HomeMy WebLinkAboutSJ95-16 Subject
Staff Reports
L:\TEMPLA TE\FILEINFO.DOC
AGENDA #:
PREPARED BY:
SUBJECT:
DATE:
INTRODUCTION:
DISCUSSION:
STAFF AGENDA REPORT
8 B
Donald Rye
Planning Director
Consider appeal of Buckingham Disposal from ordinance
interpretation
October 16,1995
In June, City staff was made aware of the existence of a
recycling operation conducted by Buckingham Disposal at
5980 Credit River Road. The facility was opened without
benefit of a Certificate of Occupancy and a subsequent
determination was made by the Planning Director that the use
was not a permitted or conditional use in the 1-2 zoning district.
The owner of Buckingham Disposal appealed this decision
pursuant to Section 7.4 of the zoning ordinance. The Planning
Commission, acting as the Board of Adjustment, heard this
request on August 28 and, following its deliberations,
recommended that the City Council uphold the appellant's
contention that the recycling operation fits within the definition
of light manufacturing as contained in the zoning ordinance.
Section 7.4 states that the Council shall make its decision by
resolution within 60 days.
The issue to be resolved is whether the City Council agrees
with the staff interpretation of the ordinance or with the
appellants view that the recycling operation falls within the
definition of light manufacturing in the zoning ordinance.
Attached to this report are the planning commission staff
report, the use listing in the 1-2 zoning district, a letter to Mr.
Buckingham from the City Manager, the staff memorandum
making the determination of use, a memo from the building
official, a letter from Mr. Buckingham describing the operation,
a letter from the City Manager, a letter from Mr. Buckingham's
attorney filing the appeal, a response to the appeal letter from
the Planning Director, a summary of operations and a letter
16200 Eagle Creek Ave. S.E., Prior Lake, Minnesota 55372-1714 / Ph. (612) 447-4230 / Fax (612) 447-4245
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER
ISSUES:
from Scott County indicating that the facilities license has been
denied.
The planning report had three options specified:
1. Recommend support of the staff determination
2. Recommend support of the appellants position
3. Recommend the staff determination be upheld and that
staff be directed to conduct a study pursuant to Section 2.5
of the zoning ordinance to determine under what
circumstances a recycling center may be allowed in the 1-2
zoning district.
The staff recommendation was alternative 3. The Planning
Commission recommended alternative 2.
If Council believes that a recycling operation as described by
the appellant does not fit the definition of light manufacturing as
discussed in the planning report, it should uphold the staff
determ ination.
If Council believes that the recycling operation fits the definition
of light manufacturing, it should uphold the appellant.
If Council believes that a recycling operation is sufficiently
different from other traditional light manufacturing uses, it
should direct staff to conduct the appropriate study to define
how such a facility should be regulated.
Staff is of the opinion that such a use raises some particular
concerns related to outside storage, appearance, storage of
potentially hazardous materials on site such as
chlorofluorocarbons in appliances and control of traffic and
drainage. The only effective way to establish criteria and
monitor compliance with respect to such uses is to define
recycling as a conditional use in the 1-2 zone. The study
recommended by the staff would define any other safeguards
that would be appropriate to consider for this use.
ALTERNATIVES:
1. Uphold the staff interpretation of the ordinance that a
recycling operation does not fit the current definition
of light manufacturing. This would effectively prohibit
continued operation of the recycling operation.
2. Uphold the appellants position
3. Uphold the staff interpretation and direct staff to
conduct a study to determine the proper method of
regulation for recycling operations
RECOMMENDATION: Alternative 3. No further enforcement action would be
taken pending the outcome and council action on such a
study. It is our expectation that the study would
recommend that recycling be a conditional use in the 1-2
zone.
ACTION REQUIRED: Motion to direct pre aration of a resolution consistent
with the City Counci action.
PLANNING REPORT
AGENDA ITEM: 4
SUBJECT~Consider appeal of Buckingham Disposal from ordinance interpretation
SITE:5980 Credit River Road
PRESENTER:Donald Rye
PUBLIC HEARING:
DA TE:August 28,1995
YES
x
NO-N/A
INTRODUCTION:
In June, City staff was made aware of the operation of a recycling operation conducted
by Buckingham Disposal at the above address. The facility was opened without benefit of
a Certificate of Occupancy and a subsequent determination was made by the Planning
Director that the use was not a permitted or conditional use in the 1-2 zoning district. The
owner of Buckingham Disposal is appealing this decision pursuant to Section 7.4 of the
zoning ordinance. The Board of Adjustment has the responsibility to hear the appeal and
make a recommendation to the City Council to either uphold the interpretation by staff,
determine that the staff interpretation was incorrect and grant the appeal or to recommend
some alternative resolution of the issue such as a zoning ordinance amendment.
DISCUSSION:
The letter from Tom Buckingham dated July 18 describes the operation of his business
and presents the rationale under which he believes his use is a permitted use in the zoning
district.The staff memorandum dated July 21 presents the reasoning leading to the
conclusion that the use is not permitted in the 1-2 district.The letter from the appellants
attorney dated August 9 constitutes the formal appeal.As of August 21, the detailed
statement referred to in the third paragraph of Mr. Cairns letter has not been received.
The role of the Planning Commission in the appeal process is advisory only. Once the
Commission determines a position, a recommendation is to be made to the City Council
for final action.
In considering the appeal, the Commission should consider all of the material contained
in the staff report as well as testimony offered by the appellant on his behalf. The
language of the ordinance should be read in such a way as to allow all provisions of the
PCREPT.DOT
16200 Eagle Creek Ave., Prior Lake, Minnesota 55372-1714 / Ph. (612) 447-4230 / Fax (612) 447-4245
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER
ordinance to be applied in a consistent fashion. Consequently, the Commission should
look beyond the case before it and consider the implications of its recommendation.
The ordinance currently defines light manufacturing as " the processing and fabrication of
certain materials where no process involved will produce noise, vibrations, air pollution,
fire hazards or noxious emissions which will disturb or endanger neighboring properties."
Fabricate is defined as "To construct by combining and assembling" while manufacturing
is defined as "to make or process a raw material into a finished product, esp. by means of
a large-scale industrial operation." Staff does not believe that a recycling center where
used materials are gathered, separated and, in some cases, reduced in bulk, conforms to
either definition. The staff memorandum also lists other reasons why it was felt that
recycling centers are not currently permitted in the 1-2 district.
ALTERNATIVES:
The Planning Commission has three alternatives:
1. Recommend that the City Council uphold the staff determination and direct continued
enforcement actions to be taken.
2. Recommend that the City Council uphold the appellant and direct termination of
zoning ordinance enforcement.
3. Recommend that the City Council uphold the staff determination and direct that staff
conduct a study pursuant to Section 2.5 of the zoning ordinance to determine under
what circumstances, if any,
RECOMMENDATION:
It is recommended that the Planning Commission recommend Alternative 3 to the City
Council.
ACTION REQUIRED:
Motion to adopt Alternative 3.
BUCKAP.DOC
-.
I
J
-j
-J
]
G
C-1
S-D
2.3
2.4
2.5
the taxable value and to promote the public health, safety and welfare. (Ord.93-18)(Cj~.....C J)
LIGHT INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT is intended to provide areas of the community which will
allow general industrial uses which due to their size and nature would not conform to the
Special Industrial District.
CONSERVATION DISTRICT is provided to recognize vital environmental resources of
the community as steep slopes, wetland and unstable soil conditions and allow
development only after careful analysis.
SHORELAND DISTRICT is established to protect water and shoreland resources
from unwise development and water pollution and to preserve economic and natural
environmental qualities of the shoreland environment. Land located within the following
distances from protected waters is considered to be within the Shoreland District: 1000
feet from the ordinary high water mark of a lake, pond, or flowage and 300 feet from a
river or stream, or the landward extent of a flood plain on such river or stream, whichever
is greater.
DISTRICT BOUNDARIES: District boundaries shown within the lines of the roads,
streams, and transportation rights-of-way shall be deemed to follow the centerlines. The
vacation of roads shall not affect the location of such district boundaries. When the
Zoning Officer cannot definitely determine the location of a district boundary by such
centerlines, by the scale or dimensions stated on the Zoning Map, or by the fact that it
clearly coincides with a property line, he shall interpret the location of the district
boundary with reference to the scale of the Zoning Map and the purposes set forth in all
relevant provisions of the Ordinance. Where a district boundary line divides a lot of
record into two or more districts, any portion of the lot within fifty (50) feet of such division
may be used for any use of either district as approved by the Board of Adjustment.
DISTRICT REQUIREMENTS: Except for Planned Unit Developments, all buildings and
uses in each district shall be subject to the requirements listed under Sections 3 through
9. Planned Unit Development standards may be applied to any Residential Districts at
the request of the land owner and at the discretion of the City Council. Where Planned
Unit Development standards differ from the original district standards, the Planned Unit
Development standards shall apply.
USES NOT DESIGNATED: A use not specifically designated as a permitted or
conditional use anywhere in the City is considered prohibited. In such a case, the
Council, Commission or a property owner may request a study by the City to determine if
the use is acceptable and if so, what Zoning District would be most appropriate for the
use and what conditions and standards, if any, should be attached to the development of
the use. If found acceptable an amendment to the Zoning Ordinance may be initiated by
the Councilor Commission permitting the use. (Ord. 83-6)
Section 2, Page 2
PERMITTED USES
CONDITIONAL USES
[
[
[-
l
[
[
l
[
[
[
L
I'
r
1-
[~!
!
r
[
.1
r
t
1. Light Manufacturing 1. Manufacturing
2. Research Laboratories 2. Public Utility
Buildings
3. Testing Laboratories 3. Water & Sewer
Treatment Facilities
4. Offices 4. Airports
5. Supply Yards 5. Truck & Railroad
Terminals
6. Warehousing 6. Grain Elevators
7. Truck Terminals 7. Commercial
Recreation
8. Public Parking 8. Animal Clinics
9. Parking Lots 9. Food Product
Processing
10. Mini-Storage Units
C-1 CONSERVATION
1. Agriculture 1. Water & Sewer
Treatment Facilities
2. Single Family Dwellings 2. Commercial
Recreation
3. Camps & Cottages 3. Airports
4. Public Parks & Playgrounds 4. Cemeteries
5. Public & Parochial Schools 5. Radio & TV Stations
6. Hunting Preserves 6. Sanitary Land Fills
7. Golf Courses 7. Animal Clinics
8. Specialized Animal Raising 8. Animal Feed Lots For
9. Stables & Riding Academies more than 10 animals
10. Public Buildings
11. Marina (Ord. 83-6)
12. Wholesale Plant Nurseries (Ord 90-07)
13. Agricultural Preserve (Ord 93-12)
Section 3, Page 5
~/~
June 30, 1995
Tom Buckingham
Buckingham Disposal
5980 Credit River Road SE
Prior Lake, MN 55372
Subject: Recycling Center Located in Prior Lake
Dear Mr. Buckingham:
Building Official, Gary Staber, and Planning Director, Don Rye, have had the
opportunity to review the materials you submitted on Friday, June 23. In addition,
they inspected the site on June 26. I am attaching a copy of their written findings.
Based upon the materials you submitted, the site inspection and a review of the
City's Zoning Ordinance and Uniform Building Code, our findings can be
summarized as follows:
1. Recycling is not a permitted or conditional use in the 1-2 Zone.
2. The plans provided were not to scale, and did not show both first and
second floor layout. A code analysis should be completed by a qualified
engineer or architect focusing on such issues as exiting, sanitation
facilities, occupancy separations, allowable square footage and site access
in general.
3. It is apparent that alterations have been made to the building without
proper permits, either by the current or former occupant.
In short, the recycling operation continues to be contrary to the City's Zoning
Ordinance, City Code and Uniform Building Code.
According to Gary Staber, the Uniform Building Code issues are resolvable. What
needs to occur first is that the Council should consider whether it wishes to add
recycling as a permitted or conditional use in the 1-2 Zoning District and, if so, what
safe guards should be associated with such usage.
BUCKHAM2.DOC
1620D Eag1eCreeK Ave., Prior Lake, Minnesota 55372-1714 / Ph. (612) 447-4230 / Fax (612) 447-4245
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNrIY EMPLOYER
Page 2
Tom Buckingham
June 30, 1995
If you desire to have the Council consider such a request please provide me with a
letter to that effect which we will submit to the Council together with supporting
materials. You can expect that staff will recommend numerous safeguards if the
Council is positively inclined to allow recycling uses as a conditional use or
permitted use.
Until the Zoning Ordinance is revised and your operation comes into complete
compliance with the City Code, Uniform Building Code, County and State
requirements, you may not operate the recycling facility from this location. To do
other wise is contrary to the law and undertaken at your sole and exclusive risk.
If you have any questions please feel free to contact me, Don Rye or Gary Staber.
FB:db
Attachment
RUCKHAM2.DOC
16200 Eagle ueek-Ave.--s.E., Prior Lake, Minnesota 55372-1714 / Ph. (612) 447-4230 / Fax (612) 447-4245
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER
MEMORANDUM
DATE:
June 26, 1995
Frank Boyles, Gary Staber
Don Rye
Buckingham Disposal
TO:
FROM:
RE:
I have reviewed the material presented to us on Friday, June 23 by Tom Buckingham. In addition, I
have reviewed the zoning ordinance and visited the site on June 26 with Gary. I have concluded that a
recycling center is not a permitted or conditional use in the 1-2 Industrial zoning district.
I base this finding on several factors as follows:
. When the ordinance was written in 1983, recycling was fairly well established as a legitimate land
use and yet the ordinance makes no specific provision for such a use.!t is possible to conclude from
this that this use was not considered as a viable use in this district.
. Light manufacturing is a permitted use in the 1-2 district and is defined as " The processing and
fabrication of certain materials where no process involved will produce noise, vibrations, air
pollution, fire hazards or noxious emission which will disturb or endanger neighboring properties."
The definition of manufacturing is" to make or process ( a raw material) into a finished product,
esp., by means of a large-scale industrial operation." The notion of a recycling center where used
materials are gathered, separated and reduced in bulk does not conform to the traditional definition
of manufacturing.
. A significant portion of the recycling operation is conducted outside.Large metal bins,semi trailers
and trucks are located around the site and the recycled materials are stored outside until moved
elsewhere.In addition, the general public drops off material outside in the storage yard. In that
respect, the recycling operation has a distinct commercial aspect to it as it generates traffic much as
a retail use might.
. The zoning ordinance provides that uses not specifically designated as permitted or conditional uses
are prohibited. I believe that the recycling operation is sufficiently different from uses which would
qualify as light manufacturing as to put it into the prohibited category. In that case, the ordinance
provides for a study of the use to determine if the use is acceptable and, if so, in what zoning district
and with what additional conditions and standards, if any.
Based on the foregoing, I conclude that Buckingham Disposal operating as a recycling center is not a
permitted or conditional use in the 1-2 district.
Frank Boyles
From:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Date:
Gary Staber
Frank Boyles
Don Rye
Buckingham Disposal
Monday, June 26,1995 3:53PM
Hi Frank, Buckingham came in with some information late on Friday afternoon. Don and I had a chance to go
out and tour the site today. We met Tom Buckingham on site and told him after our tour that we would be going
back to City Hall to write memos regarding the facility.
My comments are as follows:
1. A code analysis should be completed by a qualified engineer or architect. Items such as
exiting, sanitation facilities, occupancy separations, allowable square footages, and site access in general should
be addressed.
2. Building plans should be to scale, 1/8 or 1/4 inch per foot is preferred.
3. Building plans should be complete showing both the first and second floor layouts.
When Don and I were touring the structure it became quite obvious that the former tenant made several
alterations to the building without proper permits. It was also noted that Buckingham made some alterations and
modifications to the building without proper permits. Mr. Buckingham while being cooperative, is not totally
innocent in that this situation we are reacting to seems to have been created largely by Mr. Buckingham himself.
Rather than giving my first impressions at this time, I would rather wait for the architect's code analysis for a
more thorough response.
