foreign foreign foreign foreign well good evening and welcome it is 6 30 it is Monday July the 25th 2022 and it's time for our Burnsville Planning Commission meeting tonight's Planning Commission meeting is being held in person and virtually via Zoom as chair I'll be leading the pub Planning Commission meeting and the public is welcome to participate when invited throughout the meeting members of the public May attend the meeting in person or they can join us via Zoom if attendees experience audio problems on Zoom we suggest you leave the meeting and then try rejoining that usually fixes the problem additional instructions on how to participate tonight's agenda and any background information we get are all posted online at the Burnsville website which is Burnsville Mn Dot gov and on the public meeting calendar as usual tonight's meeting will also be available for viewing on bctv and on the city's website if you're unable to participate this evening or you're watching a rerun please submit your public testimony to come to City staff VIA mail or by sending an email to City staff or sending it directly to City Hall you may participate on tonight's meeting by going to zoom.us slash join and typing meeting ID 973-1502 -2578 once you're logged into the meeting please use the chat feature to let the moderator know which item you plan to speak to also you can call into the meeting by dialing 651-372-8299 again you would use meeting ID 973-1502-2578 for each public hearing I will open up time when callers may speak to that item and give more instructions at that time your call will be muted until then please note there might be a slight delay due to difference in Technologies so if you find that um you have your computer turned up or your TV turned up please mute those so that we don't have a echoing effect in the delay with that I am going to move on to the agenda and looking at the agenda tonight looks like we have two public hearings and updates so any additions to the agendas commissioners see enough I'll turn to staff any changes no changes all right well I'll look for a motion commissioner Braddock motion to adopt the agenda has been made by promotional Braddock commissioner Awad I second the motion second by commissioner Awad all in favor please signify by saying aye aye and that is unanimous next uh you should have had um received meeting minutes from our last meeting which was July the 11th 2022. everybody got a chance to read them I'm assuming any changes to the minute says they were listed that's any from the Commissioners staff no changes from staff no chance no change is made do I have a motion to accept the meeting minutes commissioner Wallace make a motion to approve the minutes motion's been made commissioner Brad and second by commissioner Braddock all in favor please signify by saying aye aye once again we're unanimous that brings us to number three on the agenda and it's a public hearing for the application of a Panda Restaurant Group for Planned unit development Amendment for construction of a freestanding fast food restaurant with a drive-through on the vacant parking lot parcel located south of County Road 42 and west of the planned Aldrich Avenue Extension known as lot 6 block 1 Burnsville Center Third Edition here to present is our applicants or our urban planner from stantic Kristin baldando baldonado I'm going to keep getting I'm getting used to it myself I'm like my name down so I don't say the wrong one well congratulations then oh so as long as you just got married right a couple years ago okay okay take it over now oh God well good evening Commissioners um my name is Kristen baldonado and I am a planner with stantec and this is a public hearing for an application from Panda Restaurant Group from a planned unit development a PUD amendment to construct a freestanding fast food restaurant with a drive-through on the vacant parcel located south of County Road 42 and west of the plan aldrick Avenue Extension also known as lot 6 block 1 of the Burnsville Center Third Edition of the subject parcel is located just north of the Burnsville Center mall and is just over one acre in size a 1.08 Acres the underlying zoning district is mixed use and the parcel has a plan unit development overlay the proposed use as a freestanding restaurant is a conditional use within the mixed-use zoning District the 2040 comprehensive plan guides this property as bus or business retail office and the adjacent Parcels to the south east and west are also zoned mixed use and guided the same as the subject property it's a little history and background information the Burnsville Center plan unit development was recently amended it's in September of this past year to divide up the original PUD for the shopping mall in order to better accommodate Redevelopment around the mall as mentioned the parcel is just west of the planned Aldrich Avenue Extension a key Improvement component within the Burnsville Center Village plan that was adopted in 2019. the subject property is currently operating as a vacant parking lot approved by the amended planned unit development agreement in September of 2021 and is therefore a legal non-conforming use within the mixed-use district the Pud Amendment will allow the subject property to operate as a quick service restaurant the site is currently and proposed to remain accessible from the shared shopping center access some PUD Amendment benefits the Pud Amendment benefits include that the proposed use is compatible with the existing nearby uses and it is also compatible with the 2040 comprehensive plan goal to increase the economic vitality of the shopping center area by redeveloping Parcels that are used predominantly for parking today because so much parking already exists within the mall area and surrounding this particular property the applicant has proposed a reduction in their required parking spaces those parking spaces have been replaced with Landscaping this parcel is already in unique shape with it being very wide about 550 feet wide without a lot of depth less than 100 feet in depth and there was also right away taking from for The Aldrich Avenue extension on the Eastern side of the property so this proposal is actually using quite a unique lot and finally this amendment would bring the non-conforming use into zoning compliance and the deviations include a reduction in the building setbacks the accessory structure which is the trash enclosure is located closer to the county road 42 than the restaurant building itself and as a result of the unique lot shape the applicant was challenged to fit in the required building perimeter Landscaping but as mentioned Landscaping has been increased in other areas the required parking minimums are not met but again this is substituted for landscaping and finally the number of signs in construction style of the signage deviates from the code requirements onto the site plan so the site plan is shown here which depicts three accesses three two-way access points into the site and one exit only for for the drive through aisle so here's one here's two here's three two-way access and then here's the driveway exit only uh there are two separate parking lots the West lot has seven parking spaces and includes access to the trash enclosure and the East lot has 26 parking spaces and is also where the drive-through is accessed the drive-through Lane has enough space for approximately 20 cars where six are required by code the applicant anticipates that most patrons will be utilizing the drive-through to pick up food the building itself is just over 2 600 feet square feet and has 32 seats on the interior in the proposed site plan as we see it today does not include bicycle parking but a condition has been added that bicycle parking be incorporated into the site plan prior to building permit issuance landscape plan the applicant is proposing to remove eight existing trees and install seven new trees for a total of 16 trees they're proposing five overstory trees above the required five the city code requires 141 shrubs and therefore the applicant has proposed 245 shrubs above the requirement the pervious or green space requirement is 25 of the lot and the applicant is proposing approximately 30 Green Space exceeding the pervious requirement by approximately five percent the plan shows a three and a half to four and a half foot wide perimeter landscaping around the building here here and here here for approximately 62 linear feet in total where 102 linear feet is required or about 50 percent of the 204 linear feet building perimeter Landscaping requirement therefore the required 50 billing perimeter landscape requirement is not met in response to this deviation a condition has been added that an outdoor patio or enhanced building entrance area be incorporated to provide a direct public benefit the zoning ordinance allows a reduction in building perimeter Landscaping when utilizing aesthetic design features located within 10 feet of the building wall and in the past two years all three drive through restaurant puds that were approved included in outdoor seating element of varying scale and size the most recent PUD included a reduction in Perimeter Landscaping in exchange for a patio area which is permitted by the zoning code and the center Village Redevelopment Vision plan identifies key components for redevelopment of this area that includes creating outdoor seating areas that contribute to a more human scaled and walkable design a pedestrian friendly building entrance can be obtained through a seating area utilities this shows a utility plan and the building uh will be connected to both City Water and Sewer and the lot already has existing storm sewer infrastructure and some of that will be updated the building includes Stone and wood look materials on all four sides with metal accents and sweeping roof details the proposed building is 22 feet tall and at the tallest point of the souping element these materials meet the intent of the city code including accent materials contrasting and Visually pleasing colors and a combination of vertical and horizontal design features the roof Mountain mechanical units are proposed to be hidden from view with a parapet on all four sides the applicant proposes one sign on all four building sides and will be required to obtain sign permits the city code allows two wall signs and requires a specific construction style of individual raised mounted letter signs the applicant is proposing deviations to the number of wall signs and the required construction style signage is signage is proposed on all four building walls and the construction style does not meet the code requirements and as I mentioned previously this PUD amendment process would allow these deviations the seven foot four inch trash enclosure will screen the containers and is designed to match the Aesthetics of the main structure and staff has added the condition for the applicant to add an outdoor seating area or enhanced building entrance as well as bicycle parking prior to issuance of the building permit and with these conditions staff is supportive of The Proposal to their recommendation so staff recommends that the Planning Commission recommend to the city council approval of the plan unit development Amendment subject to the following conditions one the conditions of previously approved PUD shall remain in full force and effect to a bicycle parking element shall be incorporated into the site plan prior to issuance of a building permit three and outdoor patio or enhanced Plaza space with dining area shall be incorporated into the site plan prior to building permit issuance for exterior lighting she'll be downcast and shielded on all faces five all outstanding engineering comments dated June 30th 2022 shall be addressed to the satisfaction of the city engineer prior to building permit issuance and six deferred Park dedication fees in the amount of 18 750 must be paid prior to the issuance of the building permit that's all I have mm-hmm well thank you appreciate that um the very detailed explanation of the project any questions Commissioners commissioner Wallace a very good presentation thank you uh the one question that I have is in regards to