposed removal of trees.  Also another concern is the outdoor treatment of children with sensory issues.  Shirley concluded that some of the trees to be removed on the south end of the area to be quarried are currently about 40 feet high.

 

A motion was made by Yoerg, seconded by Burchill to recommend to the Common Council to approve the conditional use permit and the expansion from 9.3 to 18.9 acres on the St. Croix Business Park property with the same conditions that were initially approved:

-           A minimum of three feet of dirt cover required as part of the reclamation plan.

-          An erosion control plan for the site is to be submitted for approval by the city engineer and community development director for the designated quarry area.

-          A security in the form acceptable to the city attorney of $4,000 per acre to secure the implementation of the reclamation plans.

-          No sale of black dirt from the quarry.

-          Hauling access road to access at Hanley Road only.

Motion carried.

 

Public hearing and consideration of an application for a conditional use permit for an 80 unit assisted living & memory care housing facility with licensing for a community based residential facility (CBRF) & residential care apartment complex (RCAC), 653-661 Ban Tara Lane (south of Center Drive and east of Carmichael Road) – Blue Jay Properties, LLC.  Chairman Knudson called the public hearing to order, reviewed the hearing notice and requested public comment.  None was received.  A motion was made by Yoerg, seconded by Selissen to close the public hearing.  Motion carried.  7:58 p.m.

 

Dick Grekoff, project coordinator reviewed the general plan and introduced the Tealwood Management Company that will provide on-site administration of the proposed facility.  Steve Harl, V.P. of Operations

Page 4, Plan Commission

March 4, 2010                                                                                                                   

 

commented that Tealwood has been providing administrative services to 44 senior housing projects since 1989 in Minnesota, Iowa, Nebraska and South Dakota.  Pat Swenson, RN provided information about patient care.

 

Olson asked what location in Minnesota may be similar in nature.  Harl noted that The Colony in Eden Prairie would be a similar facility.  Swenson noted that a registered nurse is not on duty 24 hours, but is on call.  The dispensing of medications will vary per the individual needs of the residents, but generally is administered by a LPN.

 

Knudson noted that the provision of staff and dispensing of medications is regulated by Wisconsin Administrative Rules.

 

Olson inquired if the memory care facility is secured.  Swenson answered yes.  Swenson noted that a RN is on-site 40 hours / week and LPNs are on-site 16 hours / day.

 

A motion was made by Burchill, seconded by Selissen to recommend approval of the conditional use permit for an 80 unit assisted living and memory care facility with licensing for a community based residential facility (CBRF) and residential care apartment complex (RCAC) with the following conditions:

-          The maximum number of units may not exceed 80 units total.

-          The facility must receive and maintain Wisconsin Department of Health Services licenses for a community based residential facility (CBRF) – DHS Chapter 83 and a residential care apartment complex (RCAC) – DHS Chapter 89.  Copies of the licenses shall be provided to the city of Hudson.

-          Approval of the final development plans for Ban Tara Commons, 80 unit assisted living and memory care facility.

-          Require an access and utility easement with the city of Hudson.

-          Review of the conditional use permit one year upon issuance of the building permit.

Motion carried.   

 

Concept/final development plans for an 80 unit memory care/assisted living housing complex, 653-661 Ban Tara Lane (south of Center Drive & east of Carmichael Road) –  Blue Jay Properties, LLC / West Lake Builders.  Grekoff introduced Roger Humphrey, project engineer.  Humphrey noted that the property was recently annexed to the city of Hudson.  Humphrey reviewed the proposed site and building improvements.  It was noted that the project will be developed in two phases; the construction of the 64 unit facility in 2010 and the two – eight unit structures in 2011.  Humphrey explained that the water system will be looped and will be a public system and that the sanitary sewer lines will be a private system, but connected to the city system.  The water main will be extended to the south edge of the property.  Storm water will be a series of four (4) storm water ponds; the two (2) main ponds will serve for rate control and water quality.

 

Yoerg asked about the removal of the private septic systems.  Humphrey noted that the septic systems will be abandoned with removal of the existing homes and per city of Hudson specifications.

 

 

 

Page 5, Plan Commission

March 4, 2010                                                                                                                   

 

Darnold noted that plans were amended to reduce the amount of off-street parking, but to provide for proof of parking to accommodate for additional parking if needed in the future.