Page 1
~ ~(!.~; \I ~ 1 I ~ II G'( ~?JS
BUCKINGHAM DISPOSAL, INC.
5980 Credit River Road
Prior lake MN 55372
Phone: 226.6441
Fax: 226.6442
(612) 334-8532
July 18, 1995
Frank Boyles, Manager
City of Prior lake
Prior lake Courthouse
4629 Dakota Street S. E.
Prior lake MN 55372-1714
Dear Mr. Boyles:
In the past week or so I have had discussions with a number of advisors regarding your
concern about our operations in Prior lake. This letter is to offer a view of the situation that
I believe will support a conclusion on the City's part that my use of the property is entirely
consistent with the City's ~ning Code.
As you know, my business services over 1000 Prior lake residences. In addition to picking
up MSW from those residences, I also have a contractual obligation to do weekly curbside
recycling pick-up. There is no realistic alternative to processing the recyclables at my property.
If I am not able to do so, even for a brief period of time, the effect may be adverse to the Prior
lake residents that I serve.
In addition, I offer residential generators drive-in and drop-off service for recyclables and
compostable materials (the latter being regularly used by Prior lake residents since they can
avoid the $2.00 per bag charge for curbside pick-up).
Since it is not clear to me that earlier staff review of my operations reflect a thorough
understanding of what my business and use of the property is, let me offer specifics. There
are a number of components to my business: there are offices; my trucks are parked overnight
and operate from the property; I warehouse certain materials for limited periods of time; I
maintain and store supplies for my business; and I run a recyclable materials processing
operation which, in my view, is clearly a permitted "light manufacturing" use.
let me also clarify what my business is not. It is not a site for processing or transferring
Mixed Municipal Solid Waste (commonly known as "garbage") as that term is defined by
Minnesota law.
Your staff has indirectly seemed concerned that my property in Prior lake will have some
processing of MSW done there. That is not the case. My vehicles for MSW pick-up are stored
overnight at the property. Otherwise, under my Scott County Licenses, lam prohibited from
726139.1
processing MSW; and 1 do not have an MSW transfer station license nor do 1 have any
intention to secure such.
You have raised the concern that my use of the property is not for Light Manufacturing as
permitted by the 1-2 Zoning classification. I ask that you reconsider this tentative conclusion
for the following reasons:
1. My business is "processing" materials. The raw materials are the
unsorted recyclables. My process is the sorting, compacting and
packaging of the recyclables into marketable form. The City definition
of Light Manufacturing is properly broad enough to encompass clearly
what we do. The "finished" material or product is sold to end-users for
incorporation into additional manufactured products. In effect, we are
the first of several manufacturers/processors that allow the entire
recycling system to function effectively.
2. My processing does not produce "noise, vibrations, air pollution, fire
hazards or noxious emissions..." All of my processing is now and will be
done indoors; and the sorted materials are stored in enclosed shipping
containers until volumes adequate for transport are collected.
3. The only portion of my processing which is "outdoors" is the mere
placing of the separated materials into distinct and enclosed containers.
4. My operations have no commercial aspects. I do not sell anything to the
public; 1 merely pay generators of recyclables a fee for their delivery.
None of the persons dropping materials off need parking on-site as the
time they are on the property is minimal. The number of trips per day by
such persons will likely not exceed 35 during the week and perhaps as
many as 100 on Saturdays. These vehicle movements will hardly be
noticed on County Road 21, especially when it becomes a four lane road
which I understand is planned for the future.
5. As to the Becker Ice Arena use of a portion of the property, I am
unaware of any City Zoning Code provision that requires a conclusion
that my manufacturing and Becker's need be "compatible." In fact, they
clearly are; otherwise 1 would not have been able to secure their sub-
lease of a portion of the building. Becker has other operations in the
immediate area; its continued location and expansion in Prior lake is
welcomed, I am sure, by the City.
As to building code issues, your staff is aware that I have engaged Prior lake architect Pat
O'Keefe (O'Keefe Design Associates) to advise on how to assure that the modest interior
alterations we have made (building one partition wall and eliminating a couple of others) to
the property are up to code. We will do our best within reason to do the same with
726139.1
. ,
improvements, if any, done by the prior owner/user that may not have been done with permits
or up to code.
The only significant physical change to the building which I will seek permits for is the
addition of a canopy at the west end of the building to provide weather protection for people
dropping off reyclables. And that is not really my first preference. I would prefer to add a drive
through door on the south side of the building so that customers would actually come into the
building, drop off materials, and then exit to the north. This procedure would be much easier
for the customers and more consistent with my business practice of running all processing
operations of my business indoors. This would be consistent with the telephone company's
use of its building just to the west of my property.
Of course, I am very concerned about your suggestion that we cease the recycling operations
pending consideration of a zoning amendment which I believe is unnecessary. I understand
that such a process may take up to 90 days. In the meantime, I have contractual and license
obligations to provide services to your residents. If I cannot continue the light manufacturing
processing that I am doing, there may be serious disruption in those services --- and possibly
some additional expenses to your residential generators since any interim solution is bound
to be more expensive than what is happening now.
I assure you, and you can independently ascertain if you wish, that I have and will own and
manage a sound business providing needed and cost-effective service to my customers, most
of which are Prior Lake residents. A great majority of these customers have been serviced by
my business for many years; they would not continue with me if my work was not exemplary.
cc: Mayor and City Council Members
John A. Cairns, Briggs & Morgan
726139.1
r--
August 1, 1995
Tom Buckingham
Buckingham Disposal, Inc.
5980 Credit River Road
Prior Lake, MN 55372
Subject: Appeal to City Code Requirements
Dear Mr. Buckingham,
Thank you for your July 18, 1995 letter. After reviewing the letter, it is clear
that there is a disagreement regarding the interpretation of the zoning
ordinance with regard to recycling operations. Two portions of the City's
Qrdinance are instructive: Section 2.5 of the Zoning Ordinance entitled "Uses
not designated" provides that:
"A use not specifically designated as permitted or conditional use
anywhere in the City is considered prohibited. In such a case, the
Council, Commission or property owner may request a study by the
city to determine if the use is acceptable and, if so, what zoning district
would be most appropriate for the use, and what conditions and
standards, if any, should be attached to the development of the use. If
found acceptable an amendment to the Zoning Ordinance may be
initiated by the Council or Commission permitting the use."
The City Code goes on to say in Chapter 5-6-4 Appeals that "An appeal from
a ruling of the Zoning Officer may be made by the property owner or agent
. within thirty (30) days after the order utilizing the procedure as follows:
A. The property owner or agent shall file with the Zoning Officer a
notice of appeal stating the specific grounds upon which the appeal
is made.
B. The Zoning Officer shall transmit the appeal to the Board of
Adjustment for study and recommendation at its next regular
meeting.
C. The Board of Adjustments shall make its recommendation within
sixty (60) days and transmit to the City Council for official action.
162~lJa~W't~W\:t,~.?~rior Lake, Minnesota 55372-1714 / Ph. (612) 447-4230 / Fax (612) 447-4245
AN EQUAL OPPORTIJNITY EMPLOYER
D. The City Council shall make its decision by Resolution within sixty
(60) days and a copy of the resolution shall be mailed to the
applicant by the Zoning Officer."
Planning Director, Don Rye, has reviewed the City Code with respect to
recycling operations and provided his interpretation. Your July 18
memorandum outlines your interpretation. Don Rye, in his capacity as the
Zoning Officer, does not believe that the Zoning Ordinance addresses
recycling operations as either permitted or conditional uses. Consequently,
. you have the opportunity to appeal Mr. Rye's findings to the Board of
Adjustment which is the City's Planning Commission. The Board of
Adjustment, and subsequently, the City Council have the option of
supporting Mr. Rye's interpretation and/or directing that revisions be made
to the Zoning Ordinance to address recycling operations specifically. To
expedite this process, I have interpreted your July 18 letter to be a notice of
appeal as required under the code. I have asked the Planning Department to
initiate the process set forth in 5-6-4 and 2.5.
In the meantime, I must advise you that until the Zoning Ordinance is
revised and your operation comes into complete compliance with the City
Code, Uniform Building Code, County and State ReqJ,lirements, you may not
operate the facility from this location. To do otherwise is contrary to the law,
and undertaken at your sole and exclusive risk.
Whether or not the Zoning Ordinance is revised to accommodate the recycling
use, it will be necessary for you to submit a building permit application,
supporting materials and fees in order that the work already accomplished
will be deemed legal under the State Building code laws.
Feel free to contact Planning Director Don Rye, or Assistant Planner Deb
Garross, to schedule the appeal you are requesting before the Planning
Commission and City Council.
cc: Don Rye, Gary Staber an
16200~MPe~~IA~'R2q,rior Lake, Minnesota 55372-1714 / Ph. (612) 447-4230 / Fax (612) 447-4245
AN EQUAL OPPORnJNITY EMPLOYER
LAW OFFICES
BRIGGS AND MORGAN
PROFESSIONAL ASSOCIATION
2400 IDS CENTER
MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55402
TELEPHONE 1612/ 334 - 8400
FACSIMILE (612) 334-8650
WRITER'S DIRECT DIAL NUMBER
SAINT PAUL OFFICE
2200 l'IRST NATIONAL BANK BUILDING
SAINT PAUL,MINNESOTA 00101
TELEPHONE (6121223-6600
FACSIMILE 16121 223-641)0
(612) 334-8532
INTERNET ADDRESS:
CAIJOH@EMAIL.BRIGGS.COM
.~
August 9, 1995
Frank Boyles, Manager
City of Prior Lake
Prior Lake Courthouse
4629 Dakota Street S.E.
Prior Lake, MN 55372-1714
Dear Mr. Boyles:
We have confirmed that the Buckingham Disposal, Inc. matter will be on the planning commission
agenda for August 28, 1995. I have asked Don Rye to set the matter towards the end of the
agenda as I will not be able to get to Prior Lake much before 8:00 that evening.
We do not agree with your statement of the situation in your August 1 letter. In particular, we
disagree with the options that are on the table for consideration. The Planning Commission and
City Council could accept our view of the situation rather than supporting Mr. Rye's flawed (in
our view) interpretation or directing revisions of the ordinance.
Prior to the meeting, we will submit a more detailed statement of our view of the situation.
Included will be a recitation of the discussions held with city staff before your first
correspondence and other facts that we believe are material to the situation.
We will try to get this material to you by August 18 so that it can be assessed by the staff as they
prepare their report and considered by Planning Commission members ahead of the meeting.
728106.1
MEMBER, LEX MUNDI, A GLOBAL ASSOCIATION OF INDEPENDENT LAW FIRMS
BRIGGS AND MORGAN
Frank Boyles
August 9, 1995
Page 2
In the interim, I would appreciate receiving from you and your staff:
1. A list of the Planning Commission members; and
2. A description of the circumstances under which the City permits the operation of
Lloyd's Construction Services, Inc. to operate in the 1-2 zoning district.
yours,
JAC/vkh
cc: Tom Buckingham
Steve Rathke, Esq., City Attorney
728106.1
August 14, 1995
Mr. John A. Cairns
Briggs And Morgan
2400 IDS Center
Minneapolis, MN. 55402
Dear Mr. Cairns:
Frank Boyles asked me to respond to your letter of August 9 concerning Buckingham
Disposal. I have enclosed a Planning Commission roster for your information.
Concerning Lloyd's Construction Services, it appears that they have occupied the
building without benefit of a Certificate of Occupancy and their circumstances in that
regard are similar to those of your client. The Building Department will be following up
with this to rectify the apparent code violation Thank you for bringing this matter to our
attention.
d~
Donald Rye
Director of Planning
cc: Frank Boyles
Gary Staber
Document2
16200 Eagle Creek Ave., Prior Lake, Minnesota 55372-1714 / Ph. (612) 447-4230 / Fax (612) 447-4245
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER
AGENDA #:
PREPARED BY:
SUBJECT:
DATE:
INTRODUCTION:
ISSUES:
STAFF AGENDA REPORT
8a
Donald Rye
Planning Director
Consider appeal of Buckingham Disposal from ordinance
interpretation
September 18,1995
In June, City staff was made aware of the operation of a
recycling operation conducted by Buckingham Disposal at
5980 Credit River Road. The facility was opened without
benefit of a Certificate of Occupancy and a subsequent
determination was made by the Planning Director that the use
was not a permitted or conditional use in the 1-2 zoning district.
The owner of Buckingham Disposal appealed this decision
pursuant to Section 7.4 of the zoning ordinance. The Planning
Commission, acting as the Board of Adjustment, heard this
request on August 28 and, following its deliberations,
recommended that the City Council uphold the appellant's
contention that the recycling operation fits within the definition
of light manufacturing as contained in the zoning ordinance.
Section 7.4 states that the Council shall make its decision by
resolution within 60 days.
The issue to be resolved is whether the City Council agrees
with the staff interpretation of the ordinance or with the
appellants view that the recycling operation falls within the
definition of light manufacturing in the zoning
ordinance.Attached to this report are the planning commission
staff report,the use listing in the 1-2 zoning district,a letter to Mr.
Buckingham from the City Manager, the staff memorandum
making the determination of use, a memo from the building
official a letter from Mr. Buckingham describing the operation, a
letter from the City Manager, a letter from Mr. Buckingham's
attorney filing the appeal, a response to the appeal letter from
the Planning Director, a summary of operations and a letter
16200 Eagle Creek Ave. S.E., Prior Lake, Minnesota 55372-1714 / Ph. (612) 447-4230 / Fax (612) 447-4245
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER
from Scott County indicating that the facilities license has been
denied.
The planning report had three options specified:
1. Recommend support of the staff determination
2. Recommend support of the appellants position
3. Recommend the staff determination be upheld and that
staff be directed to conduct a study pursuant to Section 2.5
of the zoning ordinance to determine under what
circumstances a recycling center may be allowed in the 1-2
zoning district.
The staff recommendation was alternative 3. The Planning
Commission recommended alternative 2.
If Council believes that a recycling operation as described by
the appellant does not fit the definition of light manufacturing as
discussed in the planning report, it should uphold the staff
determination.
If Council believes that the recycling operation fits the definition
of light manufacturing, it should uphold the appellant.
If Council believes that a recycling operation is sufficiently
different from other traditional light manufacturing uses, it
should direct staff to conduct the appropriate study to define
how such a facility should be regulated.
Staff is of the opinion that such a use raises some particular
concerns related to outside storage, appearance, storage of
potentially hazardous materials on site such as
chlorofluorocarbons in appliances and control of traffic and
drainage.
ALTERNATIVES:
1. Uphold the staff interpretation of the ordinance that a
recycling operation does not fit the current definition
of light manufacturing.This would effectively prohibit
continued operation of the recycling operation.
2. Uphold the appellants position
3. Uphold the staff interpretation and direct staff to
conduct a study to determine the proper method of
regulation for recycling operations
RECOMMENDATION: Alternative 3.No further enforcement action would be
taken pending the outcome and council action on such a
study.
ACTION REQUIRED: Motion to direct preparation of a resolution consistent
with the City Councils action.
Reviewed By: Frank Boyles, City Manager
ordinance to be applied in a consistent fashion. Consequently, the Commission should
look beyond the case before it and consider the implications of its recommendation.
The ordinance currently defines light manufacturing as " the processing and fabrication of
certain materials where no process involved will produce noise, vibrations, air pollution,
fire hazards or noxious emissions which will disturb or endanger neighboring properties."
Fabricate is defined as "To construct by combining and assembling" while manufacturing
is defined as "to make or process a raw material into a finished product, esp. by means of
a large-scale industrial operation." Staff does not believe that a recycling center where
used materials are gathered, separated and, in some cases, reduced in bulk, conforms to
either definition. The staff memorandum also lists other reasons why it was felt that
recycling centers are not currently permitted in the 1-2 district.
AL TERNA TIVES:
The Planning Commission has three alternatives:
1. Recommend that the City Council uphold the staff determination and direct continued
enforcement actions to be taken.
2. Recommend that the City Council uphold the appellant and direct termination of
zoning ordinance enforcement.