the drive-through um showing all you said 20 cars I I know by the design that showed like 22 cars in there if I counted them correctly is that drive through going to be wide enough for let's say you're the 18th car in line and want to get out of line to drive around or is there some type of additional uh access where they can exit that drive-through line if need be but I think when you're in I'm not sure Sarah do you know so as proposed it's not wide enough or there's no early exit that's been placed uh one of the outstanding engineering comment memos does relate to finding a solution for that but um on the this plan Set uh it's not indicated it's very similar to um the plan that was approved over by um the former roasted pear property where they have that extra exit um and that is a condition that is potentially looking being looked into comments that they need to address going to address it it looks like from the Landscaping plan they may need to remove a tree so we are still working through that detail at this time they have not indicated that they're able to do that have an early exit out of the drive-through but we'll continue to work with them okay thank you great question any other questions or comments commissioner Timmerman thanks for your presentation Miss baldonado um I have a question about where Aldrich is coming into the shopping center [Music] Aldrich as you're probably aware has had discussion about either being an overpass or an underpass uh of some sort of um I don't know pedestrian friendly way to get across County Road 42 in a safe manner um I noticed in one of your slides you commented about um the right way that the city of Burnsville will receive what I guess can we go to the pictometry and can you just talk me through the the actual Logistics of the space that will be required if an underpass is built there and if that's sufficient for future development there commissioner Timmerman I can probably take that so we're currently working on a preliminary design for The Aldrich extension and looking at the viability of an underpass or if it will need to stay at grade or not far enough along in the design but if we were to do an underpass there would be some substantial retaining walls and those would all need to stay within the right of way that we have so the right-of-way has been platted and dedicated and that's the the area that we're working within and you feel it would be sufficient with some engineering yes yes um you know preliminarily yes and if something were to occur that we needed to take additional Land There is that Landscaping buffer there that they've put the building on the opposite side we were supportive of that um we'd have to work with them and potentially can reconfiguring it's just too far we're too early in the process to make any recommendations to the to to change how they've laid it out yeah I think this is um I mean this is a premier spot Center Village and so I think what really stands out to me is that those developers who want to jump in early are going to get some really really nice spots like this project here I think it's a nice project I think with the foresight of the the center Village Vision um I think it's going to set the stage pretty nicely for additional development so Kudos nice presentation good looking um restaurant I think that um I don't see any problems with the okay any other questions from Miss baldonado or city staff all right well thank you we're going to open up the public hearing now it is 6 49. anyone wishing to speak to this item may come forth to the left turn or if anybody is on Zoom that wants to speak onto this issue they can let them moderator know via the chat feature and zoom or if you're on the phone you can dial star six with the moderator and we have a gentleman coming up to the lectern can you please state your name and address for the record please Eric abelin um with Heights Venture architect so I'm actually the applicant um at 1111 North Loop West Suite 800 Houston Texas 77008 um thank you I just want to follow up on what Christian talked about his great presentation really presented it well I did want to talk about a little bit more about the vision and this this thin little site really sets the stage for that Corridor we're trying to react to existing conditions with parking lot and that shared Ring Road but we're also trying to look for what's this going to look like when that becomes a Boulevard style when we've established the other side of the parking lot the south of that access Drive becomes mixed use becomes office becomes a tree-lined Boulevard we've we've really did a hard a really good job of trying to establish that perimeter and we wanted to keep our vehicular use knowing that we wanted something a little bit more pedestrian oriented for the entire development let's keep the vehicular use towards 42 that's where it belongs so everything south of you know our our small parking lot is going to be is going to be buffered by the the tree line by the new six foot sidewalk that allows you you know access to that development and then all of the vehicular uses then are then screened from the future people that are going to be utilizing the South but it still kind of balances with the vehicular use keeps it sequestered from The Pedestrian the the site kind of forced us you know into the building location the west side is full of easements sanitary storm and all these other good things so while we wanted to be closer to that corner we couldn't get there so that Western parking lot while you know we've had a lot of discussions about how inappropriate it is why do you need a second parking lot this is really kind of the utilitarian parking lot and unfortunately it's it's near that corner but the easement sort of preclude any sort of really meaningful development um employees are going to park there dumpster enclosures over there all the good stuff is on the east side the guests come from the East side the doors are facing the east side but we also want to be tight to the new streetscape right so we're starting to create this Urban streetscape fabric with the building tight and close to the uh to the sidewalk and allow for that streetscape to happen so the patio I think is going to reinforce that right at that corner where the Ada parking spaces are will sacrifice a little bit of landscaping there a tree that would be a great spot for a little corner piece of a patio to tie right into the entrance you know the drive-through Escape Lane is a bit of a challenge because it creates a bailout a single bailout where it's not nearly normally expected it is going to be in the right direction which is to our benefit but again you know we'll we'll maybe move a tree sacrifice a tree and see if we can get that bailout Lane at the right spot probably a couple cars before the order boards um you know in the honeymoon period that'll be a good drive-through stack and it'll be full we feel like we have a really strong cue so we're not going to back out into the uh you know the rest of the development and again we'll keep that separation strong our current curb line is 34 feet from the right-of-way on Aldrich so if there is something that needs to happen in the future um you know we've sacrificed six six parking spaces on that side and five parking spaces near that that Northern Corner in order to provide a little bit more flexibility in order to provide more Landscaping five percent over it's not a lot but on a one acre lot there's a lot that's going on here I think that's a real win and I think we've we've done a fair job of that and with regard to storm water uh we're installing a rain Garden kind of in the Middle where the existing storm sewer is so it's going to filter all our water before it gets into the main system and help address some of the water quality concerns are there any other questions I'd be happy to entertain them but I appreciate your time appreciate your consideration well we appreciate that um when you when you go into the building or are you do you expect a lot of dining customers into the Panda Express is it more of a drive-through type of operation do you find locations typically they run about 60 40. 60 40 drive through heavy over the last two years you know we really can't count that data but that has also taught us different ways that people ACCESS food right so you have third party carryout that enter the building you have um online ordering so it's a temporary parking situation and you also do have an increased drive through awareness we have 32 seats in the dining room and they really do expect those to be used they're really family-centric so they're they're really strong in having dinner together as a family whether that's you take it home with you and eat at your home or eat at Panda's home and that's what they call this building style the panda home because they want people to again revisit and re-re-find that that dinner time that we've lost over the last several years so we only have 32 seats and we're only providing 35 parking spaces and some of those you know five or six of those will be taken by employees so it's a pretty tight uh site as far as their typical operations for 2600 square foot restaurant but I think they'll make it work okay yeah I was noticing that with the math when you said 32 spots with 35. seating or um any other questions commissioner Awad um nice uh I just want to compliment you on a nice design on a very challenging lot and uh I appreciate your presentation so thank you for sharing that information with us thank you commissioner Timmerman a couple questions for you uh I really liked how you talked about this project it sounds like you have some Visions for the South Side uh and maybe some future development in this space as well which I think is exciting and maybe you're hinting at something to come down the road I'd love to no I'm uh there's a lot of space right it's a lot of space available so I'm trying trying to help Regina right um so yeah I was selling what was my question though I'm sorry I'm trying to remember um oh I know what it was uh do you know is there a different concept here I mean there is a Panda Express in Apple Valley about two miles from here is this A New Concept do they plan on moving their operation completely to Burnsville because they're so excited to join our community um do you have a relationship with that either location franchisee I'm curious about that so this Market this is a really strong Market um I think I don't know the particulars but I would assume that that location stays in place generally speaking the concept's going to be the same the same food service the same menu it's a different style building totally different interior uh the first one is going to be built they'll probably start construction in about a month so um this is a really New Concept for Panda Express new design they've put a lot of work and effort into try to elevate more of their brand to match what they feel is there is the the quality of the cuisine you know we say that we're fast food but it's more of this Quick Serve fast casual type we're trying to align more with Paneras and things like that um there's a new location that's uh trying to go through this process as well in Lakeville and so we're we're strategically growing in in the kind of the Southern uh metropolitan area and there are a few right now Roseville is being built right now and um they have a presence right now in in Minneapolis uh Richfield there's a TI little little TI that's happening so I think it's about it's all about growth so I don't I don't see anything um closing down when they do find new locations they're very strategic about not taking too much market share from existing stores and they feel like the market can support that great thank you any other questions commissioners all right thank you so much for sharing I appreciate that thank you any other person that would like to speak to this issue may walk up to the select turn or I'm being told there's nobody on Zoom and I'm not seeing a mad rush so I'm going to close the public hearing at 6 57. I'm going to turn to the Commissioners what do you guys think commissioner Wallace um I'm definitely in support of this the