 

Yoerg asked if the buildings will block the view of the existing residences on top of the bluff.  Grekoff answered that the view of the existing residences would not be blocked as the residences are located about 30 to 40 feet above the roofline of the buildings.  Yoerg inquired about the number of trees that will need to be removed.  Grekoff explained that the trees east of the buildings will not be disturbed.  Darnold asked about saving some of the trees located near the road as they were of a size that could be saved and replanted.  Grekoff stated that it was their intent to replant the trees that could be saved.

 

A motion was made by Burchill, seconded by Yoerg to recommend approval of the final development plans for Ban Tara Commons, 80 unit assisted living and memory care facility, 653 – 661 Ban Tara Lane as proposed by Blue Jay Properties, LLC with the following conditions:

-          Amendment of plans per the city engineer comments (3-3-10 memo) and fire department  (6-19-09 memo) with building permits to be withheld until plans are accepted by the city engineer and fire department

-          Require an access and utility easement with the city of Hudson

-          Abandon private well and septic systems per municipal ordinance

Motion carried.

 

Zoning amendments recommendations, consistency with zoning district classification & comprehensive plan land use designations – Community Development Director.  Darnold suggested removing the rezoning of the properties at 911 Fourth Street (city), the two properties on Coulee Road (Gaffer and Caruso) and the property on the east side of STH 35 and south of Hanley Road (Bieneman Farm) to re-review and conduct hearings at a later date and to add two properties located on Third Street across from city hall.

 

A motion was made by Burchill, seconded by Yoerg to recommend rezoning of the properties as proposed (listed on proposed hearing notice except the properties listed above) to provide for consistency between the city comprehensive plan and the zoning map.  Motion carried.

 

Payment in lieu of required parking, amendments to Municipal Code Zoning Code, Section 225-48 H (3) (s) Off-street parking/commercial and Section 235-36, Management of utility for vehicle & parking/municipal utility – Community Development Director.  Burchill asked if the fund created by the payment in lieu of required off-street parking will be the same as the existing maintenance fund for the downtown parking lots.  Knudson commented that this would be a separate fund and would only be used to provide new or expanded off-street parking in the downtown area.  Darnold explained that the program could be used to purchase private parking for conversion or use as public parking lots.

 

Darnold noted that the fee per stall has not been established and is under review by the city engineer.

 

A motion was made by Burchill, seconded by Yoerg to recommend approval of the draft amendments to Section 255-48, Zoning Code and Section 235-35, Vehicles and Parking to establish a payment in lieu of required off-street parking  program and to set a public hearing for amendment to the zoning code.  Motion carried.

Page 6, Plan Commission

March 4, 2010                                                                                                                                   

 

Change of “areas for parking vehicles” at 911 Fourth Street and 700 First Street (city) properties – Community Development Director.  Knudson explained that the city attorney has advised the city of a provision in the state statutes that require the plan commission to review and report to the Common Council prior to the city selling or terminating use of city property for “areas of parking vehicles.”  Because the city is considering the sale of the building and parking lot at 911 Fourth Street and the building at 701 Second Street and the possibility of including use of some of the parking stalls in the parking lot between the buildings at 700 First Street and 701 Second Street, the plan commission needs to review this issue. 

 

Yoerg asked about the current arrangement of the parking lot at 911 Fourth Street with Bethel Lutheran Church and the city.  Knudson noted that if the building parking lot is sold that Bethel Lutheran Church may decide whether to continue the arrangement; if not, the owner will need to reimburse the church for its investment in developing the parking lot per existing agreements.

 

A motion was made by Burchill, seconded by Yoerg that the plan commission does not object to the sale or release of off-street parking at 911 Fourth Street or all or part of the parking at the parking lot between the buildings at 700 First Street and 701 Second Street.  Motion carried.   

 

Amendments to Municipal Code, Chapter 202 – Signs (sign ordinance).  Olson suggested that a review of new regulations adopted by the city of Rochester, Minnesota for electronic signs may be of value.  Knudson noted that for discussions with the Downtown Council he had prepared a presentation that included video clips (YouTube) demonstrating varied rate of change of message.  Knudson noted that he is inclined to believe that a message transition of every six (6) to eight (8) seconds is not objectionable.  The plan commission will need to determine what transition rate will be acceptable and under what criteria the city considers approval of electronic signs.

 

A motion was made by Yoerg, seconded by Selissen to postpone discussion on the sign ordinance until the March 25th meeting.  Motion carried.

 

Other business for information purposes only or for placement on future agenda.   None was discussed.

 

A motion was made by Yoerg, seconded by Olson to adjourn.  Motion carried.   9:03 p.m.

 

Respectfully submitted,

Dennis Darnold, Secretary