3. Recommend that the City Council uphold the staff determination and direct that staff
conduct a study pursuant to Section 2.5 of the zoning ordinance to determine under
what circumstances, if any,
RECOMMENDATION:
It is recommended that the Planning Commission recommend Alternative 3 to the City
Council.
ACTION REQUIRED:
Motion to adopt Alternative 3.
BUCKAP.DOC
....
.....
2.3
2.4
2.5
I
.
- -J
-J
]
1-2
C-1
S-D
the taxable value and to promote the public health, safety and welfare. (Ord.93-18)(0\~C ...))
LIGHT INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT is intended to provide areas of the community which will
allow general industrial uses which due to their size and nature would not conform to the
Special Industrial District.
CONSERVATION DISTRICT is provided to recognize vital environmental resources of
the community as steep slopes, wetland and unstable soil conditions and allow
development only after careful analysis.
SHORELAND DISTRICT is established to protect water and shoreland resources
from unwise development and water pollution and to preserve economic and natural
environmental qualities of the shoreland environment. Land located within the following
distances from protected waters is considered to be within the Shoreland District: 1000
feet from the ordinary high water mark of a lake, pond, or flowage and 300 feet from a
river or stream, or the landward extent of a flood plain on such river or stream, whichever
is greater.
DISTRICT BOUNDARIES: District boundaries shown within the lines of the roads,
streams, and transportation rights-of-way shall be deemed to follow the centerlines. The
vacation of roads shall not affect the location of such district boundaries. When the
Zoning Officer cannot definitely determine the location of a district boundary by such
centerlines, by the scale or dimensions stated on the Zoning Map, or by the fact that it
clearly coincides with a property line, he shall interpret the location of the district
boundary with reference to the scale of the Zoning Map and the purposes set forth in all
relevant provisions of the Ordinance. Where a district boundary line divides a lot of
record into two or more districts, any portion of the lot within fifty (50) feet of such division
may be used for any use of either district as approved by the Board of Adjustment.
DISTRICT REQUIREMENTS: Except for Planned Unit Developments, all buildings and
uses in each district shall be subject to the requirements listed under Sections 3 through
9. Planned Unit Development standards may be applied to any Residential Districts at
the request of the land owner and at the discretion of the City Council. Where Planned
Unit Development standards differ from the original district standards, the Planned Unit
Development standards shall apply.
USES NOT DESIGNATED: A use not specifically designated as a permitted or
conditional use anywhere in the City is considered prohibited. In such a case, the
Council, Commission or a property owner may request a study by the City to determine if
the use is acceptable and if so, what Zoning District would be most appropriate for the
use and what conditions and standards, if any, should be attached to the development of
the use. If found acceptable an amendment to the Zoning Ordinance may be initiated by
the Councilor Commission permitting the use. (Ord. 83-6)
Section 2, Page 2
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
PERMITTED USES
1-2 LIGHT INDUSTRIAL
1.
2.
Light Manufacturing
Research Laboratories
3.
Testing Laboratories
Offices
Supply Yards
4.
5.
6.
7.
Warehousing
Truck Terminals
8.
9.
Public Parking
Parking Lots
10. Mini-Storage Units
C-1 CONSERVATION
1.
Agriculture
Single Family Dwellings
Camps & Cottages
Public Parks & Playgrounds
Public & Parochial Schools
Hunting Preserves
Golf Courses
Specialized Animal Raising
Stables & Riding Academies
Public Buildings
Marina (Ord. 83-6)
Wholesale Plant Nurseries (Ord 90-07)
Agricultural Preserve (Ord 93-12)
Section 3. Page 5
CONDITIONAL USES
(
(
r
(
r
[
I
[
[
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
1.
2.
Manufacturing
Public Utility
Buildings
Water & Sewer
Treatment Facilities
Airports
Truck & Railroad
Terminals
Grain Elevators
Commercial
Recreation
Animal Clinics
Food Product
Processing
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
1.
Water & Sewer
Treatment Facilities
Commercial
Recreation
Airports
Cemeteries
Radio & TV Stations
Sanitary Land Fills
Animal Clinics
Animal Feed Lots For
more than 10 animals
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
/S.~/-(~ /~
June 30, 1995
Tom Buckingham
Buckingham Disposal
5980 Credit River Road SE
Prior Lake, MN 55372
Subject: Recycling Center Located in Prior Lake
Dear Mr. Buckingham:
Building Official, Gary Staber, and Planning Director, Don Rye, have had the
opportunity to review the materials you submitted on Friday, June 23. In addition,
they inspected the site on June 26. I am attaching a copy of their written findings.
Based upon the materials you submitted, the site inspection and a review of the
City's Zoning Ordinance and Uniform Building Code, our findings can be
summarized as follows:
1. Recycling is not a permitted or conditional use in the 1-2 Zone.
2. The plans provided were not to scale, and did not show both first and
second floor layout. A code analysis should be completed by a qualified
engineer or architect focusing on such issues as exiting, sanitation
facilities, occupancy separations, allowable square footage and site access
in general.
3. It is apparent that alterations have been made to the building without
proper permits, either by the current or former occupant.
In short, the recycling operation continues to be contrary to the City's Zoning
Ordinance, City Code and Uniform Building Code.
According to Gary Staber, the Uniform Building Code issues are resolvable. What
needs to occur first is that the Council should consider whether it wishes to add
recycling as a permitted or conditional use in the 1-2 Zoning District and, if so, what
safe guards should be associated with such usage.
BUCKHAM2.DOC
1620D Eag1eCreek Ave.. Prior Lake. Minnesota 55372-1714 / Ph. (612) 447-4230 / Fax (612) 447-4245
AN EQUAL OPPORThNITY E~lPLOYER
Page 2
Tom Buckingham
June 30, 1995
If you desire to have the Council consider such a request please provide me with a
letter to that effect which we will submit to the Council together with supporting
materials. You can expect that staff will recommend numerous safeguards if the
Council is positively inclined to allow recycling uses as a conditional use or
permitted use.
Until the Zoning Ordinance is revised and your operation comes into complete
compliance with the City Code, Uniform Building Code, County and State
requirements, you may not operate the recycling facility from this location. To do
other wise is contrary to the law and undertaken at your sole and exclusive risk.
If you have anlestions please feel free to contact me, Don Rye or Gary Staber.
FB:db
Attachment
/ Fax (612) 447-4245
MEMORANDUM
DATE:
June 26, 1995
Frank Boyles, Gary Staber
Don Rye
Buckingham Disposal
TO:
FROM:
RE:
I have reviewed the material presented to us on Friday, June 23 by Tom Buckingham. In addition, I
have reviewed the zoning ordinance and visited the site on June 26 with Gary. 1 have concluded that a
recycling center is not a permitted or conditional use in the 1-2 Industrial zoning district.
1 base this finding on several factors as follows:
. When the. ordinance was written in 1983, recycling was fairly well established as a legitimate land
use and yet the ordinance makes no specific provision for such a use.!t is possible to conclude from
this that this use was not considered as a viable use in this district.
. Light manufacturing is a permitted use in the 1-2 district and is defined as " The processing and
fabrication of certain materials where no process involved will produce noise, vibrations, air
pollution, fire hazards or noxious emission which will disturb or endanger neighboring properties."
The definition of manufacturing is" to make or process ( a raw material) into a finished product,
esp., by means of a large-scale industrial operation:' The notion of a recycling center where used
materials are gathered, separated and reduced in bulk does not conform to the traditional definition
of manufacturing.
. A significant portion of the recycling operation is conducted outside.Large metal bins,semi trailers
and trucks are located around the site and the recycled materials are stored outside until moved
elsewhere.In addition, the general public drops off material outside in the storage yard. In that
respect, the recycling operation has a distinct commercial aspect to it as it generates traffic much as
a retail use might.
. The zoning ordinance provides that uses not specifically designated as permitted or conditional uses
are prohibited. 1 believe that the recycling operation is sufficiently different from uses which would
qualify as light manufacturing as to put it into the prohibited category. In that case, the ordinance
provides for a study of the use to determine if the use is acceptable and, if so, in what zoning district
and with what additional conditions and standards, if any.
Based on the foregoing, I conclude that Buckingham Disposal operating as a recycling center is not a
permitted or conditional use in the 1-2 district.
Frank Boyles
From:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Date:
Gary Staber
Frank Boyles
Don Rye
Buckingham Disposal
Monday, June 26,1995 3:53PM
Hi Frank, Buckingham came in with some information late on Friday afternoon. Don and I had a chance to go
out and tour the site today. We met Tom Buckingham on site and told him after our tour that we would be going
back to City Hall to write memos regarding the facility.
My comments are as follows:
1. A code analysis should be completed by a qualified engineer or architect. Items such as
exiting, sanitation facilities, occupancy separations, allowable square footages, and site access in general should
be addressed.
2. Building plans should be to scale, 1/8 or 1/4 inch per foot is preferred.
3. Building plans should be complete showing both the first and second floor layouts.
When Don and I were touring the structure it became quite obvious that the former tenant made several
alterations to the building without proper permits. It was also noted that Buckingham made some alterations and
modifications to the building without proper permits. Mr. Buckingham while being cooperative, is not totally
innocent in that this situation we are reacting to seems to have been created largely by Mr. Buckingham himself.
Rather than giving my first impressions at this time, I would rather wait for the architect's code analysis for a
more thorough response.
Page 1
~ t.e.~ L " eeQ. 1 \ z. II q S"' J?jS
BUCKINGHAM DISPOSAL, INC.
5980 Credit River Road
Prior lake MN 55372
Phone: 226.6441
Fax: 226.6442
(612) 334-8532
July 18, 1995
Frank Boyles, Manager
City of Prior Lake
Prior Lake Courthouse
4629 Dakota Street S. E.
Prior Lake MN 55372-1714
Dear Mr. Boyles:
In the past week or so I have had discussions with a number of advisors regarding your
concern about our operations in Prior Lake. This letter is to offer a view of the situation that
I believe will support a conclusion on the City's part that my use of the property is entirely
consistent with the City's Zoning Code.
As you know, my business services over 1000 Prior Lake residences. In addition to picking
up MSW from those residences, I also have a contractual obligation to do weekly curbside
recycling pick-up. There is no realistic alternative to processing the recyclables at my property.
If I am not able to do so, even for a brief period of time, the effect may be adverse to the Prior
Lake residents that I serve.
In addition, I offer residential generators drive-in and drop-off service for recyclables and
compostable materials (the latter being regularly used by Prior Lake residents since they can
avoid the $2.00 per bag charge for curbside pick-up).
Since it is not clear to me that earlier staff review of my operations reflect a thorough
understanding of what my business and use of the property is, let me offer specifics. There
are a number of components to my business: there are offices; my trucks are parked overnight
and operate from the property; I warehouse certain materials for limited periods of time; I
maintain and store supplies for my business; and I run a recyclable materials processing
operation which, in my view, is clearly a permitted "light manufacturing" use.
Let me also clarify what my business is not. It is not a site for processing or transferring
Mixed Municipal Solid Waste (commonly known as "garbage") as that term is defined by
Minnesota law.
Your staff has indirectly seemed concerned that my property in Prior Lake will have some
processing of MSW done there. That is not the case. My vehicles for MSW pick-up are stored
overnight at the property. Otherwise, under my Scott County Licenses, I am prohibited from
726139.1
processing MSW; and I do not have an MSW transfer station license nor do I have any
intention to secure such.
You have raised the concern that my use of the property is not for Light Manufacturing as
permitted by the 1-2 Zoning classification. I ask that you reconsider this tentative conclusion
for the following reasons:
1. My business is "processing" materials. The raw materials are the
unsorted recyclables. My process is the sorting, compacting and
packaging of the recyclables into marketable form. The City definition
of Light Manufacturing is properly broad enough to encompass clearly
what we do. The "finished" material or product is sold to end-users for
incorporation into additional manufactured products. In effect, we are
the first of several manufacturers/processors that allow the entire
recycling system to function effectively.
2. My processing does not produce "noise, vibrations, air pollution, fire
hazards or noxious emissions..." All of my processing is now and will be
done indoors; and the sorted materials are stored in enclosed shipping
containers until volumes adequate for transport are collected.
3. The only portion of my processing which is "outdoors" is the mere
placing of the separated materials into distinct and enclosed containers.
4. My operations have no commercial aspects. I do not sell anything to the
public; I merely pay generators of recyclables a fee for their delivery.
None of the persons dropping materials off need parking on-site as the
time they are on the property is minimal. The number of trips per day by
such persons will likely not exceed 35 during the week and perhaps as
many as 100 on Saturdays. These vehicle movements will hardly be
noticed on County Road 21 , especially when it becomes a four lane road
which I understand is planned for the future.
5. As to the Becker Ice Arena use of a portion of the property, I am
unaware of any City Zoning Code provision that requires a conclusion
that my manufacturing and Becker's need be "compatible." In fact, they
clearly are; otherwise I would not have been able to secure their sub-
lease of a portion of the building. Becker has other operations in the
immediate area; its continued location and expansion in Prior Lake is
welcomed, I am sure, by the City.
As to building code issues, your staff is aware that I have engaged Prior Lake architect Pat
O'Keefe (O'Keefe Design Associates) to advise on how to assure that the modest interior
alterations we have made (building one partition wall and eliminating a couple of others) to
the property are up to code. We will do our best within reason to do the same with
726139.1
improvements, if any, done by the prior owner/user that may not have been done with permits
or up to code.
The only significant physical change to the building which I will seek permits for is the
addition of a canopy at the west end of the building to provide weather protection for people
dropping off reyclables. And that is not really my first preference. I would prefer to add a drive
through door on the south side of the building so that customers would actually come into the
building, drop off materials, and then exit to the north. This procedure would be much easier
for the customers and more consistent with my business practice of running all processing
operations of my business indoors. This would be consistent with the telephone company's
use of its building just to the west of my property.
Of course, I am very concerned about your suggestion that we cease the recycling operations
pending consideration of a zoning amendment which I believe is unnecessary. I understand
that such a process may take up to 90 days. In the meantime, I have contractual and license
obligations to provide services to your residents. If I cannot continue the light manufacturing
processing that I am doing, there may be serious disruption in those services --- and possibly
some additional expenses to your residential generators since any interim solution is bound
to be more expensive than what is happening now.
I assure you, and you can independently ascertain if you wish, that I have and will own and
manage a sound business providing needed and cost-effective service to my customers, most
of which are Prior Lake residents. A great majority of these customers have been serviced by
my business for many years; they would not continue with me if my work was not exemplary.
~rUIY<<' --1
lb~ ~/LAC-~I~c.'
cc: Mayor and City Council Members
John A. Cairns, Briggs & Morgan
726139.1
~ ----
,
I
)
./
August 1, 1995
Tom Buckingham
Buckingham Disposal, Inc.
5980 Credit River Road
Prior Lake, MN 55372
Subject: Appeal to City Code Requirements
Dear Mr. Buckingham,
Thank you for your July 18, 1995 letter. After reviewing the letter, it is clear
that there is a disagreement regarding the interpretation of the zoning
ordinance with regard to recycling operations. Two portions of the City's
o.rdinance are instructive: Section 2.5 of the Zoning Ordinance entitled "Uses
not designated" provides that:
"A use not specifically designated as permitted or conditional use
anywhere in the City is considered prohibited. In such a case, the
Council, Commission or property owner may request a study by the
city to determine if the use is acceptable and, if so, what zoning district
would be most appropriate for the use, and what conditions and
standards, if any, should be attached to the development of the use. If
found acceptable an amendment to the Zoning Ordinance may be
initiated by the Council or Commission permitting the use."
The City Code goes on to say in Chapter 5-6-4 Appeals that "An appeal from
a ruling of the Zoning Officer may be made by the property owner or agent
within thirty (30) days after the order utilizing the procedure as follows:
A. The property owner or agent shall file with the Zoning Officer a
notice of appeal stating the specific grounds upon which the appeal
is made.