only thing and for a point of order is for the recommendations of the city council I'd just like to add the number seven in there that they do continue to work with the engineering staff to look at that exit Lane uh this man were you gonna say something how would we like to like um well so number five says that all the outstanding review comments must be satisfied and it's currently one of them okay so I don't know if you wanted to call it out we I don't know how that works from a planning site or if it needs to be a condition it's it's already kind of a condition embedded in that memo do we make it a 5B highlight that specifically I think I I think we take the point that it that it's a recommendation to to make that happen so maybe we can work on the language of that it is included in the memo and the memo is attached to your report that outlines those outstanding comments I I just definitely want to call it out for the city council to look at because I know in that other property the the former roasted pear one um they were able to achieve it in that small location and I think that was a a win-win for everybody and I just think with the the length of this drive I think it's needed and you don't want to be stuck in line if you wanted to leave well that too that too of course of course because I will visit absolutely any other comments questions concerned I too agree with this project I think it's a great play great thing for the start of the center Village it's pretty much our first first kind of outside building coming in so this is this is great news this is a good good start forward I am looking for uh you know commissioner why do you have something to say hi I'd like to make a motion Mr wad please go ahead uh I move that we recommend to the city council approval of the application of a planned unit development amendment to construct a quick service restaurant with a drive through on the vacant parcel located south of County Road 42 and west of the planned Aldrich Avenue Extension known as lot six block One Burnsville Center Third Edition according to the six conditions that we six point five conditions are listed emotions been made by commissioner why do I have a second commissioner Wallace oh second second by commissioner Wallace all in favor please signify by saying aye aye that is unanimous it is going to be on the City council's Tuesday August the 1st they're um consent agenda excuse me man we have a United unanimous consent that means it goes to the consent agenda and the council will look at it and all consent to items at one time with that we'll move to the next item on our agenda that is a public hearing for the application of Burnsville sanitary landfill Incorporated for development stage plan unit development and conditional use permit to increase disposal capacity biting up 26 million cubic yards of Municipal Solid Waste raise the landfill height to 1082 feet above mean sea level change the end use plan to remove Golf Course concept and allow work within the Minnesota River flood plain at 2650 Cliff Road West here to speak on this matter is one of our city planners Deb Garros Ms Garros the floor is yours all right you know how technically Advanced I am thanks Jay I was just going to comment that you notice yeah I'd love to have Jay always has you zoomed in when you're having your technical issues I mean I got it for sure F5 I'm sorry about that no worries thank you everyone um we do have a public hearing this evening um the project is the um expansion of the Burnsville Cemetery landfill they are looking at um two actually parts of the application one is development stage planned unit development and the other is a conditional use permit to allow work within the flood plain of the Minnesota River in order to accommodate the Pud in terms of the development stage PUD the city council has looked at this and they actually have advised the applicant to come forward with this application they approved the concept planned unit development back in 2018 and then this would be the actual development stage the city ordinance does require for Planned new developments a concept plan and then a development stage plan so this is the actual element that would Implement that concept plan so for the development stage PUD what they're looking for is to reduce the landfill footprint from 216 to 204 Acres to increase the disposal capacity and that would be to add 26 million cubic yards of MSW is Municipal solid waste so that's what they're looking to do they're looking then to decrease the amount of demolition construction or DNC waste and also Industrial Waste at this point in time the landfill operates with the ability to provide those three types of waste and certain filling of those and that is regulated by the Minnesota Pollution Control agency so they're asking to basically get rid of two of the types of waste and then increase the municipal Solid Waste part of it this would result in an increase to the height of the landfill from the average which was approved in 2006 to be between 814 and 820 feet above mean sea level and that was to a level four contouring of the golf course to be on top of that and this would be to change that height to increase it to Elevation 1082 which would be an increase from if the landfill were complete right now with what they are able to fill it has an approval to be about 104 feet tall this would increase that to 372 feet tall they are looking to eliminate the 1800 of course for the end use plan and this again is something that Council has indicated that they have agreed with and then to establish the future end use plan primarily as landfill with some open space with that it does involve there are a number of different approvals that have occurred over the years one of those includes an interim use permit which was approved for judge storage location and a temporary access road and so instead of that needing to be completed that internal use permit needing to be completed immediately they are requesting for an extension and for that area to be allowed to stay in place until such a time as they start actually doing work within that area for the levees that will need to be provided for floodplain protection in addition to that there are deviations that are requested and these are for an existing building that was constructed and also a harvester it's a tank if you will and they were constructed based on the current existing PUD intending for at some future date when it turned into a golf course for it to become a Golf Course Maintenance building since that Golf Course concept is going away we're looking at deviations for setbacks for exterior materials and unscreened overhead doors to basically allow the building that is there now to remain in place foreign about the conditional use permit as you know working within the Minnesota River this is in the flood Fringe area which does allow with a conditional use permit approval filled to be brought in but they do need to provide information in that to the city to the DNR to the Watershed districts Etc that there's not going to be a negative impact of that on the floodplain they will also be constructing stormwater ponds so they will need to to do work within the floodplain related to that and complete Wetland mitigation and then again complete their flood levies which will basically change because of the proposed change in the landfill footprint design so the site right now is zoned commercial recreation business it was a signed that designation back in 2006 again to reflect it was a new zoning District that was put into place originally to reflect the Buck Hill which is a commercial type of semi public type of entity although it is privately privately owned and operated so again with the golf course being the induced concept the city looked at and changed the comprehensive plan and also the zoning to this commercial recreation district and then they also uh waived some of the development uh Park dedication standards because this was again going to be a facility that would be available for use by the public so the history of this the entire Minnesota River quadrant area has a long history and we have three basic primary operations that have been there for a long long time and this commission and Council has reviewed many of them in the not so recent past but it includes the Kramer running a materials Quarry which is currently operating to the east of the Burnsville landfill it involves a freeway dump which actually is located on the east side of Interstate 35 and is the current Gulf driving range and that operated from 1960 to about 1969 and that has been closed then there was a freeway landfill which is on the west side of the um of I-35 and that operated until 1990 and in 1986 it was actually designated a federal Superfund Site and then the city has been working with the various agencies Minnesota Pollution Control agency Etc Dakota County and a number of others to um work out a way to clean up that site and also the freeway dump so in 1992 the Minnesota Pollution Control agency which I want to emphasize is really the primary regulator for landfills they do all the detail work they get into the nuts and bolts of things we are looking at land use they deal with the the very specifics they have done um and they did an environmental impact statement for the landfill expansion back in 1992 uh and then they issued what is known as a con or um certificate of need for the landfill to expand to the West which is known as the West Development Area or wda and then also to expand to the north which is known as the north Development Area or MDA and this is uh this graphic shows you where that North Development Area is kind of in the pink on the north side of the landfill and then the West Development Area is this area in red and what we'll change is the majority of the north Development Area will go away or be removed there has not been trash installed in any of these sites at this point so basically what the proposal is is to move that part of the footprint back to the South about 700 feet from where currently is and then they will place What's called the annex Development Area which is I believe about 77 Acres just to the north of the West Development Area so that's kind of how that settles out and then there are a number of different aspects that go on with that um in 1994 the city approved a plan unit development for Kramer Mining and materials for the expansion of the Quarry and at that point in time they owned also what we know of as a Burnsville sanitary landfill in 1997 kmm sold the Burnsville sanitary level excuse me landfill to U.S waste and then shortly after that it was sold to waste management which is our current owner and operator in 2003 the city approved an expansion for the landfill again and that was the first mention of the public golf course concept also in 2003 Dakota County actually conducted a voluntary environmental assessment worksheet or environmental review to look at that North Development Area to determine if there were impacts environmental impacts that would need further study and Analysis and they found that there was not potential for significant environmental effects at that time for that plan in 2003 also um the landfill received approval of a conditional letter of map revision when you're in the flood plain you need to work with FEMA in the DNR and what these are is they take a look at basically the dike systems were involved in this and you need to indicate how you're going to provide the protection of the flood protection and then get those details and that ultimately ends out on the FEMA maps that people can look up for floodplain insurance and in 2005 there actually was an environmental impact statement that was done by the Minnesota Pollution Control agency and that was for the WTA and then a height modification and that was where we got the golf course concept which is in place now the mbca also at that time approved a certificate of need and that allowed additional new disposal capacity for the landfill and they also noted that likely more even more disposable capacity would be needed at some point in the future in 2006 the city of Burnsville actually approved the planned