05-27-2014 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

May 27,2014 for the berm/barrier construction area still somewhat conceptual. The applicant will be working to f,rnalize more detailed plans and those plans must be submitted to the Engineering/Public Works Department for final review and approval. The 2010 land use approvals, and associated sound mitigation berm, were the result of many complaints that were received from the residential neighborhood to the west, primarily the Rockstone Court neighborhood. There was a broader land use effort at the time to create a legislative means to permit Belair's crushing operation, which had been occurring for years un- p".-itt.a. This effort resulted in the creation of the Environmental Constraint Overlay Area zoning district. The standards in this zoning overlay were drafted specifically for Belair's use and bãsed upon a lot of the sound study they had undertaken. The most significant condition within the overlay related to sound, and restricted decibel levels measured at the nearest residential use to 56.5 dBA. The 56.5 dBA was a decibel level deemed appropriate in 2010, was written into the ordinance, and related to the loudest sound event on Belair's site, which was the bang of a tail gate. For perspective, the average background noise on Rockstone Court, u, -ðurur.d in 2010, was approximately 42 decibels and a sound level change (increase or decrease) of 10 decibels gives the perspective ofincreasing or decreasing sound by half' Staff explaíned the Planning Commission reviewed this item at their May 20'n meeting and recommends approval of Addendum No. 5 to the Sound Mitigation Plan subject to conditions with the deadline for the berm changed to September 30, 2014' Mike Murlowski, Murlowski Properties, explained the rubble barrier would be built within 10 days after he receives Council approval. He provided comment on the panels that would be ,rèd fot the sound wall noting they would take 10 to 12 weeks to manufacture. Councilmember Bauman supported the proposed extension as this would ensure that Mr. Murlowski had the concretepanels. She believed that Mr. Murlowski was committed to the project.-lt4r. Murlowski expressed concern with the wording regarding the pipe easement. Jim yarosh, Segal Brill representative for Mr. Murlowski, questioned if the pipe through the Murlowski property was a City pipe. Public Works Director'Wyffels stated this was the case. Mr. yarosh recommended the language regarding an easement be omitted from the conditions for approval. City Attorney LeFevere did not object to the word easement being omitted from the conditions and have this instead be called an encroachment. Motion by Councilmember Jacobsen seconded by Councilmember Burg to adopt a Resolution approving the request as submitted subject to six conditions, striking the word easement encroachment agreement and replacing itwith encroachment agreement 5 Ayes,0 Nays-Motion Carried 4. Consideration of Innsbruck Pond Stormwater District Boundaries. Report No. l4-134. City Manager tntter e>rplained Senior Engineering Sr.pervisor Sctrlichting would be presenting this item to Council. SeniorEngineering Sryervisor Schlichting reported the previously proposed Innsbruck Pond Taxation District Improvement Project included the City hiring a pond maintenance company to chemically treat Innsbruck Pond for weeds; purchase and install a pond fountain; and, create a storm ,"*", improvement taxing district of the 16 lots included on the petition to pay for the cost. This item was tabled by the Council with a recommendation for staff to redraw the taxation district boundaries; and to include alargu City contribution (greater than 25%:o) Ïor the area of Innsbruck Park to be included in the redrawn boundary. Staff presented three new PageTofll 4. Consideration of Innsbruck Pond Stormwater District Boundaries. Repoft No. l4-134.