B. The Zoning Officer shall transmit the appeal to the Board of
Adjustment for study and recommendation at its next regular
meeting.
C. The Board of Adjustments shall make its recommendation within
sixty (60) days and transmit to the City Council for official action.
162ol}~~~~WVAv~.?frior Lake, Minnesota 55372-1714 / Ph. (612) 447-4230 / Fax (612) 447-4245
AN EQUAL OPPOR11JNITY E.\1PlOYER
D. The City Council shall make its decision by Resolution within sixty
(60) days and a copy of the resolution shall be mailed to the
applicant by the Zoning Officer."
Planning Director, Don Rye, has reviewed the City Code with respect to
recycling operations and provided his interpretation. Your July 18
memorandum outlines your interpretation. Don Rye, in his capacity as the
Zoning Officer, does not believe that the Zoning Ordinance addresses
recycling operations as either permitted or conditional uses. Consequently,
you have the opportunity to appeal Mr. Rye's findings to the Board of
Adjustment which is the City's Planning Commission. The Board of
Adjustment, and subsequently, the City Council have the option of
supporting Mr. Rye's interpretation and/or directing that revisions be made
to the Zoning Ordinance to address recycling operations specifically. To
expedite this process, I have interpreted your July 18 letter to be a notice of
appeal as required under the code. I have asked the Planning Department to
initiate the process set forth in 5-6-4 and 2.5.
In the meantime, I must advise you that until the Zoning Ordinance is
revised and your operation comes into complete compliance with the City
Code, Uniform Building Code, County and State Requirements, you may not
operate the facility from this location. To do otherwise is contrary to the law,
and undertaken at your sole and exclusive risk.
Whether or not the Zoning Ordinance is revised to accommodate the recycling
use, it will be necessary for you to submit a building permit application,
supporting materials and fees in order that the work already accomplished
will be deemed legal under the State Building code laws.
Feel free to contact Planning Director Don Rye, or Assistant Planner Deb
Garross, to schedule the appeal you are requesting before the Planning
Commission and City Council.
cc: Don Rye, Gary Staber an
16200~~Fe~~IAM'~2q,rior Lake, Minnesota 55372-1714 I Ph. (612) 447-4230 I Fax (612) 447-4245
AN EQUAL OPPORTIJNITY EMPLOYER
LAW OFFICES
BRIGGS AND MORGAN
PROFESSIONAL ASSOCIATION
2400 IDS CENTER
MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 1515402
TELEPHONE 16121 334 - 8400
FACSIMILE ~121 334-86150
WRITER'!> DIRECT DIAL NUMBER
SAINT PAUL OFFICE
2200 FIRST NATIONAL BANK BUILDING
SAINT PAUL, KINNESOTA 1l1ll0!
TELEPHONE (0121223-0600
FACSIKILEI0121223-64ll0
(612) 334-8532
INTERNET ADDRESS:
CAIJOH@EMAILBRIGGS.COM
~
.
August 9, 1995
Frank Boyles, Manager
City of Prior Lake
Prior Lake Courthouse
4629 Dakota Street S.E.
Prior Lake, MN 55372-1714
Dear Mr. Boyles:
We have confirmed that the Buckingham Disposal, Inc. matter will be on the planning commission
agenda for August 28, 1995. I have asked Don Rye to set the matter towards the end of the
agenda as I will not be able to get to Prior Lake much before 8:00 that evening.
We do not agree with your statement of the situation in your August 1 letter. In particular, we
disagree with the options that are on the table for consideration. The Planning Commission and
City Council could accept our view of the situation rather than supporting Mr. Rye's flawed (in
our view) interpretation or directing revisions of the ordinance.
Prior to the meeting, we will submit a more detailed statement of our view of the situation.
Included will be a recitation of the discussions held with city staff before your first
correspondence and other facts that we believe are material to the situation.
We will try to get this material to you by August 18 so that it can be assessed by the staff as they
prepare their report and considered by Planning Commission members ahead of the meeting.
728106.1
MEMBER, LEX MUNDI, A GLOBAL ASSOCIATION OF INDEPENDENT LAW FIRMS
BRIGGS AND MORGAN
Frank Boyles
August 9, 1995
Page 2
In the interim, I would appreciate receiving from you and your staff:
1. A list of the Planning Commission members; and
2. A description of the circumstances under which the City permits the operation of
Lloyd's Construction Services, Inc. to operate in the 1-2 zoning district.
JAC/vkh
cc: Tom Buckingham
Steve Rathke, Esq., City Attorney
728106.1
August 14, 1995
Mr. John A. Cairns
Briggs And Morgan
2400 IDS Center
Minneapolis, MN. 55402
Dear Mr. Cairns:
Frank Boyles asked me to respond to your letter of August 9 concerning Buckingham
Disposal. I have enclosed a Planning Commission roster for your information.
Concerning Lloyd's Construction Services, it appears that they have occupied the
building without benefit of a Certificate of Occupancy and their circumstances in that
regard are similar to those of your client. The Building Department will be following up
with this to rectify the apparent code violation Thank you for bringing this matter to our
attention.
Donald Rye
Director of Planning
aSinCerelY,
I (I (')
r~/,
cc: Frank Boyles
Gary S taber
Document2
16200 Eagle Creek Ave.. Prior Lake. Minnesota 55372-1714 / Ph. (612) 447-4230 / Fax (612) 447-4245
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITv E:--1PLOYER
BUCKINGHAM DISPOAL, INC
5980 CREDIT RIVER ROAD
PRIOR LAKE, 1vfN 55372
612-226-6441
6/95
SUMMARY OF OPERATIONS
BUCKINGHAM DISPOSAL COMPANY WAS FORMED 27 YEARS AGO WlTIi
TIlE RECYCLING OPERATIONS STARTED IN JANUARY OF 1988.
BUCKINGHAM RECYCLES IS OPEN TO TIlE PUBUC FROM 9 AM 1TI.L
3 P.M, MONDAY TIIRU FRIDAY WITH THE EXc~TION OF THURSDAY
EVENING WIDCHIS TilL 7P.M AND EVERY SAruRDAYFROM 10 AM
.~4-P;M- MATERIAL.ACC~llID AT TIllS FACILrIY INCLUDE SCRAP METAL,
. -DRAIN O}4MAGAZINES, ~NEWSPAP~iOmc:e PAPER, PHONEBOOKS,
~6.Jto, '{1N-eAm~titA~~, )jID~'flf:>>5~.
OTHER RECYCLING ITEMS TAKEN.BUT MAY INCLUDE A SMALL SERVICE
.' .......... --- --"
FEE ARE:, COMPOst; APPLrANCE,''PIRES; AND T.V. 'So
ALUMINl.T.M---cANs- ARE-PORcHASED FROM TIlE PUBUC. WE OPERAlE our
OF AN ENCLOSED BUILDING OF APPROX. 14,000 SQ. Fr. ALL RECYCLING
MATERIAL IS PROCESSED HERE BY OUR OWN EMPLOYEE'S (GENERAIL Y
THREE FUlL TIME) TIIAT DO STRIC'IL Y RECYCLING SUCH AS BALING
CARDBOARD OR PLASTIC OR SIMPLY CRUSHING CANS ORHELPlNG
CUSTOMERS. MATERIALS ARE THEN TAKEN DIRECILY OtITDOORS AND
PUT INTO SEMI-TRAILERS AND ARE SHIPP.8D DIRECn.. Y TO THE MILLS.
ON A pAIL Y BASIS BUCKINGHAM HANDLES APPROX ONE TON OF
CARDBOARD AND ONE THOUSAND POUNDS OF ALUMINUM CANS.
SCRAP :METAL, MAGAZINES NEWSPAPER AND OTHER RELATED ITElv.fS ARE
CONTAINED IN SMALL AMOUNTS IN CAGED TYPE CONTAINERS AND
lRANSFERRED INTO ROlL-OFF BOXES OU1DOORS. WE THEN 'IRANSPORT
OUR OWN MATERIALS TO MARKET. DR1\1Nt)n;IS CONTAINED IN A
SECONDARY CONTAINER STORAGE TANK AND IS EMPIUV WEEKLY BY:
EDEL On., SERVICE OF NORTHFIELD, :MN EP A #.MND-985-742- 774.
BUCKINGHAM ALSO OPERATES A SOLID WASTE COILECTION BUSINESS
AND A ROlL-OFF CONSTRUCTION BOX RENTAL COMPANY wrrn AN
ADDmONAL THREErEMPUJYEES:nm TOTAL EMPLOYEES FOR ALL
OPERATIONS ARE NINE WIDCH INCLUDES MY WIFE AND MYSELF.
BECKER ARENA PRODUCTS, INC. IS A TENANT OF OURS RENTING APPROX.
9,.,600 SQ.ET. TIiEY MANUFACTURE ICE HOCKEY ARENAS AND EMPLOY LESS
mAN SIX E'tv1PLOYEES. TI:IEIR MAIN OFFICE IS LOCATED ON COTTONWOOD
LANE IN PRIOR LAKE.
BUCKINGHAM ALSO FOLLOWS THE SCOlT COUNTY REQUIREMENTS
WIllCH ARE AS FOLLOWS:
THE NUMBER. OF WASTE APPUANCES STORED AT THE FACIUTY SHALL
NOT EXCEED SIXTY. ONCE THE NUMBER OF APPUANCES REACHES
SIX'IY, TIm UCENSEE SHALL HA VB AlL APPUANCES REMOVED FROM
THE FACIlITY. ALL APPUANCES TIiAT CONTAIN HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
(CFC'S, PCB CAPACITORS AND MERCURY SHAlL BE REMOVED FROM mE
SI1E BY AN APPUANCE COLLECTOR OR DEUVERED TO A FACILITY lHAT
Wll.L REMOVE THE HAZARDOUS MATERIAL. THE VENDOR WE USE IS JRIS
APPliANCE DISPOSAL, INC. OF INVER GROVE HEIGHTS,:MN.
USED On.. AND WASTE BATIERlES ARE MANAGED IN ACCORDANCE wrrn
THE SCOTT COUNTY HAZARDOUS WASTE ORDINANCE NO. 12
THE NUMBER OF WASTE TIRES DO NOT EXCEED FIF1Y. THE TIRES ARE '/
STORED IN AN ENCLOSED BUILDING OR ON AN AREA IN pIRE~'T~GHT,
VOID OF ANY VEGETATION.
ACCESS SHALL BE CONTROLLED BY WHATEVER MEANS '!HE OWNER!
liCENSEE DETERMINES TO BE WORKABLE. THE OWNERlUCENSEE SHAIL
BE RESPONSIBLE FOR REMOVAL AND PROPER DISPOSAL OF ALL
UNACCEPTABLE WASTES.
ONLY SEPARATED RECYCLABLES ARE MANAGES AT TInS SITE. :MIXED
MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE IS NOT TRANSFERRED, STORED IN CONTAINERS
OTIIER lHAN COLLECTION VEHICLES OR ll.l:'PED FOR PROCESSING OR
TRANSFERRED FROM lHIS SITE.
SCOlT COUNTY HAS NO llr.l.lill US THAT THE PRESENT SEWER SYSTEM: IS
ADEQUATE AND ACCEPTABLE AS TIlE CITY HAS APPROVED.
THE COUNTY HAS ALSO INFORMED US TIiAT THEY HA VB MAILED
NECESSARY FORMS AND THAT UCENSES WOUID BE APPROVED BY THEM:
ONCES WE HA VB COMPLIED wrrn THE CITY OF PRIOR LAKE ORDINANCES.
THE BUCKINGHAM COMPANIES
EMPLOYEE SUMMARY
AREA 6-1-95
DRIVERS 3
ADMINISTRATION 3
RECYCLING CENTER 2
CLERICAL OFFICE 1
TOTAL 9
SCOTT COUNTY
ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH
COURTHOUSE A 102
428 HOLMES ST~~Tli5, 1995
SHAKOPEE. MN 55379- 1393 (612) 496-8177
Tom Buckingham
Buckingham Recycling Center
5980 Credit River Road
Prior Lake, Minnesota
Re: Solid Waste Facility License
Dear Mr. Buckingham:
This letter regards your application to operate a Recycling Facility in the
City of Prior Lake. We have reviewed your application and must deny your
license for the following reasons:
1. Lack of approval (zoning, conditional use, etc.) by the City of
Prior Lake.
2. Failure to obtain and submit a Permit-By-Rule from the Minnesota
Pollution Control Agency.
In accordance with the Scott County Administrative Procedures Ordinance No.
1, Section 7.01, you have the right to make a written appeal to this
decision. I have enclosed a copy of this Ordinance for your review.
We will be sending you a refund of your annual license fee of $100.00. The
application fee that you submitted of $50.00 is non-refundable.
Denial of this license application does not prevent you from reapplying
once the above mentioned items have been addressed and satisfactorily
completed.
All operations relating to the acceptance, storage and sorting of
recyclable material must cease at this location until a license is obtained
from this Office. Continued operation is a violation of the Scott County
Solid Waste Ordinance No.2, and subject to those penalties outlined in
that Ordinance. If you are close to resolving the above noted issues, or
if you have any questions please contact Jeff Peterson or myself at 496-
8177.
Sincerely,
a,~
Allen Frechette
Environmental Health Manager
cc: Dick Underferth, County Commissioner, District 4
Frank Boyles, City Manager, City of Prior Lake t
John Roach, Assistant County Attorney
O:\S~\BUCKINGH.VIO
An Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action/Safety Aware Employer
Correspondence
L:\TEMPLA TE\FILEINFO.DOC
May 28, 1996
Mr. Thomas Buckingham
Buckingham Disposal Inc.
5980 Credit River Rd. SE.
Prior Lake, MN 55372
Dear Mr. Buckingham:
I have reviewed again the most recently submitted site plan for your operation, which
appears to be part of a package including a description of the company. The following
information discussed on February 5, 1996, does not appear on and should be added to
that site plan;
1. Location, types and sizes of landscaping materials (this information was
previously submitted as a detail, but should be on the site plan as well),
2. The proposed location of a freestanding sign, if you intend to use one,
3. A note explaining the reasons for leaving the North and East areas unpaved as
you have previously explained them.
Also enclosed with this letter is a conditional use permit application for submittal with
the revised site plan. After June 4, 1996, please direct any questions you may have to
Don Rye.
Very truly yours,
R. Michael Leek
Associate Planner
cc. File SJ96-02
Donald Rye, Planning Director
BUCK528.DOC/JAK 1
16200 Eagle Creek Ave. S.E., Prior Lake, Minnesota 55372-1714 / Ph. (612) 447-4230 / Fax (612) 447-4245
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER
April 30, 1996
Mr. Thomas Buckingham
Buckingham Disposal Inc.
5980 Credit River Rd. SE.
Prior Lake, MN 55372
Dear Mr. Buckingham:
We last met to discuss the conditional use permit for Buckingham Disposal on February
5, 1996. It was my understanding from that meeting and a couple of phone conversations
that plans were being prepared in accordance with the discussion at that meeting and the
follow-up letter I sent on February 5, 1996, and that we could expect to see the revised
plans and CUP application within a few weeks.
It seems to me that it would be in both your and the City's best interests to proceed with
the conditional use permit application as soon as possible so that the issues surrounding
the use of your site can be resolved.
I would appreciate receiving your revised site plan and the CUP application in our offices
as soon as possible so that we can schedule the application for review by the Planning
Commission and City Council. Feel free to call me with any questions you may have.
v e~lY ~~urs, . _
// /~0u-~
R. Michael Leek
Associate Planner
cc. File SJ96-02
Donald Rye, Planning Director
16200 ~~~9~C~~S.E., Prior Lake, Minnesota 55372-1714 / Ph. (612) 447-4230 / Fax (612) 447-4245
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER
LAW OFFICES
BRIGGS AND
PROFESSIONAL ASSOCIATION
2400 IDS CENTER
MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55402
TELEPHONE (6121 334 - 8400
FACSIMILE (6121 334 - 8650
WRITER'S DIRECT DIAL NUMBER
SAINT PAUL OFFICE
2200 FIRST NATIONAL BANK BUILDING
SAINT PAUL,MINNESOTA 1511101
TELEPHONE (6121 223-6600
FACSIMILE (6121 223-64150
(612) 334-8532
January 16, 1996
Don Rye, Planning Director
City of Prior Lake
4629 Dakota Street S. E.
Prior Lake MN 55372-1714
Dear Mr. Rye:
Thank you for confirming that the~gh~ matter is on hold until Tom has completed
his site planning and reviewed the details with you. That may be done yet this week. In
that event, we will be in touch and try to work out a meeting of the minds in time to deal
with the matter on February 5.