unit development that exists today in that they also planted the property into a lot a lot one black one is the lot that the landfill is located on then there's a northern piece that's an outlet which was to be provided to the city as Park dedication at that point in time the city did give some congestion or concessions in terms of their park dedication fees based on that Golf Course concept and this is uh an artist rendering of the landfill actually it's um uh giving you an idea of what the landfill would look like and this is in our current comprehensive plan and this is the actual plat of bsli Edition out lot a is this area to the north that's circled and this is what was to be dedicated or given to the city of Burnsville and then Outlaw or excuse me a lot when block one is where the existing landfill is located after planning it it was found that Cargill actually has a deed restriction over about 300 feet of the Westerly part out of the landfill property and then in addition to that outlet a also could not be transferred because of some existing covenants and restrictions so what happened is the city then um decided Well we couldn't take a lot a for Park dedication so they did a use agreement for a lot a to allow the city to basically install Trails use it for Parks those types of things and then later there was actually a conservation easement that was provided over Outlet a again restricting uses primarily to the park and trails and natural resources so with that we had the conservation easement giving giving over all lot a and then there are separate agreements a lot of separate agreements that are associated with the landfill project that are not really part of the land use approval but we just wanted the Planning Commission in public to be aware of these there are right-of-way use agreements for 124th Street which is the South part of the site it's an East-West Road basically a continuation of Cliff Road as well what that would be then Golf Drive is on the east side of the landfill and that's the North South Drive so the right-of-way agreements our separate agreements approved by the city council and what they've done is really to allow the landfill to continue to exclusively use those rights way until such a time as the city needs them or and the landfill is basically closed and sees its operation in addition to that we have a performance and encroachment agreement that I'll talk about here shortly there's a host agreement and that is being reviewed and renegotiated with the applicant again these are worked out with the city council but primarily what the landfill does is they provide the city a certain amount of money based on the tonnage of materials that are brought to the site and then that can be used by the city for environmental programs and other things so we are in the process of renegotiating that based on this proposed application another benefit for the city is that we do also have a garbage agreement and waste management provides city services or service to City facilities like our parks and things to collect trash so that that is not something that the city needs to pay for and there are a number of other elements that go along with that they also have a storm water management agreement which Planning Commission has seen very similar to others and then there's many other easements and even some other agreements that we're working on in connection with this beauty Amendment in terms of the site itself you can see the waste management or parental sanitary landfill is on the southern half of the slide actually north is facing west if you will so the slide really could be turned but this also gives you an idea of next door the grammar Quarry property uh and then the location of the freeway dump and then the freeway landfill the Minnesota River and then the city of Bloomington is to the north and adjust to the west of the site is the common boundary with Burnsville in the city of savage in 2018 the council established a priority for Minnesota River quadrant involving these various facilities that are out there the mpca has been reviewing different alternatives for basically cleaning up the freeway landfill and freeway dump taking that garbage and then looking at replacing it in a line facility on the same property so there are several iterations of that but that's kind of the design that is one of the primary options being considered and that is known as a dig and line concept the city council however would like to see what is known as a dig and Hall concept and what they would like to see is basically all of the garbage taken and dug out from the two freeway landfill and dump sites and then brought off site to a different location then the area would be filled um with soils and be able to be redeveloped at some point in the future so what they're looking at in this digging Hall alternative is Minnesota River quadrant wide and it does involve basically consolidating the waste and reducing the overall trash footprint in the Minnesota River quadrant from 310 to 204 Acres this would eliminate 94 Acres of landfill footprint in the mrq it does involve increasing the height of the Burnsville sanitary landfill and um the mpca alternative I believe if that remains in place you would be looking at a landfill along 35W that would be about 133 or so feet tall in this graphic you've seen before but it basically shows kind of what would happen with the um the freeway landfill this is a looking basically from the river to the Southwest but this is kind of the Dig and line option and then again they would be taking the fill from freeway dump and both of this would then be open space if you will ultimately in 2018 the city council did approve the concept PUD for the landfill we knew from that time that because of the increased height that was proposed that we're not going to have that flat top any longer for a golf course and Council kind of concurred that the golf course concept isn't going to be really workable and the plan for the landfill Edition really makes that a pyramid and there's not going to be area on top that is going to be usable for all intents and purposes since then we have also taken a look at other other items and there are some issues with the trails that have come up and also the the potential to use the property so in the concept plan this is what was approved and you have kind of a side view if you will of this elevation going up to Elevation um 1080 which is at 372 or so feet and then this is basically what it looks like and this is a smaller area that you have at the very top of the landfill so that's what was approved in the concept same type of thing only this is in color and this shows you where the west or excuse me the North Development Area is and then the West Development Area would be through here this Annex Development Area is what is proposed for the footprint expansion if you will and also along with these kmm has done their reviews they've done their received Concept in development stage PUD approval for their property and the um the landfill has gone through their environmental work which was a supplement to the earlier environmental impact statement for what is proposed and that process again was conducted by Minnesota Pollution Control agency they had their comment period they determined the Eis basically to be adequate in terms of the materials they provided all the materials to at least address questions that were raised and then they have adopted their findings of fact as of February this year in terms of PUD benefits for this project it has the potential to take all of the waste from the freeway landfill and dump and then allow for cleanup and Redevelopment of that part of the city has the potential to reduce the total trash footprint from 310 to 204 acres and that's in the entire mrq and then relocating those eliminates 94 Acres of landfill footprint if you will in the mrq reduces the number of landfills from three to one the Wetland impacts that are proposed have been reviewed by the parks and Natural Resource Commission The Proposal actually is a slight reduction and impacts to Wetlands and they will also be providing Wetland credits so the pnrc has recommended approval of their proposed Wetland mitigation plan the applicant as I indicated earlier we have these other agreements for them providing garbage and and other types of facilities also with a host agreement and then it does move the length of footprint approximately 700 feet further from the Minnesota River than the current project in order to accommodate that the deviations associated with that chop building and Harvester are basically to allow the existing setbacks to remain those are deviations from the 40-foot Frontier setback and then there would also be a deviation to allow basically the exterior materials to remain as they are as opposed to having to be changed to the different industrial performance standards the application uh really this is a summary of that and it does show a few things that I want to take note of we do have the proposed Annex area which is this area here it's kind of shown in blue and then that's about 27 Acres they do show the existing unlined area of the landfill which is inside this white line and this part is unlined because lining wasn't always required and so this part was the first part of the landfill to be created and that's the area that is currently unlined and then the rest of it is lined we do have represent Eric's Terry it's through here we do have representatives for the applicant here that can give you more detail if you'd like on the liner um in the lining but basically that is the the existing condition and then we included this in your packet which just gives you an idea of what's allowed based on the current approvals from 2006 and then the proposed development just wanted to make note for Planning Commission I did have the wrong information in this last cell um ultimately it's moving to about 45 million cubic yards the freeway dump and freeway landfill together is about 6 million cubic yards so we do want to make sure that there is enough capacity always available so that they can take those materials from freeway landfill and dump for the project itself a couple of things just to note we talked about that there is Outlet a up through here and then there is a separate conservation easement and that conservation easement will likely need to be amended they'll need to remove the new annex Development Area from the conservation easement now and then there are also some existing Trails which are shown in red these are existing easements and again we have some of those that are in the annex Development Area so those will need to be removed and that likely will be a future vacation process by the city council and then in terms of the grading plans these are very difficult to read because there's so much information here but I guess just in general just wanted to show that we are looking at some storm water improvements stormwater ponding just north of the existing landfill and then they have a separate grading plan for the South part of the landfill and that shop building and Harvester tank I was referring to those are located in this area of the site they did also provide a map and this is showing where sections of the landfill are going to be provided and again the applicant can address this to you but basically there are areas of the footprint the ultimate or most high part is the what's shown here at elevation uh 1082 and then depending on where you're at within the landfill it is structured a little bit differently and these are all based on cross sections if you will from that plan they do provide information and the details about the liners and again we just have these and if there are questions again the applicant can address these for you this would be the dredge spoil area site that I referred to and this had an interim use permit on it basically for this site and this access road to go away and again what the applicant is requesting is to allow that to continue until such time as they're actually doing the work for the new annex area and doing construction of the Levee system around that new area there is also a temporary Road