We will be in touch.
JAC/bk
cc: Tom Buckingham
Glenn Kessel, Esq.
742598.1
MEMBER, LEX MUNDI, A GLOBAL ASSOCIATION OF INDEPENDENT LAW FIRMS
i(\~_
~
LAW OFFICES
BRIGGS AND MORGAN
r . . 1
: ...- r-"1 r;::-:, .--, r,' n 7 ,VP, "'~..'
,'" .... .. ~ I:~ .' I , ,'" I
II \' ,. . " ,.. 'I 'v "'" ".
:i D ! ~~S2-J~; ~\<-~~ : i 1\:
~l DEe 2 6 ~ I~
PROFESSIONAL ASSOCIATION
2400 IDS CENTER
MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55402
TELEPHONE (6121 334 - 8400
FACSIMILE (6121 334 - 8650
SAINT PAUL OFFICE
2200 FIRST NATIONAL BANK BUILDING
SAINT PAUL, MINNESOTA 55101
TELEPHONE (612) 223-6600
FACSIMILE (612)223-6450
WRITER'S DIRECT DIAL NUMBER
(612) 334-8532
December 21, 1995
Don Rye, Planning Director
City of Prior Lake
4629 Dakota Street S. E.
Prior Lake MN 55372-1714
Dear Don:
Tom Buckingham and I believe that we made important progress at our meeting with you
yesterday in Prior Lake. Tom is doing the following:
. a site plan to identify the concepts that he intends to use as a basis for complying
with the City's screening and landscaping rules. The plan will deal with all aspects
of the site except for the southern frontage which will be set aside until the final
alignment of rebuilt Scott County 21 is established and a determination is made
as to the ownership of certain areas that will be affected by the new routing.
. bidding the work so that he has a sense of cost.
When the site plan is done, he will review it with you before going into final detail.
Tom thinks that he will be ready to review the site plan with you early in January. It appears that
we would be ready to go to the Council, hopefully in agreement with you, at its meeting on
January 15. Please confirm that the matter will be laid over until then.
Given the progress, Tom would like your building inspector to visit the site and go through his
concerns with Tom, his architect and, perhaps, one of his realtors. Tom will be in touch with you
to set this site visit up.
Please advise is you have any concerns or questions about this course of action.
JAC/bk
740319.1
MEMBER, LEX MUNDI, A GLOBAL ASSOCIATION OF INDEPENDENT LAW FIRMS
"
December 14, 1995
Mr. Glenn R. Kessel
Lommen, Nelson, Cole & Stageberg, P.A.
1800 IDS Center
80 South Eight Street
Minneapolis, MN 55402
Re: Buckingham Disposal
Dear Glenn:
The Planning Department is in receipt of your letter of December 13, and John Cairns
letter of December 11, 1995. In addition, on thi~ date I have spoken twice with Mr.
Cairns about the issues raised in his letter. In those conversations I have expressed my
belief that;
1) Buckingham would be required to apply and go through the review
process for a conditional use permit rather than being granted a CUP
contemporaneously with the passage of the draft ordinance, and
2) That plans relative to the layout and operation of the facility would have to
be a part of the CUP application in order to determine whether the facility
complies with applicable ordinance standards for screening, landscaping, signage,
etc.
I am "faxing" a copy of the draft ordinance to you for your information. Once you have
had a chance to review the draft, please give Don Rye a call to discuss the City's response
to Mr. Cairns letter and the issues he attempts to raise. As always thank you for your
assistance.
V ery~ yours,
/1/ A:~~~
R. Michael Leek
16200 ~al~~!l)<Ave. S.L Prior Lake, Minnesota 55372-1714 / Ph. (612) 447-4230 / Fax (612) 447-4245
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER
'"
CITY OF PRIOR LAKE
ORDINANCE NO. 95-19
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING TITLE 5 OF THE PRIOR LAKE CITY CODE
AND SECTIONS 3 AND 8 OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE, 83-06.
The City Council of the City of Prior Lake does hereby ordain:
Title 5 of the Prior Lake City Code and Sections 3 and 8 of the Zoning Ordinance, 83-06
are hereby amended as follows:
SECTION 8 - DEFINITIONS
8.1
General:
Certain words used in this Ordinance are defined and shall be
interpreted as follow:
RECYCLABLE MATERIALS - Materials that are separated from mixed municipal
solid waste for the purpose of recycling, including, paper, glass, metals, automobile oil,
batteries and other specifically allowed items. Refuse derived material or other material
that is destroyed by incineration is not a recyclable material.
RECYCLING FACILITY - A center for the collection, processing or repair of
recyclable materials for reuse in their original form or use in manufacturing processes.
Recycling facilities may include the following:
Designated Recycling Center: A recycling facility which has complied
with the permitting rules of the Pollution Control Agency and is open a minimum
of 12 operating hours each week, 12 months each year, and accepts for recycling
at least four different materials such as paper, glass, plastic, and metal.
Light Processing Recycling Facility: A building or enclosed space
occupying an area less than 45,000 square feet and used for the collection and
processing of recyclable materials. Processing does not include end-use
manufacturing or industrial use but may include the preparation of material for
efficient shipment or end-user's specifications, by such means as baling,
briquetting, compacting, flattening, grinding, crushing, mechanical sorting, and
shredding.
SECTION 3 - PERMITTED AND CONDITIONAL USES
3.3 ST ANDARDS FOR LIGHT PROCESSING RECYCLING FACILITIES
AND DESIGNATED RECYCLING CENTERS
~.
1. Such facilities must meet Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA)
requirements, or other applicable state requirements, for recycling facilities.
2. The facility does not abut a property planned, used or zoned for residential
use.
3. The facility must meet the requirements for screening and landscaping
contained in Section 6.10 of this Ordinance, and the requirements for off-
street parking contained in Section 6.5 of this Ordinance.
4. Storage of recyclable materials outside a principal building, accessory
building or enclosed containers is not permitted. Outdoor storage of
containers for recyclable materials is subject to the screening requirements of
Section 6.10 generally, and Section 6.10(F) Parking Lot Landscape
specifically.
5. If the facility is located within 500 feet of property planned, zoned or used for
residential use, hours of operation shall be restricted to 9:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m.
PERMITTED USES
CONDITIONAL USES
1-2 LIGHT INDUSTRIAL
10. Light Processing
Recycling Facility
11. Designated Recycling
Center
This ordinance shall become effective from and' after its passage and publication.
Passed by the City Council of the City of Prior Lake this _th day of
,1995.
ATTEST:
City Manager
Mayor
Published in the Prior Lake American on the _ day of
,1995.
Drafted By:
The City of Prior Lake
16200 Eagle Creek Avenue
Prior Lake, MN 55372
2
LOMMEN
N"ELSON-
....................................
DEe I 4 1995 ilWiU~!!i
,'I
II
Lommen, Nelson, Cole & Stageberg, P.A.
Or . w P i at Buildin , Suite 210
400 South Second Street
Hudson, Wisconsin 54016
1800 IDS Center
80 South Eighth Street
Minneapolis, Minnesota 55402
LAW FIRM
(612) 339-8131
Minnesota WATS (800) 752-4297
FAX (612) 339-8064
Glenn R. Kessel
Attorney at Law
(715) 386-8217
Twin City Line (612) 436-8085
FAX (715) 386-8219
Minneapolis Office
Internet Address: GLENN@EMAIL.LOMMEN.COM
(612) 336-9338
December 13, 1995
Mr. Don Rye, Planning Director
City of Prior Lake
16200 Eagle Creek Avenue S.E.
Prior Lake, MN 55372
Re: Buckingham Disposal, Inc.
Dear Don:
Enclosed please find a letter I received from John Cairns, the attorney for Buckingham
Disposal, Inc. Since I have not received a copy of the draft of the proposed Conditional Use
Ordinance, I cannot respond to his letter.
Please give me a call to discuss how you want to handle the response.
Very truly yours,
{.EN'\NE~' COlE & STAGEBERG, P.A.
Glenn R. Kessel
GRK:dh
enclosure
cc: Frank Boyles
FROM B&M FAX 612-334-8650 VOICE 334-8520
(MON) 12. II' 95 ] 6: 40/ST. 16: 28/NO. :3560292567 P
') 1'3
:.../ '
LAW OFFICES
BRIGGS AND MORGAN
PD.OFESSION.....L ASSOCT.ATION
:.!400 IDS CEl'l'"T.ER
MINNJ::AI'OLIS, MINNESOTA 1504002
TT~l.F.l-'H.ONE IElL21 :3~' 9400
FACSIMILn ~12,~34'6600
.....nlt.Jl:R.S DIRECT DIAL NTJ1'ol'BP';:R,
5hTNT ;PAUL OFl"IC]l;
112<)O "TR!~T ll"rrOtl'AL BJJ( IJUILI>tNO
::!.-lHT l'^ rrr..1!11.N1'I'1!:SOTl' ClGlOI
TF.:LP.PS<>"'" r"I'" ....0'6600
PAC$I)frT.R l"I~1 llQI}.Q.USO
(612) 334-8532
INTI'-RNET t.DDFlE$S'
CAIJOH@EMAIL BRIGGS.cor'l
December 11, 1995
Glenn R. Kessel, Esq.
Lommen Nelson Cole & Stageberg
1800 IDS Center
80 South Eighth Street
Minneapolis MN 55402
Dear Glenn:
Re: Buckingham Disposal, Inc.
We have reviewed the pending conditional use ordinance as drafted by staff In October. Setting
aside our view that the City cannot act to limit our client's business, the onry concern I have
about the draft is the use of what appear to be unique definitions of the four essential terms. I
believe that there are statutory definitions of each category; and that the state definitions would
preempt any difference at the City level.
In other words, we do not believe that the City can impose conditions for operation of the facility
that are not explicitly permitted by State law. Any conditions contrary to State law would fail under
the doctrine of preemption. Please review the statutes and let me know whether or not you
concur.
We are particularly concerned about condition 4 which as been added by the staff since the first
draft of the ordinance was circulated, There are multiple uses adjacent to Buckinghams that have
far greater outside storage problems, but apparently are not going to be held to any standard
(e.g., telephone service companies are not permitted uses. construction companies are not
permitted uses, etc.). Imposing such a condition would unfairly subject the Buckingham
operations to spedfic conditions not imposed on other similar uses in the city.
On another point, there is no indication from staff that our client is to receive a conditional use
permit simultaneously with passage of the ordinance. , believe that was the intent of the council
739123 ,
,. FROM B&M FAX 612-334-8650 VOiCE 334-8520
(MON) 12, i I' :~5 16:40/ST. 16:28/NO, 3560292567 P 3/3
J3RIGOS AND MORGAN
when direction was given to staff to draft the provisions. It is irrational and improper to impose
the burden of going through that process on the Buckinghams. It just makes no sense to require
them to produce site plans, pay filing fees, purchase certified names and addresses from
adjacent property owners. supply unknown quantities of "additional information as [might be]
requested by the Planning Director, etc.
Please advise on this point as well.
J~;ours,
(J~~b
./
JAC/bk
ne123 \
@@@O\{j@
LOMMEN
;"~ TJ'1T l~ .n. ~.,. T
i '~\l'~r'~ . ' . 2J ''c-!?0 ....u.t. i "'.!
; "1 'Lj, j .~j i~ j: ,''1 1 <j
~'l -i." _.:1-.i.1 ~-,,' . . -1- .~
OCT 2 6 1995
LAW FIRM
Grandview Professional Building, Suite 210
400 South Second Street
Hudson, Wisconsin 54016
1800 IDS Center
80 South Eighth Street
Minneapolis, Minnesota 55402
Lommen, Nelson, Cole & Stageberg, P.A.
(612) 339-8131
Minnesota WATS (800) 752-4297
FAX (612) 339-8064
Glenn R. Kessel
Attorney at Law
(715) 386-8217
Twin City Line (612) 436-8085
FAX (715) 386-8219
Minneapolis Office
Internet Address: GLENN@EMAlL.LOMMEN.COM
(612) 336-9338
October 25, 1995
Mr. John A. Cairns
Briggs and Morgan
2400 IDS Center
Minneapolis, MN 55402
/{
Dear John:
Enclosed please fmd correspondence from Michael Leek, City Associate Planner, to Allen
Frechette, the Environmental Health Specialist of Scott County. As you can see from Mr.
Leek's letter, the proposed amendment to the City's Zoning Ordinance will be heard at the
Planning Commission meeting on November 13th.
Very truly yours,
~OMMEN, NELSON, COLE & STAGEBERG, P.A.
n 11 J ,'1
(~L\~
Glenn R. Kessel
GRK:dh
enclosure
cc: Don Rye
~
I4J 001
. I
10/23/95 14:32
FAX 612 44i 4245
CITY ~RIOR L.~E ~~7 CITY ATTORNEy'
Ptlone If
Fax #
Fax #
October 23, 1995
Mr. Allen Frechette, Environmental Health Specialist
Scott County Office of Planning and Zoning
Scott COll..'1ty Courthouse
Shakopee, Minnesota 55379
Dear Mr. Frechette:
TIlls letter "vill follow up a conversation I had last week with a member of your staff, as
well as the message I left for you regarding Buckingham Disposal. The Prior Lake City
Council has directed the Planning Staff to prepare an ordinance amendment which will
make operations like Buckingham conditionally pennitted uses in the 1-2 zoning district.
That proposed amendment v.rill be heard before the City's Planning Commission on
November 13, 1995.
As the City goes through the process of amending its ordinance, Buckingham will be
allowed to continue its operations. It is my understanding that, in light of the City's
proposed action, your office will be proceeding 'with its processing of Buckingham's
permit application.
Please let me know if you have specific questions regarding this matter.
Very truly yours,
~ /1 07 /__~j /
//)/ 7:t~U?~
R. Michael Leek
Associate Planner
CC. Donald R. Rye, Planning Director
,
16200 ~~fiJm~<Ave. S.L Prior Lake, Minnesota 55372-1714 / Ph. (612) 447-4230 / Fax (612J 447-4245
"'1'.1 I='nllo.r rlCJpr'l::;,'rr INri" t:'~.rOr (",vc.r; . I ________
LAW OFFICES
MORGAN
BRIGGS AND
WRITER'S DIRECT DIAL NUMBER
(612) 334-8532
INTERNET ADDRESS:
CAIJOH@EMAIL.BRIGGS.COM
September 14, 1995
Mr. Don Rye
City of Prior Lake
16200 Eagle Creek Ave.
Prior Lake, MN 55372
Dear Don:
PROFESSIONAL ASSOCIATION
2400 IDS CENTER
MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55402
TELEPHONE (6121 334 - 8400
FACSIMILE (6121 334-8650
SEP I 5 1995
~'
SAINT PAUL OFFICE
2200 FIRST NATIONAL BANK BUILDING
SAINT PAUl., MINNESOTA 1515101
TELEPHONE (6121223-6600
FACSIMILE(6121223-~0
I am out of town on October 2. We have no objection to setting the matter on for the
October 16 meeting. Thanks for your cooperation.