a conditional use permit that was approved back in 2013 and it's approximately in this area the landfill southwest corner if you will and that was a cup which allowed fill in the floodplain for a temporary access road if that is going to remain then we need to make sure that they provide the FEMA information that would be required for it to remain if it's going to be removed then again there are other standards for things that they need to provide to us like as Bill plans Etc and this is a close-up the yellow building is here there is also um they are actually set back from the right-of-way but the existing um parking area is within that and then the Harvester tank also is not set back far enough but it's not within the right-of-way use so we'll have to look at at a future date you know once this um it becomes used or we improve the road they'll have to work with the city on what to do with that part of the parking lot floodplain and wetlands I talked about this a little bit in terms of the um the information that they need to provide their Wetland replacement plan again recommended for approval in terms of Woodlands landscaping and lighting the applicant is meeting the city's requirements they're a tree permit will they'll need to do that before they can work at the site this plan actually reduces tree impacts from 26 to 19 percent the landscape final cover they have agreed to work with the city and mpca to provide some type of Wildflower type material for Habitat but we do need to make sure that it's something that can work so it isn't going to cause problems with the liner system or the landfill the applicant has agreed to do that they're lighting and photometric plans are well within the Ordnance standards that was a question that came up during the concept PUD and I believe also during the environmental review they're showing basically the illumination levels of just a little bit less than one foot candle and this is on the actual top of the landfill the ordinance would require minimum two foot candles or maximum I guess of two foot candles at the property lines so they're well within that and as far as the seis we did learn that the FAA will require a red flashing light on top of the landfill it's going to be at a height that it will need that similar to the grain storage bins that are in city of savage then in terms of engineering there are a number of things that we are working on still with the applicant and those go to those various agreements but basically looking to provide a road Network consistent with our mrq plan um Park dedication we've talked about Trail easements uh in consideration of the deed restrictions from Cargill Etc also the landfill will they currently have a leachate system which is basically taking all of the materials that as the landfill um starts to settle and that is removed to the city sewer system at this point it's very corrosive material and we've had some issues to one of our live station thank you lift stations I'm like I know what that is lift stations thank you um so the applicant is working with mpca to directly route that um leachate directly into an mpca system and that will be part of what goes on here but the mpca or excuse me Metropolitan Council has indicated that they are in favor of that and in terms of the project itself as I said our existing comprehensive plan shows the landfill and the trails they will need to make application if this is approved to come back and amend the comprehensive plan to basically remove all of the golf course um information from the comp plan we may need to modify the trails as well based on what we find out here and working with a level of detail and they'll need to change that use then from that Golf Course site back to the industrial site that it was previously and the industrial is owning is I too and basically all of the other properties are also zoned I2 and they're covered by planned unit developments one of the other items that came up that was news to us and something that we need to work out is during the seis there are new error permitting requirements and what this is uh is a requirement to protect the public basically from you have flares and you know there's methane gas that comes from the landfills those types of things so in order to protect the public they are requiring offense to be installed basically around the entire landfill this same air permitting also applies to the Quarry and they either have been or will be installing a fence as well which is all well and good except that it cuts off our ability to access our planet right away and also for public use for Trails so we are going to need to be working with staff and PCA and the applicant to find a way to work around that just another wrinkle with that we did receive a number of comments that were provided to Planning Commission in your packet and we did receive letters from city of Bloomington the Hennepin County Board of Commissioners and the Department of Natural Resources and those are also provided in your packet at this point in time the applicant still needs to meet with DNR to address some of their concerns over um natural species out on the site and then also some of the some questions related to uh surface water and drinking water with that we are recommending that this Planning Commission public hearing be continued to your next meeting which would be the August 8th Planning Commission meeting but to take public testimony this evening and then what we will do is come back to you on the 8th with any additional information that you need from this and any of the comments that come up from the public hearing Miss Garris that was just a wonderful description of everything that we're going through in what we're looking at uh I appreciate that this is very much a contentious item obviously and I think there's people here to speak to that and uh so what we're going to do we're going to follow the same procedures we did with this last public hearing we will turn to the Commissioners to ask questions to City staff and we'll have the applicant come up and then we'll open up the public hearing for anyone that wishes to speak to this issue which I'm assuming a few people do um Miss garos just for clarification I think there was some information put out there stating that we were planning to expand the trash onto or use on online sites and the whole mindset behind expanding the use of the sanitary landfill is to remove the trash the Dig and Hull option to remove the trash that's unlined and move it to another site that is lined so that our drinking water stays safe for under that assumption is that correct that's correct yes okay however there are parts of this and I would let the SE this uh there are Parts where they're talking about putting in additional liner over the unlined portion um to add additional waste to as opposed to we had initially asked them years ago if they could dig up the unlined area then line it and go from there and that option was not available so there are Parts in terms of the liner that we do have folks here that can address those questions for the commissioned in the public okay besides Ms garroos Ms Madden and Ms desert are here the city engineer to speak on any questions you might have Commissioners any questions for City staff Mr Timmerman uh I have a number of questions if you don't mind me just going down the list cheer no wait no go go for it um I'll probably follow you so Ms garo's great presentation um we always learn something new um there's a lot of agencies involved here um a few of the questions that I have are surrounding the environmental impact and we don't have um I guess we don't have the conditions set forth that would be proposed by City staff uh in the final recommendation but I'm wondering uh if one of those conditions would be that if the Burnsville sanitary landfill is in fact expanded that one condition is that it is to take the waste from the dump and the freeway landfill that would be one of the conditions yes definitely that we will be recommending okay okay yes and then I guess the obvious environmental impact there is that we are mitigating the the contaminants the toxins the potential leaching of uh hazardous material into not only the Minnesota River but also burnsville's drinking water source I mean this is extremely close to the source of our drinking water um and so for our city there's some real concerns not only with environmental impact but with health impact here correct yes that's correct we do have our city consultant here um from black and beach that if you have particular questions about that he can talk to you kind of about that issue but that is definitely an environmental concern that we have currently and will continue needs to be further studied and uh he can address that for you yeah I think it'd be great to hear from him and also the applicant maybe before we uh hear any additional public testimony just a suggestion oh I already brought that up um but the the other question I have I guess is is really to clear up a misnomer and that is that although this is called the Burnsville sanitary landfill isn't it true that many other cities also have their their waste moved to the Burnsville sanitary landfill yes definitely um the brinjal sanitary landfill takes waste from all over the Twin Cities metropolitan area and we do have um someone here from npca a couple of folks that can address that for you as well it's the Burnsville sanitary landfill that's what they called it part of the ownership you have waste management and then Burnsville sanitary landfill Inc and Etc so it's referred to as Burnsville but you're correct we do take waste from the entire metropolitan area I have other questions but I think some of the people that you talked about that are here I might save those for them so thank you Miss girls before I go to them any other questions Commissioners okay we will go to our applicants and I believe it is Michael Miller is that the please uh please come on up we really like to drill you hello hi can you just state your name and address for the record Michael Miller and I live at 20721 Lake Ridge Drive in Prior Lake Minnesota thank you sir uh did you want to continue questioning and I'll follow you sure that'd be fine um Mr Miller one of the questions that I have um that I didn't ask Miss Garros is she made a comment about not being able to line or maybe an unwillingness to line a certain part of the the landfill can you talk about that a little bit um it seems to me that we're trying to mitigate some unlined dumps and landfills that have been in existence for decades and I guess what is the hold up on being able to do that on this particular property well at the Burnsville sanitary landfill there yes there is a an online landfill that was probably started filling I believe in the early 60s of which uh the total acreage of that uh um they could help it's probably up above my head here roughly half of it has been lined over with with uh approved liners um so so half half of this unlined area has already been filled over it's it has has um various liners constructions that we've we've placed over the top of it and filled waste above it there's the other half of it has been capped so it essentially has a liner over the top of it it just doesn't have a liner at on the underneath side of this also with that we currently have our our mpca permit has gone on a notice and if if the folks in the PCA could probably speak more eloquently uh to it than I could but we do have some conditions where we have to do some uh some more work to determine that uh this unlined section of the landfill basically is safe and if it was to somehow release something we would have all the detectors and we have a contingency action in place where we'd be able to treat it if there was some type of unexpected release uh great thank you and Mr Miller I have toured the uh Burnsville sanitary landfill and frankly the observations I've made and the information that I've heard from your operation is that you do take environmental impact very seriously I think that you've been throughout this entire process a good partner in in trying to not only operate your own business but also mitigate some