JAC/gf
cc: Tom Buckingham
731103.1
MEMBER, LEX MUNDI, A GLOBAL ASSOCIATION OF INDEPENDENT LAW FIRMS
--------.---.-.-
BRIGGS AND
MORGA
LAW OFFICES
PROFESSIONAL ASSOCIATION
2400 IDS CENTER
MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55402
TELEPHONE 16121 334 - 8400
FACSIMILE 16121334-8650
WRITER'S DIRECT DIAL NUMBER
SAINT PAUL OFFICE
2200 FIRST NATIONAL BANK BUILDING
SAINT PAUL, MINNESOTA 55101
TELEPHONE (612) 223-6600
FACSIMILE (612) 223-6450
(612) 334-8532
INTERNET ADDRESS:
CAIJOH@EMAIL.BRIGGScOM
August 23, 1995
Members of the Prior Lake Planning Commission
Chuck Arnold
Dick Kuykendall
Tom Loftus
Dave Roseth
Thomas E. Vonhof
Dave Wuellner
William Criego
Gentlemen:
Re: Buckingham Disposal, Inc.
It is our contention that the use is permitted, that the intended use was made known to the city
prior to closing the Buckinghams' purchase, and that city staff had entered no objections to the
use.
With this letter are attachments as follows:
1. A letter from Brent Johnson, a realtor representing the Buckinghams, recounting a
discussion with City staff.
2. Correspondence from Tom Buckingham to Mr. Boyles and from my office to Mr. Rathke
setting forth our position in detail.
The City code defines light manufacturing as the "processing ... of certain materials and products
where no process involved will produce noise, vibrations, ... which will disturb or endanger
neighboring properties." That is exactly what the Buckinghams are doing with recyclable
materials.
The Prior Lake zoning code properly has defined a category of uses, here "Light Manufacturing."
For example, the Becker operation (manufacturing hockey arenas) is regarded as an 1-2 use even
though there is no specific mention of such an operation in the list of certain uses which
729160.1
BRIGGS AND MORGAN
are also permitted in the district. The recyclable processing ( a manufacturing business), like
Becker, is a permitted use under the general definition.
As you probably know, the Buckinghams provide waste collection services (separate collection
of MSW and recyclables) to over 1000 homes in Prior Lake. The recyclable materials (including
those dropped off by the public) are processed inside the building, temporarily stored in closed
and covered containers outside the building, and regularly transported to the next processing
site.
The Buckinghams' operation is the only facility in Scott County open to the general public for
drop-off of recyclable materials --- under State laws, every county has to have at least one such
site. The Buckingham operations have been the only such designated site in Scott County ever
since this requirement came into effect. At their previous location in Savage, the Buckingham
operations were exemplary.
There is no other processing facility available in the Metro area that makes any economic sense
to use even in the short term. If processing cannot happen at this site, there would likely be
significant disruption in servicing Prior Lake residents --- a problem that need not be faced at all.
You should be aware of what the Buckingham operations are not, as well. The Buckingham
property is not now and has never been intended to operate as a mixed municipal solid waste
transfer station. The Buckinghams are not in this business and have no interest in starting such
an operation. We do not believe that a transfer station operation would be permitted in the 1-2
category.
Given your staff's assurances to Mr. Johnson, we are baffled as to what has led to a change in
their position. There is correspondence as early as February and March of this year from Mr.
Staber to Ernie Peacock of Edina Realty dealing with the property in anticipation of the
Buckingham purchase. The nature of the Buckingham operations were well known to your staff
from conversations with Mr. Johnson (and his colleague Butch Hanson), Mr. Peacock and Mr.
Buckingham.
We ask that you overrule the staff interpretation and conclude that the Buckingham operations
are permitted uses in the 1-2 zoning area.
We will be at your meeting on August 28 (and have asked that the matter be set for 8:00 to
accommodate schedules). In addition, Mr. Johnson will be present along with Mr. Peacock.
JAC/bk
enc
729160.1
BRIGGS AND MORGAN
cc: Tom Buckingham
Brent Johnson, Edina Realty, Prior Lake Office
Ernie Peacock, Edina Realty, Edina Office
Steve Rathke, Lommen, Nelson, Cole & Stageberg
Frank Boyles, Manager, City of Prior Lake
Don Rye, Planning Director, City of Prior Lake
729160.1
- - r E &~v: : AX :: = - ~ : ~ - ~ '~ : =
~ r'" -- ,... .... ~ .... ""
.. _. _:.cf"-"
~ v..... ....' ... -I- '....' '" :::......'
......, .......... ..........' --
:;..I:! '...: C:, :.:.:' '::
.~ - ...., - ......... ~
" ......... -.:' .......-
- , "" ~ .... -' . -..;' , ..... ...
::;~:c:--~: :.""
...........---- --" ..... .'..
~'!i'(1M ; ED 1 'Joe:. r-<~.::"'~ TY I-'ri ll.Jr' LHKC:
.............r _t''':'':::l'
J...':J:;J:::;J,&.IC-.o;;.....J..
AUGUST 21,1995
JOHN,
THiS IS THE ORDER. OF EVENTS PERTAINING TO THE BUCKINGHAM
ZONING ISSUE AS I RECALL THEM.
i ~VEHT UP TO CITY tiALLAPPROXJMATELYMAY 1,1995 TOCJiECK ON
THE ZONING FOR TOM. THE FIRST PERSON I TALKED TO WAS MIKE
LEEK. I EXPLAINED TO HIM EXACTLY WHAT BUCKINGHAMS 00 IN THEIR
BUSINESS AND ABOUT THAT T'IME. DON REYE. THE CITY PlANNER
WALKED BY SO MR LEEK ASKED MR. REYE WHAT HIS OPINION WAS OF
THE'SITUATION. I THe~ EXPLAINeD TO MR. REVE WHAT 1l4E
BUCKlNGHAMS BUSINESS WAS. MR. REVE GOT OUT THE PAKm LAKE .
ZONING BOOK AND t.OOt<:J:D UP 1-2 ZONING. WENT DOWN THE UST AND
ACCORDfNG TO THE BOOK, MR. REYE STATED THAT BeTWEeN ntE
TRUCKING, WAREHOUSING AND LIGHT MANUfACllJRJNG THERE
WOULD NOT BE A PROSlEU VVlTHTHe ZONING. HE DID NOT INDICATE
THAT THeRE WOULD BE. ANY PROBl...EMS \tVITH THIS rtPE OF BUSINESS
BEING LOCATED IN THIS. BU1LDfNG.
If we CAN Be OF Ah"( MORE HELP TO YOU, CALL US AT ANYTlME.
<2 ~ t'~,JG''''
[.Jt'LF~ . .
SCOTT COUNTY
ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH
COURTHOUSE A 102
428 HOLMES ST~~Tli5, 1995
SHAKOPEE, MN 55379-1393 (612) 496-81n
Tom Buckingham
Buckingham Recycling Center
5980 Credit River Road
Prior Lake, Minnesota
Re: Solid Waste Facility License
Dear Mr. Buckingham:
This letter regards your application to operate a Recycling Facility in the
City of Prior Lake. We have reviewed your application and must deny your
license for the following reasons:
1. Lack of approval (zoning, conditional use, etc.) by the City of
Prior Lake.
2. Failure to obtain and submit a Permit-By-Rule from the Minnesota
Pollution Control Agency.
In accordance with the Scott County Administrative Procedures Ordinance No.
1, Section 7.01, you have the right to make a written appeal to this
decision. I have enclosed a copy of this Ordinance for your review.
We will be sending you a refund of your annual license fee of $100.00. The
application fee that you submitted of $50.00 is non-refundable.
Denial of this license application does not prevent you from reapplying
once the above mentioned items have been addressed and satisfactorily
completed.
All operations relating to the acceptance, storage and sorting of
recyclable material must cease at this location until a license is obtained
from this Office. continued operation is a violation of the Scott County
Solid Waste Ordinance NO.2, and subject to those penalties outlined in
that Ordinance. If you are close to resolving the above noted issues, or
if you have any questions please contact Jeff Peterson or myself at 496-
8177.
Sincerely,
a?J-
Allen Frechette
Environmental Health Manager
cc: Dick Underferth, County Commissioner, District 4
Frank Boyles, city Manager, City of Prior Laker
John Roach, Assistant County Attorney
O:\~\BUCKINGH.VIO
An Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action/Safety Aware Employer
19
"
"infmem"
C I T Y 0 F P RIO R L A K E
4629 Dakota Street S.E.
Prior Lake, MN 55372
Phone (612) 447-4230 - FAX (612) 447-4245
INFORMAL MEMO
DATE:
SUBJECT:
~kkrFROM: ~~ le\~
TO:
-=============================================================
MESSAGE: ~t..utl ~ ~ c.. ~ ~ (i-llll\.~ k.... He ~
~eu-",Ml o~~~", .f;-....... ~~~ <L~
3",,-,",'" Q~:,,:~~ L~~ ~~~4L..-
~J\~ ~~ ~ . ----- -r~
~ ~ ~... ~-\ ~~ ;L,., \-L~ ~~ t\.: -to
s~..
~=============================================================
REPLY FROM:
DATE:
-=============================================================
Response Required: Yes
No
v'
LAW OFFICES
BRIGGS AND
MORGAN
PROFESSIONAL ASSOCIATION
2400 IDS CENTER
MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55402
TELEPHONE (612( 334 8400
FACSIMILE (6121 334 - 8650
WRITER'S DIRECT DIAL NUMBER
SAINT PAUL OFFICE
2200 FIRST NATIONA.L BANK BUILDtNG
SAINT PAUL, MINNESOTA 5~101
TELEPHONE (6121 223 -6600
FACSIMILE {6t2J 223 -64:S0
(612) 334-8532
INTERNET ADDRESS:
CAIJOH@EMAIL.BRIGGS.COM
July 24, 1995
Stephen C. Rathke, Esq.
Lommen Nelson Cole & Stage berg
1800 IDS Center
Minneapolis MN 55402
Dear Steve:
RE BUCKINGHAM DISPOSAL SERVICES, INC.
Forwarded is a copy of correspondence from Tom Buckingham which is responsive to the City's
request that he detail use of his property. This letter is add some additional comments that I
would like you to consider.
I think that the City's correspondence of June 22 to Tom was based on a misunderstanding of
his business combined with some assumptions by city staff from the outset that were simply
incorrect. I note, too, that the letter declares that his use of the property "may not be allowed"
depending on further information being provided.
In particular, it seems to me that someone on the staff concluded early on that Tom was going
to run a garbage disposal and transfer station operation from the site. That is not a desired use
for any city; and it is not a use that Tom has any intention of undertaking --- nor did he do so
at his prior location in Savage.
As to the nature of his business, sorting, resizing, and packaging recyclables for shipping on to
another stage of the manufacturing process is, within the context of that industry, light
manufacturing as the city defines that term. We do know that the realtors on the transaction
made at least a couple of inquiries (including one visit with Don Rye (which, at a meeting of staff,
realtors and Tom, Rye "did not recall") where the potential of the purchase and use of the
property was discussed. Since there were no written records of those discussions and meeting,
I can only assume that there was some lack of specificity as to the business and that, in turn,
gave rise to some assumptions that were inappropriate.
BRIGGS AND MORGAN
Scott County has always been regarded by people in the waste disposal business to be
enlightened and reasonable in dealing with haulers, recyclers and the like. And, as city staff can
easily learn from talking with county staff, Tom has been an exemplary hauler/recycler. No one
at the County considers Tom's business to be a transfer station nor involved in MSW operations
save for overnight vehicle parking (which is a specific permitted use under the City Code). He
has been very effective in implementing and managing recycling programs consistent with ever
evolving State and County goals. That he services over 1000 Prior Lake residences is confirming
of the quality of his business.
There is at least one other business (Lloyd's Construction) to the west of Tom's that has a
similar, but to my mind from driving by the site, more visible, outdoor type of operation. Tom
believes that among its operations at that facility is a construction debris hauling business. The
Prior Lake code does not identify any of the apparent Lloyd's uses as "permitted" except to the
degree that the City has concluded that it is, overall, a "light manufacturing" use. And that seems
to me to be a logical and proper conclusion.
Even a brief cessation of the recycling portion of Tom's business will be unnecessarily disruptive
to his service to Prior Lake (and Savage) residential generators. There is no practical alternative
location for even a temporary relocation of recyclable processing.
I hope that you will concur with me that Tom's recyclable processing portion of his business is
as appropriate a light manufacturing use of property as is the remainder of his business
operations that no one is questioning. As such, there is no need nor purpose to be served by
going through an ordinance amendment. However, if the City wishes to do so while recognizing
that his entire operations can and should continue, of course he and we will cooperate in any
reasonable way to assist.
Very tfur.yours,
I-I
/1 L_______.
~6~ A. Cairns
I r
1,/
JAC/bk
cc: Tom Buckingham
7266961
- -- -.-- --...------ -- ----------------------- --- -- -- --
MEMORANDUM
RE:
July 21, 1995
Frank Boyles, Gary Staber
Don Rye
Buckingham Disposal
DATE:
TO:
FROM:
I have reviewed the material presented to us on Friday, June 23 by Tom Buckingham. In addition, I
have reviewed the zoning ordinance and visited the site on June 26 with Gary. I have concluded that a
recycling center is not a permitted or conditional use in the 1-2 Industrial zoning district.
I base this finding on several factors as follows:
. When the ordinance was written in 1983, recycling was fairly well established as a legitimate land
use and yet the ordinance makes no specific provision for such a use.It is possible to conclude from
this that this use was not considered as a viable use in this district.
. Light manufacturing is a permitted use in the 1-2 district and is defined as " The processing and
fabrication of certain materials where no process involved will produce noise, vibrations, air
pollution, fire hazards or noxious emission which will disturb or endanger neighboring properties."
The definition of manufacturing is" to make or process ( a raw material) into a finished product,
esp., by means of a large-scale industrial operation." The notion of a recycling center where used
materials are gathered, separated and reduced in bulk does not conform to the traditional definition
of manufacturing.
. A significant portion of the recycling operation is conducted outside.Large metal bins, semi trailers
and trucks are located around the site and the recycled materials are stored outside until moved
elsewhere.In addition, the general public drops off material outside in the storage yard. In that
respect, the recycling operation has a distinct commercial aspect to it as it generates traffic much as
a retail use might.
. The zoning ordinance provides that uses not specifically designated as permitted or conditional uses
are prohibited. I believe that the recycling operation is sufficiently different from uses which would
qualify as light manufacturing as to put it into the prohibited category. In that case, the ordinance
provides for a study of the use to determine if the use is acceptable and, if so, in what zoning district
and with what additional conditions and standards, if any.
Based on the foregoing, I conclude that Buckingham Disposal operating as a recycling center is not a
permitted or conditional use in the 1-2 district.
BUCKINGHAM DISPOSAL, INC.
5980 Credit River Road
Prior lake MN 55372
Phone: 226-6441
Fax: 226.6442
(612) 334-8532
July 18, 1995
Frank Boyles, Manager
City of Prior Lake
Prior Lake Courthouse
4629 Dakota Street S. E.
Prior Lake MN 55372-1714
Dear Mr. Boyles:
In the past week or so I have had discussions with a number of advisors regarding your
concern about our operations in Prior Lake. This letter is to offer a view of the situation that
I believe will support a conclusion on the City's part that my use of the property is entirely
consistent with the City's Zoning Code.
As you know, my business services over 1000 Prior Lake residences. In addition to picking
up MSW from those residences, I also have a contractual obligation to do weekly curbside
recycling pick-up. There is no realistic alternative to processing the recyclables at my property.
If I am not able to do so, even for a brief period of time, the effect may be adverse to the Prior
Lake residents that I serve.
In addition, I offer residential generators drive-in and drop-off service for recyclables and
compostable materials (the latter being regularly used by Prior Lake residents since they can
avoid the $2.00 per bag charge for curbside pick-up).
Since it is not clear to me that earlier staff review of my operations reflect a thorough
understanding of what my business and use of the property is, let me offer specifics. There
are a number of components to my business: there are offices; my trucks are parked overnight
and operate from the property; I warehouse certain materials for limited periods of time; I
maintain and store supplies for my business; and I run a recyclable materials processing
operation which, in my view, is clearly a permitted "light manufacturing" use.
Let me also clarify what my business is not. It is not a site for processing or transferring
Mixed Municipal Solid Waste (commonly known as "garbage") as that term is defined by
Minnesota law.
Your staff has indirectly seemed concerned that my property in Prior Lake will have some
processing of MSW done there. That is not the case. My vehicles for MSW pick-up are stored
overnight at the property. Otherwise, under my Scott County Licenses, I am prohibited from
processing MSW; and I do not have an MSW transfer station license nor do I have any
intention to secure such.
You have raised the concern that my use of the property is not for light Manufacturing as
permitted by the 1-2 Zoning classification. I ask that you reconsider this tentative conclusion
for the following reasons:
1. My business is "processing" materials. The raw materials are the
unsorted recyclables. My process is the sorting, compacting and
packaging of the recyclables into marketable form. The City definition
of Light Manufacturing is properly broad enough to encompass clearly
what we do. The "finished" material or product is sold to end-users for
incorporation into additional manufactured products. In effect, we are
the first of several manufacturers/processors that allow the entire
recycling system to function effectively.
2. My processing does not produce "noise, vibrations, air pollution, fire
hazards or noxious emissions..." All of my processing is now and will be
done indoors; and the sorted materials are stored in enclosed shipping
containers until volumes adequate for transport are collected.
3. The only portion of my processing which is "outdoors" is the mere
placing of the separated materials into distinct and enclosed containers.
4. My operations have no commercial aspects. I do not sell anything to the
public; I merely pay generators of recyclables a fee for their delivery.
None of the persons dropping materials off need parking on-site as the
time they are on the property is minimal. The number of trips per day by
such persons will likely not exceed 35 during the week and perhaps as
many as 100 on Saturdays. These vehicle movements will hardly be
noticed on County Road 21, especially when it becomes a four lane road
which I understand is planned for the future.
5. As to the Becker Ice Arena use of a portion of the property, I am
unaware of any City Zoning Code provision that requires a conclusion
that my manufacturing and Becker's need be "compatible." In fact, they
clearly are; otherwise I would not have been able to secure their sub-
lease of a portion of the building. Becker has other operations in the
immediate area; its continued location and expansion in Prior Lake is
welcomed, I am sure, by the City.
As to building code issues, your staff is aware that I have engaged Prior Lake architect Pat
O'Keefe (O'Keefe Design Associates) to advise on how to assure that the modest interior
alterations we have made (building one partition wall and eliminating a couple of others) to
the property are up to code. We will do our best within reason to do the same with
improvements, if any, done by the prior owner/user that may not have been done with permits
or up to code.
The only significant physical change to the building which I will seek permits for is the
addition of a canopy at the west end of the building to provide weather protection for people
dropping off reyclables. And that is not really my first preference. I would prefer to add a drive
through door on the south side of the building so that customers would actually come into the
building, drop off materials, and then exit to the north. This procedure would be much easier
for the customers and more consistent with my business practice of running all processing
operations of my business indoors. This would be consistent with the telephone company's
use of its building just to the west of my property.
Of course, I am very concerned about your suggestion that we cease the recycling operations
pending consideration of a zoning amendment which I believe is unnecessary. I understand
that such a process may take up to 90 days. In the meantime, I have contractual and license
obligations to provide services to your residents. If I cannot continue the light manufacturing
processing that I am doing, there may be serious disruption in those services m and possibly
some additional expenses to your residential generators since any interim solution is bound
to be more expensive than what is happening now.
I assure you, and you can independently ascertain if you wish, that I have and will own and
manage a sound business providing needed and cost-effective service to my customers, most
of which are Prior Lake residents. A great majority of these customers have been serviced by
my business for many years; they would not continue with me if my work was not exemplary.
Very truly yours,
cc: Mayor and City Council Members
John A. Cairns, Briggs & Morgan
726139.1
Don Rye
From:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Date:
Gary Staber
Frank Boyles
Don Rye
Buckingham Disposal
Monday, June 26, 1995 15:53cst
Hi Frank, Buckingham came in with some information late on Friday afternoon. Don and I had a chance to
go out and tour the site today. We met Tom Buckingham on site and told him after our tour that we would
be going back to City Hall to write memos regarding the facility.
My comments are as follows:
1. A code analysis should be completed by a qualified engineer or architect. Items such as
exiting, sanitation facilities, occupancy separations, allowable square footages, and site access in general
should be addressed.
2. Building plans should be to scale, 1/8 or 1/4 inch per foot is preferred.
3. Building plans should be complete showing both the first and second floor layouts.
When Don and I were touring the structure it became quite obvious that the former tenant made several
alterations to the building without proper permits. It was also noted that Buckingham made some
alterations and modifications to the building without proper permits. Mr. Buckingham while being
cooperative, is not totally innocent in that this situation we are reacting to seems to have been created
largely by Mr. Buckingham himself.
Rather than giving my first impressions at this time, I would rather wait for the architect's code analysis for
a more thorough response.
Page 1
MEMORANDUM
DATE:
TO:
FROM:
RE:
June 26, 1995
Frank Boyles, Gary Staber
Don Rye
Buckingham Disposal
I have reviewed the material presented to us on Friday, June 23 by Tom Buckingham. In addition, I
have reviewed the zoning ordinance and visited the site on June 26 with Gary. I have concluded that a
recycling center is not a permitted or conditional use in the 1-2 Industrial zoning district.
I base this finding on several factors as follows:
. When the ordinance was written in 1983, recycling was fairly well established as a legitimate land
use and yet the ordinance makes no specific provision for such a use.It is possible to conclude from
this that this use was not considered as a viable use in this district.
. Light manufacturing is a permitted use in the 1-2 district and is defined as " The processing and
fabrication of certain materials where no process involved will produce noise, vibrations, air
pollution, fire hazards or noxious emission which will disturb or endanger neighboring properties."
The definition of manufacturing is" to make or process ( a raw material) into a finished product,
esp., by means of a large-scale industrial operation." The notion of a recycling center where used
materials are gathered, separated and reduced in bulk does not conform to the traditional definition
of manufacturing.
. A significant portion of the recycling operation is conducted outside.Large metal bins,semi trailers
and trucks are located around the site and the recycled materials are stored outside until moved
elsewhere.In addition, the general public drops off material outside in the storage yard. In that
respect, the recycling operation has a distinct commercial aspect to it as it generates traffic much as
a retail use might.
. The zoning ordinance provides that uses not specifically designated as permitted or conditional uses
are prohibited. I believe that the recycling operation is sufficiently different from uses which would
qualify as light manufacturing as to put it into the prohibited category. In that case, the ordinance
provides for a study of the use to determine if the use is acceptable and, if so, in what zoning district
and with what additional conditions and standards, if any.
Based on the foregoing, I conclude that Buckingham Disposal operating as a recycling center is not a
permitted or conditional use in the 1-2 district.
BUCKINGHAM DISPOAL, lNC
5980 CREDIT RIVER ROAD
PRIOR LAKE, MN 55372
612- 226-6441
6/95
SUMMARY OF OPERATIONS
BUCKlNGHAM DISPOSAL COMPANY WAS FORMED 27 YEARS AGO WITH
TIlE RECYCLING OPERATIONS STARTED IN JANUARY OF 1988.
BUCKINGHAM RECYCLES IS OPEN TO TIIE PUBUC FROM 9 AM TllL
3 P.M, MONDAY THRU FRIDAY WITH TIIE EXc.I:WTION OF nruRSDA Y
EVENING WIDCHIS TllL 7P.M AND EVERY SAnJRDAYFROM 10 AM
J'IL-4--pM~TERIAL~CCHl'nill AT~S FAcn.r:ry INCLUDE SCRAP METAL,
_ (.J)RAIN OlU14AGAZINES;(NEWSPAPI;RlOFFICE PAPER, PHONEBOOKS,
~A:PJ)J:~;-tltA~~, J..NB~g~>>6ftLtlS.
OTIIER~CY~ :ggMS-T~~MAY IN~UDE A SMALL SERVICE
FEE ARE.,~~MPOS~-APPLIANCE-,'!'!RES; AND T.V. S.
ALUMINUM CANS ARE 'PoRcHASlID FROM TIIE PUBUC. WE OPERATE OUT
OF AN ENCLOSED BUll.DING OF APPROX. 14,000 SQ. FT. ALL RECYCLING
MATERIAL IS PROCESSED HERB BY OUR OWN EMPLOYEE'S (GBNERAIL Y
1HREE FUlL TIME) TIiAT DO STRIClL Y RECYCLING SUCH AS BALING
CARDBOARD OR PLASTIC OR SIMPLY CRUSHING CANS ORHELPlNG
CUSTOMERS. MATERIALS ARE TIffiN TAKEN DIREClLY OUIDOORS AND
PUT INTO SEMI-TRAILERS AND ARE SHIPPED DIREC'IL Y TO THE MIlLS.
ON A pAll.. Y BASIS BUCKINGHAM HANDLES APPROX ONE TON OF
CARDBOARD AND ONE mOUSAND POUNDS OF ALUMINUM CANS.
SCRAP METAL, MAGAZINES NEWSPAPER AND OTHER RELATED ITEMS ARE
CONTAINED IN SMALL AMOUNTS IN CAGED TYPE CONTAINERS AND
lRANSFERRED INTO ROLL-OFF BOXES'OU'IDOORS. WE THEN 'IRANSPORT
OUR OWN MATERIALS TO MARKET. DR:1DN-t>lLIS CONTAINED IN A
SECONDARY CONTAINER STORAGE TANK AND IS EM.I:'lllID WEEKLY BY:
--
BOBL OIL SERVICE OF NORTHFIELD, :MN EPA #.MND-985-742-774.
BUCKlNGHAM ALSO OPERAlES A SOLID W ASlE COlLECTION BUSINESS
AND A ROLL-OFF CONSlRUCTION BOX RENTAL COMPANY WITH AN
ADDmONAL THREE .EMPLUYEEs:THE TOTAL EMPLOYEES FOR ALL
OPERATIONS ARE NINE WIDCH INCLUDES MY WIFE AND MYSELF.
BECKER. ARENA PRODUCTS, INC. IS A TENANT OF OURS RENTING APPROX.
~~. TIIEY MANUFACTURE ICE HOCKEY ARENAS AND EMPLOY LESS
'IRAN SIX EMPLOYEES. TIIEIR MAIN OFFICE IS LOCATED ON COTIONWOOD
LANE IN PRIOR LAKE.
BUCKINGHAM ALSO FOILOWS TIm scon COUNTY REQUIREMENTS
WHICH ARE AS FOILOWS:
TIlE NUMBER OF W ASlE APPUANCES STORED AT TIlE FAC1LlTY SHAlL
NOT EXCEED SIX1Y. ONCE THE NUMBER OF APPLIANCES REACHES
SIXTY, THE liCENSEE SHALL HA VB AlL APPLIANCES REMOVED FROM
THE FACTI.ITY. AlL APPUANCES TIIAT CONfAIN' HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
(CFC'S, PCB CAPACITORS AND MERCURY SHAIL BE REMOVED FROM TIm
STIE BY AN APPLIANCE COLLECTOR OR DELIVERED TO A FACILITY TIIAT
WIT...L REMOVE 1HE HAZARDOUS MATERIAL. 1HE VENDOR WE USE IS JR'S
APPLIANCE DISPOSAL, INC. OF INVER GROVE HEIGHI'S, MN.
USED OIL AND W ASlE BA'ITERlES ARE MANAGED IN ACCORDANCE WTIH
THE SCOTI COUNTY HAZARDOUS WASTE ORDINANCE NO. 12
1HE NUMBER OF WASTE TIRES DO NOT EXCEED FIFTY. TIm TIRES ARE .-;
STORED IN AN ENCLOSED BUll..DING OR ON AN AREA IN PlRl3.~~GHf,
VOID OF ANY VEGETATION. .
ACCESS SHAIL BE CONTROLLED BY WHATEVER MEANS TIm oWNER!
UCENSEE DETERMINES TO BE WORKABLE. '!HE oWNERlLICENSEB SHAlL
BE RESPONSIBLE FOR REMOVAL AND PROPER DISPOSAL OF .ALL
UNACCEPTABLE WASTES.
ONLY SEPARATED RECYCLABLES .ARE MANAGES AT TInS SITE. MIXED
MUNICIPAL SOUD W ABlE IS NOT lRANSFERRED, STORED IN CONTAINERS
OTHER THAN COLLECTION VEHICLES OR Tll'PED FOR PROCESSING OR
'IRANSFERRED FROM TInS SITE.
scon COUNTY HAS NO 1ll'.lliJ.J US mAT TIIE PRESENT SEWER SYSTEM IS
ADEQUATE AND ACCEPTABLE AS THE CITY HAS APPROVED.
'IHE COUNTY HAS ALSO INFORMED US TIIAT THEY HAVE MAILED
NECESSARY FORMS AND mAT LICENSES WOULD BE APPROVED BY THEM
ONCES WE HA VB COMPLIED WTI1I TIm CITY OF PRIOR LAKE ORDINANCES.
THE BUCKINGHAM COMPANIES
EMPWYEE SUMMARY
AREA 6- I -95
DRIVERS 3
ADMINISlRATION 3
RECYCLING CENTER 2
CLERICAL OFFICE I
TOTAL 9
,.--
..~.......
/,\':'l.i"~' ~';\lo:~~'~
. , ,',;'....."~
, ,.,
. ,
CITY OF PRIOR LAKE
~
Februllry 26, 1988
Ms. Sally Berdt
First Minnesota Saving~ Banlc
690 16th Avenue South
Hopkins, Minnesota 55343 " "
Dear MI. Berdt I
The purpose of this letter is to sl.ll'l'lWlrize the results of our meeting at 5980
Cred1t:River Road on February 2, 1988. aJilding Permit No. 85-308 was issued to
Schweich Construction Inc. for the construction of a 23,100 square feet
office/warehouse building on November 20, 1985. This structure has not been
canpleted and a certificate of occupancy has not been issued. Before an
occupancy permit can be issued the following items will need to be carpleted or
resolved.
1. A septic system nust be constructed to acCCllllllOCbte the sewage flow
generated by the structures use. Additional plans are required showing
the septic system location and design specifics.
2. The building is a steel framed structure rated as a Type II N
construction. All interior and exterior walls must be of
non combustible construction.
,
I
I
;
!
3. All interior items must be canpleted such as heating systems, partition
walls, restroom facilities, lighting, exit signs, floor coverings,
painting, etc.
4. A landscaping plan must be subnitted and approved by City Staff showing
the types and locations of planting materials. All site improvements
must be carpleted prior to occupancy.
S.All final inspections must be approved including building, plllllbing,
electrical.... and a . si te inspection.
Please beadViSedthatflJildingiPe~tNo. 85-308 has expired due to inactivity.
New building permits will have to be issued prior to any construction activity
on the site. ... I have enclosed a Building Permit AP.;'lication for your use.
. .
. .
.....
l
If you have any quell:iona, pleaM feel free to contact me at 447-4230 between
8100 ~ .M. anc! 4130 P.M., fobnday thrOUgh Friday.
Horat .Graler, Director of. Planning
Brad Janzen, 1015 Grain Exchange Bldg., Mpll, ffi 55415
John Mesenbrink, 776517Sth st. E, Prior Lake, ffi 55372
I
0 I
I' .)
, ,I
0 I.
I
I ;
/
/
.;j
1
': "
/
'''~,.' ,
"<'1"\;," ,',j.~-""'_'
. ".~j',;,_,f;;;''''.'~~",,~.~.. ~,"t"___,-, "''''''''M\.",,~ _....,....,........",,*'.......'
., '.._...~J..,.._. "~->'.. _....."'.....__'""'_ ...'..., , .,_,.L"..", .~~,'" '.
.'
iSr 309
,..'
.." "'(' "
. ,
,
.,~ - "
Me UNI'1' ~
BLOO. PBRMr1' 18S-3M
5'81 au!m'J.' RIVIR JaD
Office .
1888 sq. ft. propoled
1888 f 2488 (per SAC) -.75 SACs
WarehoUH.
21 ,38' eq. ft. pcopoeec5
21,388 .;. 18,888 (per SAC) . 2.13 SM:II
2.13
.t...7.5
2.88 SRCa. - round up to 3 SM:II
Note .