of the environmental concerns that have been caused by the last 60 years of of online landfills uh that abut that area so I I just wanted to comment on that I think that if you um you know do have the PCA and the agreements on board with them and you have the The Warning Systems I I think that's important to note is that yes maybe parts of this do not have the the liner like you talked about um but there are risk mitigation factors that are in place and the PCA I'm guessing uh stops in pretty frequently to check on those things yeah it's a it's a tightly monitored facility and as well as uh there's we have a whole work plan where we're going to be required to produce for the for the agency and uh you know it's it's not done it's it's an ongoing process you know we we monitor groundwater um you know continuously three times a year and part of our work plan is is to go in in and really do some some detailed research on on possibilities and um you know a lot of speculative stuff on what ifs with with the agency to prevent any type of incident from occurring and then the last uh questions I have for you Mr Miller are around the I guess the communities that do have their garbage brought to this particular landfill and geographically what alternatives there are I know that when we talked about moving um waste from the dump and the freeway landfill some of the Alternatives were middle of Iowa so can you talk about geographically I guess Alternatives and maybe where other options right now yeah other options is uh is one of the the big challenges that really faces the state of Minnesota today um today the aside from the Burnsville sanitary landfill on the other side of Dakota County there there is a landfill located in Inver Grove Heights that has an expected life expectancy of under 10 years um Beyond these two facilities that are in the seven County Metro area we we do operate two other landfills um just outside of the Metro one in Elk River and another one out in Spruce Ridge um beyond that the next nearest MSW landfill is either in Eau Claire Wisconsin or Lake Mills Iowa and uh recently the mpca did give some conditional con approvals for some other facilities to undertake uh environmental review to see if they could start accepting some more MSW and that would be at a facility in Shakopee and uh and another facility in Inver Grove Heights but in the short term uh there's there's not a whole lot of options um earlier when um you're asking Miss Garros about uh where where the waste was coming from uh roughly 50 percent of the waste that's disposed at at the Burnsville sanitary landfill does come from within Dakota County uh one third of the waste comes from Hennepin County we also receive one third of our waste that we receive at our Elk River landfill our Spruce Ridge Landfill and currently at our Lake Mills Iowa facility is is all made up of one-third of that total volume is from Hennepin County real good thank you Mr Miller any other questions commissioners but I'm going to go so as far as the liner is concerned this is obviously something that is of a thicker material I mean what what guarantees that there's not going to be seepage into the drinking water from there well the the liners are are designed and I should probably let Nick Bono who's uh with Carlson McCain he's uh he's our engine principal engineer that's done most of the designing and knows most of the the specs on on the liner so I'll let him take that yes all right thank you thank you I'm going to have you do the same drill as just your name my name is Nicholas Bono 2755 Holly Lane Plymouth Minnesota thank you sir um as Mike said I'm uh an engineering project manager with Carlson McCain I've been working on this project since 2018 when we first came in and met with the city and have had subsequent conversations with the city county um the folks from mpca mces regarding the Luke Jade sewer that Deb had mentioned as well so I've been on this project for for several years now um in regards to your question about the liner systems so the MSW areas at the facility need to comply with the subtitle D line of requirements which is the resource recovery and conservation Act of um subtitle D of that which was promulgated in 1991 and started to take effect through the through the 90s so various facilities at that time were either installing these liners or they were shutting down right because they didn't want to make that investment so that consists of a natural soil layer which in this case is two feet of compacted clay and then a synthetic membrane which is a 60 mil high density polyethylene plastic sheet that goes on top of the compacted clay liner so that is the liner that is in place for the newly permitted um well I should it's not necessarily new but since about the year you know 1998 or so all those areas in fact Deb if you wanted to um go back to that kind of site overview figure with the air photo that shows the unlined and lined areas the areas that are outlined in yellow are kind of separated into different phases of liner you'll notice that there is some overlap between those areas in yellow and then the white boundary that says unlined area and so what that is is um in areas that had previously been online it was permitted by the mpca to actually line over the top of that waste kind of up onto the slope um with with an alternative type of liner which consists of the same 60 ml high density polyethylene membrane but instead of a soil barrier layer it's a it's a synthetic soil geotextile and so that allows you to um be able to construct that liner on slopes of of existing waste where it's going to be much more difficult to get a very solid compacted clay liner in those areas but it does meet um the subtitle d uh requirements it does require a variance from from the mpca which the facility has obtained so there are areas of the unlined area that do have this slope liner installed over it which makes it extremely difficult to go back into those areas and try to access that that waste again and as Mike was mentioning the total online area is about 88 acres and the area of slope lined area is uh just shy of 40 acres I I believe and then with the slope that that is needed coming off of that in order to access it you're just about taking half of your area that would that would be unaccessible if you were to try to access that that online area um so that was kind of your quick landfill liner Basics are there any other questions on the liner system or no I appreciate the 101 on that sure as far as what is unlined and what gets covered with the liner would it would it be that the rain water or whatever will not seep into whatever is down there is that the mindset behind that that besides not being able to access it yes yep okay that's correct so um the areas that are shown within the online area that don't have any slope liner constructed over that right now um a portion of that will have new slope liner built over it so that more waste could be put on top of that but it would be lined the only area that that wouldn't be happening is that very far north arm um so the the blue boundary showing the limit of the annex area there um from there basically South to the edge of those yellow cell boundaries that are shown there will be new slope liner installed in the in those areas the area between the blue limit of the annex area and the white limit of the unlined area on the existing landfill that will be the traditional subtitle D two feet of clay 60 ml Geo membrane on top of that so really if there's any the the areas that are um below grade and closest to the existing water table are going to have that two foot of clay plus the 60 ml Geo membrane with uh is there a reason why there are landfills right near the river is there an optimal reason for that or was it just poor planning okay is that something you can answer or is that a you know I I wasn't around when they first started this this landfill but um it was pretty common um back in the day where if you were digging something out of the ground say rock or Santa gravel um you could put something back into the ground um in in this area it actually although there's a there is a quarry and a landfill right next to each other it's it wasn't it didn't necessarily take that same pattern because obviously they're still Excavating within the Quarry so they're not filling that back in it was an industrial area it was kind of an area that wasn't very suitable for other Land Development there were probably some low spots some Wetlands that were thought of as not being very useful and so back then they would say well we can we can make use of it let's put some trash there um and so I think it was just a combination of there's some industrial area or some industrial activity in this area and there's you know what was thought to be not very usable not very worthwhile land okay thank you for that explanation yeah I know you don't have all the specifics of our our situation however here we are with this this issue that needs to be cleaned up and I want to ensure that we clean it up where it doesn't it doesn't hit our groundwater that that is probably the most important decision I may ever make in you know my lifetime and uh and that's just a recommendation but even for city council this is this is a huge decision and I don't want anybody to think that we take this lightly so um I think that's very important if we were to do the Dig and Hall and increase the size of the sanitary lionfell wouldn't rot or runoff be going through the contaminants into the river isn't that a possibility as well so the surface runoff from the active landfill anything that contacts waste is going to be contained as leachate and that's going to be sent to the to the sewer system so that all gets collected at the at the base of the liner within the leachate collection system that essentially gets treated as sewage so it goes to the wastewater treatment plant um the the runoff that makes it to outside of the the boundaries of the waste that has not contacted waste that has contacted cover soils that have been installed over over the top of the waste um so there there will not be waste contact water that flows over land to the river or any of the surrounding area it gets collected basically before it gets there and into some kind of masseur okay that helps I appreciate that oh with that I'd done some digging any other questions Commissioners I see what you did there um no no more digging uh one other questions when we do go to dig up what is existing are we going to be kicking up smells is there going to be I'm assuming you have some kind of understanding of all what we will be experiencing through that right so there are um some regulations based on the state state rules about the amount of cover that needs to be installed so basically anything that gets worked during a particular day has to be covered with at least six inches of daily cover uh soil at the end of each day so um that's up to the facility up to Mike and his his crew on how to Stage their activities so that they don't have um huge open areas of waste that they're managing now in in the case that there is a large volume Hall from another nearby facility um you know I'm not exactly sure how something like that would be coordinated obviously um that's not a project that you'd want to have ongoing for you know years um it's something that you'd want to be done fairly rapidly so there there may be some special conditions in place for a situation such as that but for normal waste operations um you know when they go back to some of these older areas that they're going to cover over they're not really going to strip off all of the existing soils there and and re-expose all of that waste they may you know strip off the vegetation leave some buffer soil in in place there and then build their new new slope liner on top of that so there shouldn't be large areas of old waste that get exposed at one time okay thank you so much and with that we will uh move on to the public hearing it is 801 I'm opening up the public hearing I am assuming nobody's still on Zoom but Mr Golden could let me know otherwise and if anyone wants to speak to this issue they can come up to the podium and feel welcome to address us thanks for joining us sir and if you could start by stating your name and address for the record I will definitely do that good evening Mr chair members my name is Tim Bussey I have the honor and the privilege of serving as the mayor of the city of Bloomington appreciate you spending the time on this topic tonight this very important topic and I do appreciate it I think we have a presentation which I see working feverishly to pull up I will say that I'm joined tonight by city council member Sean Nelson who is uh who represents the district in Bloomington that abuts the Minnesota River he's also a Burnsville business owner and is active in both the Burnsville and the Bloomington Chambers of Commerce so appreciate that uh and Glenn markagard from our Planning Commission is with us as well who's worked extensively I know with with your staff with the mpca with any number of folks so if your questions get a little Deep In The Weeds I'm going to call Glenn up to uh to bail me out here uh I'm here tonight to provide testimony because the city of Bloomington has significant concerns about the proposed landfill expansion and uh I do want to say in addition to being a two-decade neighbor to your North I was a a neighbor to your West for a couple of decades growing up I grew up in Prior Lake that was a long time ago when uh County Road 42 was one lane in each Direction and skatefield was the place to be and there were cabins on Prior Lake and for some reason we thought it was a good idea to put trash along the Minnesota River and that was as I said a long time ago and things change and thinking changes and all of those things that I've mentioned have changed with the exception of we now still think it's a decent idea to put trash in a landfill along the Minnesota River so we in uh Bloomington we've we've closely reviewed the application materials and the supplemental environmental impact statement and the more we learn about the project frankly the more concerns we do have about the project Bloomington has submitted uh detailed comments which are part of your record and I trust you've enjoyed those uh since you've had the chance to review these comments and in the interest of uh your time this evening and our time this evening I want to focus on two key issues round water impacts and visual impacts as well and while you're waiting I just want to point out that I didn't I did go drive along uh back there along the homes and you got these beautiful homes and unfortunately they look at a garbage dump in I I can I can appreciate that that's being an issue if it would be easier I do have printouts we could just put them on the overhead cam whatever would work best he said he put it on but those two are not yet foreign at the same time here but uh do my best you're from Bloomington you can do it there we go look at that uh do it this way see if we can make I will have to put my glasses on if we're doing it this way so um so as you all know the environmental impact statement points out that large portions of the Burnsville sanitary landfill are unlined we've talked about that already this evening and you can see the unlined areas highlighted in yellow on the screen and our concern is that the waste in this area can easily sleep into the soil and into the groundwater that all of us do rely on and again as you know there are two other landfills in Burnsville the freeway landfill and the freeway dump and just like the Burnsville sanitary landfill the other two landfills are also in the floodplain of the Minnesota River and both of those are indeed unlined and as you know because they're online both are planned to be rebuilt and moved at a potentially pretty staggering cost in order to avoid groundwater contamination such an important issue as public policy makers and as stewards of the public dollars we need to learn from this expensive and potentially environmentally damaging history and not allow history to repeat itself here so the environmental impact statement states that the water table around the landfill is already interacting with the unlined waste during times of flooding on the Minnesota River the water is artificially low in the area right now due to massive dewatering at the Kramer Quarry but once the Quarry ceases operations and dewatering ceases the Quarry is going to fill up and it's going to become a lake and the water table in the area is going to rise dramatically creating a much more interaction between the groundwater and the unlined waste we are concerned that the waste is going to impact the groundwater the adjacent Lake the Minnesota River and potentially the aquifer the environmental impact statement points out that placing additional waste on top of unlined waste will impede future corrective action logically if remediation is required in the future due to observed contamination having a mountain of additional waste on top will greatly increase the cost of mitigation the city of Burnsville retaining the engineering firm of black and Beach to assist assist in the review of the application and the following is a quote from their report the quote says the potential for new waste to impede corrective action was observed in multiple public comments while additional waste volume May complicate or delay remedial action ultimately modern engineering and environmental practices can adequately address contamination with the proper planning and funding and those are the emphasis added is mine that's optimistic in other words contamination could be addressed as long as there's enough money and the statement begs a couple of questions obviously first of all where is the funding going to come from it's from the Burnsville taxpayers the state of Minnesota taxpayers from Waste Management second question is what happens if the proper funding is not available when remediation is needed and the third rather obvious question rather than creating the potential for a problem and then paying to fix it wouldn't be better to avoid the issue altogether we do have the PowerPoint now why don't we do that if you could go to this slide I will right there perfect thank you for that appreciate it reading the staff report before you this evening we noted that it states an item is included for the applicant to consider line in the unlined area of the bsli landfill which would be a substantial public benefit for the city and the region and obviously we strongly agree that lining the unlined area would be a substantial public benefit for the region we do officially informally and heart with heartfelt uh desire requests that Burnsville formally require the lining of the unlined area rather than leading that up to the applicant or how it might work next step next slide please I'd like to turn now to uh visual impacts as with the groundwater impacts we have significant concerns regarding the visual impacts the application before you tonight will allow the landfill to extend to 1082 feet above sea level that is 372 feet above the surrounding grade and 389 feet above the nearby Minnesota River the highest point in Bloomington is Mount bilboa at the Highland Ski and Snowboard area which reaches a height of 1020 feet above sea level the peak of the proposed landfill will be 62 feet above mount kilboa the landfill as we've talked about tonight will be so large that the FAA is going to require warning lights on top of it to reduce the chance of airplanes collisions and even though it lies in a flood plain the landfill is not well separated from residential uses homes in Burnsville lie less than a thousand feet away and homes in Bloomington are also very close on the across the bluff in the Minnesota River next slide please if approved the landfill could expand to 45 million cubic yards built out now one cubic yard is kind of easy to imagine 45 million cubic yards is hard to fathom now to put that in perspective the largest Pyramid in Egypt is the Pyramid of Giza and that's 3.37 million cubic yards in volume the proposed landfill would have more than 13 times the volume of the largest Pyramid in Egypt if approved the landfill will become the dominant visual feature of Burnsville and of the Minnesota River Valley it will become the visual symbol of our portion of the region next slide please I've talked about bloomington's concerns with groundwater impacts and visual impacts we have additional concerns with waste composition Wetland removal surface water impacts air quality environmental justice odor noise Aviation lack of public input we don't have time to fully explore all those options tonight but we've addressed them in our comment letter next slide please ultimately your decision tonight must be based on the findings required in the Burnsville city code before a conditional use permit can be issued your city your city code requires that you make 10 findings for example the third required finding states that the use must be quote compatible in appearance with the existing or intended character of the general vicinity and will not change the essential character of that area and as you know if even one of these findings cannot be made the conditional use permit should be denied We Believe respectfully that eight of the ten findings cannot be made they are shown here in yellow next slide please with any conditional use permit state statute provides the ability to attach conditions of approval while we don't think you should affirmatively make the required findings if you disagree we ask that you attach appropriate conditions of approval we've recommended 10 potential conditions of approval in our comment later examples include a condition limiting the height of the landfill and a condition prohibiting additional waste on top of unlined portions of the landfill next slide please to wrap up my comments I'd like to point out that the application before you tonight is for a permanent facility if approved this landfill will be here until the next glacial age yet the liners and other landfill Technologies propose to protect the public all have temporary lifespans the mpca has told the Bloomington city council that a typical liner lifespan is between 50 and 400 years placing additional waste in a flood plain adjacent to a major river is simply a bad idea it's a ticking Time Bomb eventually those liners will fail we asked tonight respectfully that you deny the application this evening inability to make the required findings we understand that the primary benefit your staff sees in the expansion of the potential for relocation of waste from the freeway landfill and the freeway dump and it's important to note that the approval of the Burnsville sanitary landfill expansion does not guarantee that the state will choose the Dig and Hull option for addressing the problems with the other two landfills it would not be surprising to me personally if the state selected the more affordable dig and line option and no waste is removed from the Burnsville relocated to the Burnsville sanitary landfill and if relocation of waste did occur it would only be a small percentage of the proposed expansion well Bloomington strongly requests denial of the application if the Planning Commission decides to recommend approval of the expansion we request that you also recommend a condition of approval that would limit the size of the expansion to waste that is physically transferred from the freeway landfill and the freeway dump Mr chair members thank you very much for your time uh thank you very much for your service on the Planning Commission I know it's as unsung as it can be sometimes and I know full well Mr chair that not once would I think that you take decisions like this lightly I know that these are important decisions and uh not all decisions are this this large this important this uh have have this much long-term impact on not only your community but other communities but this one does and I trust that you'll make the decision that's best for all of us so thank you all very much well I appreciate you coming mayor Boosie it's very important that we work together as cities we do share a common border and a very very important resource right down the middle with the Minnesota River thank you thank you appreciate it we are still in the open hearing anybody else would like to speak can come up to the lectern you do not have to provide your own PowerPoint you can just speak it's fair and thank you for joining us and please your name and address for the record yeah Sean Nelson 5112 West 105th Street Bloomington Minnesota I am mayor Busey's colleague on the Bloomington city council as he noted um I also am a business owner here in Burnsville on two businesses a residential Remodeling Company and I Skylight in a sun tunnel company uh I moved here when I was four years old I grew up in Burnsville my parents started a company here in the early 80s I bought them out other than three years that I was at College in Indiana I have been very well connected with the Burnsville Community uh mayor Boosie gave you a good description of the concerns of Bloomington I can tell you as the representative of District 2 which is the Southwest portion of Bloomington I hear from a lot of people that are concerned about the visual impacts of groundwater impacts we have a very Avid bicycle Community within Bloomington that utilizes a trail down there and they're worried about the impacts that'll have on them the the natural resources the wildlife all of that type of stuff what I want to talk about though is because of my background in Burnsville here um I want to talk about some of the positive things and I think you guys are absolutely going the right direction to clean up the Burnsville landfill and um and I actually candidly believe that my parents put waste in that as a Remodeling Company back in the day and so I remember when the state was going to require companies to pay part of the cleanup of it and my parents are like what we had no idea about this and so I'm glad that the state is stepping up to take care of the responsibility because this is a regional Statewide problem and that we're facing here and making sure we do this in the right way I completely agree with with the proposal by the Burnsville city council and the Planning Commission that that it's uh dug up and moved and if it makes sense to move it over to the Burnsville sanitary waste that that makes their sanitary landfill that makes sense to me to get it out of there um and get it uh because it's already contaminated one aquifer and I drink Burnsville water I have coffee every day so I filter it slightly um so but what I think is important when we look at this um in terms of that is making sure we have the right conditions sounds like uh you're you're talking about those types of things but making sure that there's a condition to relocate the waste and not just do the dig in and fill I think that was an important question I appreciate that that was asked and it looks like that's Direction you're going to reduce the footprint I think it's important for the city of Burnsville to maximize the Redevelopment opportunity in that area in terms of tax base and and the economic development opportunities that come to the community um one of the things that I noted was that the future use used to be the golf course which I understand may or may not make sense we struggle with that in Bloomington having two golf courses as well um and and so looking at that but making sure that it's public because right now it looks like they're going to change that to to landfill and open space versus and I don't think landfill was in that previously and so I'd be very skeptical of continuing that landfill as a future use of that property the other thing I want to talk about in in a positive way is the vision for the Minnesota River quadrant this is something I've heard about for a long long time and I've served on the Burnsville city council or sorry not city council get ahead of myself the uh um the chamber and uh have looked at that and I'm excited about that opportunity and the the economic engine that that could be for the community and you know Kramer mining is a great company in our community but that is going to end at some point and my understanding is it's they're looking at maybe around 20 40. and so I would encourage you not to lock into the large amount of expansion of this because that could take from the estimates I've seen 40 50 years and the sooner you can get to redeveloping that area the better for the community and so I really strongly encourage you if this is something you're going to move forward if there isn't another option to limit the amount don't give them the entire expansion I believe the mpca is looking not doing a smaller expansion as a preliminary approval and I strongly encourage you to limit that so that you can get to that Redevelopment opportunity there I mean having that mixed use residential Light commercial it's a very different use I think it was noted earlier in the conversation that one of the reasons a dump was put down by the river back in the day is it was not great land and it's a very industrial space that's not the vision for that area anymore the vision for that area is a recreational area a mixed-use residential Light commercial area where people are working and playing and living that's not the place for a huge dump maybe not even the place for any dump but it's already there and so so contain it do something with it that's positive and beneficial as a public use on top of it and go with the agreement from 2003. you had an agreement in 2003 as a city with them to do something there maybe it's not a golf course maybe that vision changes I get that that stuff changes stick to the original plan in my opinion and clean up the freeway once so um uh sure John I appreciate that he came over into my district and drove around there I could tell you I drove around Burnsville actually today I was dropping my daughter off at work uh she also lives in Burnsville here so so um and and drop it off at work and um noted you know that I could see the existing landfill and it's gonna be three times the size of what it is right now I was up on Williams Drive right at the border of Shakopee I believe that's close to one of the photo areas of number seven I believe in the packet that you received and from Where I Stood it would block the view of downtown Minneapolis once it's fully developed and as tall as it's going to be there will be visual impacts on Burnsville in Bloomington along that area and and I think that I think that I really appreciate that he got out and took a look at how that would really impact people in there um so sorry I didn't have a I don't have as much staff support as the mayor the PowerPoint so I just have my own notes here so um so I guess you know in conclusion the thing that I would say is looking at potentially moving the Minnesota River quadrant project forward in the next maybe 20 years maybe less getting that started versus waiting for a landfill to be fully filled up for 40 50 60 years I would 100 percent choose getting the Minnesota River quadrant project going forward as fast as you possibly could and strongly encourage you not to box future uh commissions and councils in with your decision at this point um give them the flexibility to look at that there was talk that maybe there's going to be additional landfills in Shakopee in Inver Grove Heights we don't know what it's going to be in 10 years don't box yourself in give yourself that flexibility to make the right decisions today and in the future to deal with that and so I'd strongly encourage you if if there is if you're looking at approving this to really limit how much you approve it continue to stay involved in that over the next couple decades and and really just put yourself in a much better spot than if they have the permission to do the entire project right away so thank you very much appreciate it we really appreciate your comments uh council member Nelson appreciate you coming in and sharing with us thank you thank you and you don't even have to be an elected official if you'd like to come speak you're more than welcome to anyone else would like to speak to this issue um there was nobody else on Zoom therefore I will close the public hearing at 8 23. and I'm going to turn it over to the Commissioners I would like to continue the public hearing to the next meeting because we have the DNR issues and and something still to work out and there may be additional tests so we would as well we would not close the public hearing I'm writing my Robert rules here okay yes got it thank you with that but that would require a motion correct yes okay um counter you certainly can continue to debate and uh we'll keep that end open right now and we'll continue to talk and I really do appreciate um staff making that recommendation this is a huge initiative obviously uh I don't know if people are aware we get the background information on Thursday or Friday the weekend before we have a weekend to study it and this is a bigger issue than what a weekend study can be handled so pushing off another two weeks I think is is very reasonable or makes the most sense however I need my Commissioners to uh agree with me on that and make such a motion commissioner Timmerman I I'll make the motion but before I do I just want to thank um our elected officials from across the border I think it was great that you came you were both very articulate and uh passionate uh and I hope that we convey that we are and I know our city council does as well this is a a once in a lifetime issue that we all have to deal with and there is no perfect solution I think we just have to find a palatable solution so with that I think it's wonderful to continue get some more information um hear from the PCA hear from others who may have testimony to Sharon so with that I would like to make a motion to continue the public hearing until our next meeting which is August 18th before I address that I also want to request from the waste management if they would be willing to have a tour have us on a tour I know commissioner Timmerman had been on a tour but that was before any of us were on the commission we would like to see the facility and be able to get a better idea of what we're voting on here and understanding if that would be possible thank you with that I'd be looking for a second commissioner commissioner Wadd I'll second the motion okay motion's been made by commissioner timmermann second by commissioner wad all in favor please signify by saying aye aye the hearing will be continued until August 8th that Monday night at 6 30. in these very Chambers with these very people thank you and that will conclude agenda item number four that brings us to agenda number five updates and with that I will turn to Commissioners any updates I have one I have been working with um Miss Dez Rood about another field trip and that is to see the water facility for the city of Burnsville and I would just I think it's very important for us to get an idea how that is cleaned how our water system works and so is it Tony snow is that the name twenty white Tony white that's so close it made sense Tony white Mr White um is willing to give us a tour of the facility and it looks like it would be on Thursday August the 4th at 4 pm if you guys would be ready to join us that would be I think very beneficial to all of us and then stay tuned if we can would you be the one that would work with waste management or should I uh we can coordinate with Waste Management to get some dates I think that would be beneficial for all of us since we're uh we're gonna post public notice for that I just want you to know my birthday is the day before that so I mean if we want to go up afterward and have an appetizer or something I say I coordinate that I see where that's coming okay okay I think I had a glass of water yep I'll buy you two that healthy Burnsville water that we all love right exactly with that I will turn to staff any updates uh yes so at your last Planning Commission meeting you did review some code changes to the residential zoning standards so those were adopted by the city council last week and then effective into the the city code um other updates generally what you are aware of that our next Planning Commission meeting is on August 8th for this continued public hearing as the the primary item on that on that meeting otherwise I do not have