SAC per
...2:'fp)
'~ ~
'\;" ,,: "~"
.,i."'.....,.,~:".;',,.,,',...',','
~~){~;_:
:;'''0.." t.,
0' . . :~:.
, "',+"1
'c< "1'.1
:'(;2:. i .:. ;:~,l
~>..,
:0;,~:.~:';;:
CLtyPlanner
.
MINUTia
85'-- J~ ;,
of thl proclldinV' of thl City CouncU of thl City of
'rior Lakl in thl County of leott and Itate of
Minnl.ota, inoludinv all account. auditld by .aid
Couna 11 .
Ai '4
Mayor John.on oall.d the qu..tion on the motion and upon a vote
tak.n it wa.duly pa...d.
Thl nlxt itlm on thl IVlndl WII to rlvilw thl prlUmlnlry plat
tor K.n Storm.
City Plann.r Ora.er r.vi.w.d thia for the Council. H. Itated
that the applioant app.ar.d b.tore the planninv Commildon on
5/1/84 and reoeiv.d preliminuy plat approval lubj.ot to a calh
park d.dioation f.e. Mr. Lawrence Schweich and Mre. Marlil
Bluldorn were pre..nt and lupported thl projeot at the Planninv
Commi..ion me.tinv. He turthlr Itated that Staff hu revilwed
the proj.ot and ia r.oomm.ndinv PreUminary Plat Approval IUbject
to a park dldication te. ot $4,260.00.
Th.re wal diloullion by Counoil and Statt.
It w.. a.kedby the Counoil it Mr. Storm would object to havinv
thehou... on doubl.d t.old loti to fac. 150th Strllt.
Mr. Storm had no objectionl.
Motion by Thorkellon to approve the preliminuy plat to ICen
Stormcontinvent upon the Puk Dldication t.1 ot $4,260.00 beinv
paid.nd that' all double faced ,loti have the hOUIII facing 150th
Streit, .econdld by Bu..e and upon a vote taken it wa. duly
p....d.
i';K(~~~~","~~#j~t.K~~li~v.rus."",.~'~,~~,,;,o.C)n,~icSer<,the, requl.t to. build
~ ,f.\ia~brl:i~trom".'.Sohw.ich?&Con.tructlon';)7 Counc ilmellber achwelcM~>
_<~:f.' j"i~a-~~tl'J.'II'.'.1't--::.tronf"th.'\eotrri;c"11't.bl. for - thl1 item. f
<,;;.'.
~-
;~'CitYPlanner Graser reviewed thia for the Council. He Itate4.~
'that Chapter 7, ot Titll ,4 of the Prior Lake City Code wa.?:;'
dratted,.nd.doptedto regulat. metalbuildinv. within thl City~
ofPrior;Lakl.>ln ettect it.ugVllt. that Ih.etmetal may bl~;
u..dina,.p.oial,arrangem.ntor ,combination with othlr mate"if
riall,.tor<example, : like briokand/or ItuCCO. He then, commented;~
on>thl;dt.plan. H..tated . that :' the ,'parking lotappeare to};
extend directly , to the front ot the building. The uchitectural1~
rend.ring ,lnolude. plant' materiall which ue not po..ible unle..,~
they are a climbing ivy. The ~uilding i. propoled to be\
lituated approxim.tely 55 t..t from the r.u property lin.. U~
itwer. ,mov.d to the north t'pproximately lS fe.t there would bit
adequate room tor plant materiall both to .creen the parkin9~
ue.and to provide the foundation plantingl indicated. He~
further commented.
Mr. 'T.d Schweich allo commented.
Councilmember Thorkel.on alked .bout the road being paved.
;!,ft
Mr. Schweich .tated that the puking lot would be paved but the'"
area on the aide. of the .', buUdingwould not, be becau.e of the~
type of equipment that would be Itored. He made turther comment.~
Therew.. furth.rdhcu..ion by Council, Statt and Mr. Schweich. ~
'l'
,counoilm.mb'~, BUI"),c,9mmented on ,a. different Ityle of rOot. i!
After".tur,t her: dhC,u"i,on" motion by Thorkellon to .approve thet"..,
reque.tfromSohweich, Conltruction for a .tructure continven
uJ)on .,' the' ,ar,chitectural delign through agreement with the con.J ,,'
tractor .nd :' Staff and a landscape plan acceptable' to Staff ,r:.
..oonded by BU.... ~~;~
,I' :~_'\.
J./
!~
i'if:
'a'\
.~~>~.
,that the wording be "Iteel frame Itructure".
i~:'
.....
,,<;. l(li' r
M~NU1'IS of the proceeding I of the City Counoil ot the City of
Prior Lake in the County of laott and Stlte of
M1nne.otl, 1noludin9 III Iccount. ludited bV ..id .'
Council.
;,
:j
/'~
'1
Councilm.mb.r Thork.hon .tat.d that it .hou1d r.ad, . me".'.
.tructure propo.ed by 8ahwe1ah ConltruaUon, I ,:
City Plann.r Gr..er .tatad that maybe we .hould allo .dd th.t it
b. the COmbin.tion of wood, .tucco and brick iI .n .Cc.ptable
arrang.m.nt m..ting Ch.pt.r 7, Titl. 4 of the City Cod..
Councilm.mb.r Thork.lIon acc.pt.d thh to hh motion. Council-
m.mb.r Bu... .cc.pt.d it to hi. '.cond.
,
~ayor John.on cali.d the qu..tion on the motion .nd upon . vote
taken it. .w..duly. P....d . CouncUm.mb.r S('!1we!ch r.join.d the
...~~\lncil..t.,thiltim..;.......... ..'
M.yorJohnaon th.n c.ll.d . r.c.... Th. m..ting W41 c.ll.d b.ck
to ord.r at 9121 PM'.
Th. next it.m on the agenda W41 to conlider the r.qu.n for
final paym.nt to the Archa.ologilt tor the North Shore proj.ct.
City Engin..r And.r.on r.vi.wed thi. for the Council.
City Engin..r And.r.on .tatad th.t the Council .nt.red into .r
.greem.ntwith Cougar Conlulting for performing .rch.eologic,'
lervic..forthe ,North " Shore. proj.ct. Two .re.. r.quired
.dditio~.l<,.t..tingby ,'. the Minn..ota State Hiltorical Soci.ty.
Heth.n"quot.d<'from . letter from Gordon Lothlon,. Arch..ologist
fr()m,;Coug.rCon,ul ting. He th.nat.t.d th.t the Council .gr.ed
toe..,f.. ot>$1, 837 .20 of which $1,102.32 h.. .lr..dy b.en paid.
H.. further · It.ted that . in ord.r to .xpedite the work, St.ff
.gr..d to, hav..dditional work don. in the amount of $1,522.75.
H.th.n recomm.nd.d th.t Coug.r Con,ulting b. paid . total ot
$2,257.75.
Therew.I further di.aullion by Council and Staff.
Motion> by Thork.lIon to .pprov. the p.ym.nt ot $2,257.75 to
Coug.r'Conlulting, ..cond.d by Bu....
Councilm.mb.rBu.l. ..ked' it th.y would be paid before the City
receiv.d>thetinal report.
CitYlngin.er And.rton stated th.t the ch.ck would be held until
the tin.lr.port,Gordon anticipated th.t would be on Wedne.d.y.
Mayor Johnson calledt"e queltion on the motiqn and upon . vote
taken it wa. duly palleu.
The next item on the. .gendawas to discuss County Ro.d 21 project.
M.yorJohnsonalked City M.nager McGuir. to go up.tair. .nd
check onth. Howard OlaonR.L.s di.cuslion and to report back to
the '. Council.
City Engineer Anderlon and Conlulting Engineer Norton then re-
vi.wed. County Ro.d 21." Thilwal done .s . round table discullion
at the head of the Council table.
There wllmuch dilcu..ion byCouncil.ndSt.tf.
CityiM.ttageriMCGuir.<..returr.edand Ihortly . t.here.fter st.ted th.t
Mr .Mor.lock/Mr..lrick80n'~Mr. , .' StroDtwaU/Mt. McDonald, North
Am~ricanCableand Mr., Huemoeller/Mr. Olson cam!.,to some kind of
anagr.em.nt'andwould be down 'shortly to 8~eak .with the Counoil
agdn.
~ii(~~~~ir\\l~~~a:~:r."Ic.d th.t the dilcu..ion of County Ro.d
""~""...."...
:./l
. ~
,
o
I
i
~.,' ~ .~c.. ~
FORM C
SUPPLEMENTAL DATA
FOR SEWAGE SYSTEM PERMIT
AIPIUIoR NuIMer
Ta ...... .....
t. -".'Ml". NlIIM (Lelt, PInt, M.L)
-
-J~ ~bt<\.lK.
4. .... ....... .. loll T....
L ' ~~s..I-h +r,,-.=::.. AII,'=-.l. ~-\'
IS. '!WAGI! IYITI!M DATA
a. I!"""" PIIOM
C.1In DATA
t. WoItl c-..r . I. Type of'''''' 'J.IoI. Dete I. .uppo..... Det8/~
.. tU- .re..... "II ..,.. TonIl 0nIr .. ==.. . - ".... ~H
" ........ " II DrIIft..... 0nIr IL ..... .~ PereoIdon Det8 "*-
...ffi..... TonIll Droln..... =-: per 1noIt): ~
.. to ~
a. AnI ".. U.. II. I HoIdIftt T_ w.. T.....: . DMIgft CoIouIotIcM..
..II...... 'MIlly e.11 AItorMlIvo I,...... (',..cIty) tLDopIlto .3:,' .. 1111. II ........,.
Mottled 101: .
It. II MuIIpIo 'omIIr .. DII.. of - ........,............. .
.. JI' Cf l8OIOfOIoI 101 Te'''ng: . I. fOOOlIInIendod......
4. TrPO of Drolnllolcl - ."..... ouIImIt.....
II. II AgrtoutIurol L IIItoncIIrd .,...... pion 011 PORM No
.. II Oltler (apooIfy) It.)(:Mound (pruouro d1.trIbutIon)
L II Mound (grovllr d1.trlllUllon)
.. .y...... Do"'" ,Dete SoW...lAwoI Dllta WorbIIMt
TonIl Dralllllolcl L """"' Known
L D1.1aIlM to WeI: . rIa..::.. .-r'f..)~ WlIIIr IAwoI: . -
It. too.y.., PIoocI
It. Di.1aIlM to 1uIIcIIi'l: . Zo' . I-c::.' 1!Iwdon: . -
. 1-.J.-.' Zo' .. tOoY.., PIoolI
.. DI....... .. "OI*tr Unel . IItVlIIloftJ .
II. DI..... toluctlon Uno: . - . - II. Do..... of TMIlIllid/"-
Drolnllolclll ...... on:
.. 01....... to "'..ure Uno: . - . - 1'----
.. T_~1IIid tOoY.., PIood I!Iwdon
./,ZSc::. ........ Known WIIIor &.Nt
AIM of (IU): . I H1t1lo.. Known Ground WIIIor LftoI
.. DIItenoo to ..... ., ....... - -. 101 MottIng ., ..........101...,.
,.. 0nIIMrJ HIgIl WIlIft.IAwoI): . .
II. DnlIftlIeM I., M'IIIcNIIroni ........ +~' Nolo: 'I1lo proper...... of......
ICMMI ONUM WlIIIr ....... - .... II.......... upon
......... &.eM . lei ....,.: . . .... """'"'...... 'I1lo
.... ........ .........
...... ........
....., ....ry with lIlY lIgnIturellllt II dIta 011 lIlY eppIINtIon ..... IO-2Y"'~ g
.................... ft. IIld MINet.. lie MIt of mr ..lCM1....: .
.......... of AppIIoant Dele
SEWAGE SYSTEM PERMIT
I J APPLICATION" HIRIIY
I J Pl!AMISlION .. HIAIIY G
.. In eooontenoo with
horolnelllr In .. GIN
IV ORDER ()II
TO
_Ofldum form. ....... opooIlIutIoM IIIid II .....1uppCIrtlng .... union &pool'"
1llid/.IPI!CIAL PAOVIIIONI. . C" err-
/J- ;;}rs-' 4'(
TItle Dote
NOT!: THII PI!AMIT Tl!RMINATU ON:
..... - proWled for'" 100II ClIdInrwo _I. Mlr.Moota Law.
.II!I! AEVEAI! I'OR GI!NEIIAL MD IPI!CIAL PAOVIIIONI.
MDftR.IlAY.t117
-
" '
J
~
IAIlUDl PLAY S!S'lIMS
!MPlmBB SOIIARY
&:!! 5/31/90 12/31/90
Bookkeeping 2 1
Sales 5 1
Office 1 1
Administrative 2 2
Factory 24 *21(after ~ther hiring)
Shipping 6 0
40 26
The reasons for this drop in employees are:
1. Re-assigned retail sales people and el:l.m:l.nated dMler
sales people.
2. Opened Shakopee Warehouse.
3. Improved scheduling and factory automation.
o
-
J
I
.1
1
I
--1
j
.. INCHES STRAW OR MARSH
HAV ANDUYER OfF RED
ROSIN PAPER
GfltASS COVER
CLEAN SAND FILL
MAXIMUM SLOPE-
. :1 TO I
t~'"
12" I center')
SAND't' LOAM SOIL : ,". e-!qe
PERFORATEDL'lTr-. ___
. INCHES
TOPSOIL
. !
SLOPE
. SUBSOIL
CROSS SECTION A - A
;
~
,. WII"" , OIly
CITY OF PRIOR LAKE ~::-~~10111
~. ....UILDING PERMIT. ..001d.AHI_ ~
TEMPORARY CERTIFICATE OF ZONING COMPLIANCE ,- - 3>0 0
AND UTILITY CONNECTION PERMIT POmIItN~ _ <..ap
..~...l
'10"'
PROPOSED GRADE FOUNDATION
IN RELATION TO CURB OR CROWN
OF STREET
USE OF BUILDING
IIaok
IIcle
IIlIt
TH APPLICATION
SOIL TESTS ;A- INI..oYDATA~
PILING LOGS lJ PERCOLATION
TEST
PLANS & SPECS)ll1. SETS
SURVEY ;::s.. COPIES
OFF STREET PARKING
SPACES REQ,
SPACES ON PLAN
PERMIT VALUATION
TYPE 0' CONSTRUCTION; I I IIV V
Occup.ncy Group At! I H R M
Permit FH ,.. . . .. . .. .":':~~. ~~, :, ..., sL1 ?k..Q.~
Plln Cheoklng FH. .. , , .. , . , , . , . , .. .., · '"'
St.t. Surch.rg. .. .......... ;........, ,:J:....t(q- .ls
Pen.lly........................;..... .
SeptlcSylt.m....H........,.....,.., .
oth.r'S;'b~~~~; .,'.'... '.:'. ','.:','. :','. :'.::'.::: :/17 -3'Il;b
om.. Your Building Permit Wh.n
. ,--
D.t.II.....:J'O-~
,
City:.
~-~
Check If
D.ferred
I
I
B
C.rtlflc.t. of OCCUp.lley
I..uad
ztv~
\":\ ",.<;::)
7>~~~
<~
" . 'C)
- \T1
-""
:.~ C' to,
Z-::I.:..~
R 7-
-~1 ('" ....,
)> \:::') ~
77
~ ),
-=4
7'
C.
C\
-I
C:-j
7
.~'~':
....
~ >--.: """~?'""1" t::.
~1; ~'1 ~5 \; ~ !: ~
1::,;. ~"l,~~'.1-';
&~ s 1; -:"1:7;~ t;. 1. _i "-
iJi ; ~ i\?'';:I'"~ l: \'.
....-~ .... f; '\'): ~ =1t !'f \,
'~r~ -;> .~ ~~~ -.... .~ .:~ ~
':0 ~.~ ~~;: *- ':.:.~ =
r; "<l" ~ i'~
..h. r.
"f ..Ia -tl:o ,,<. l! ~
.~"l'~~~:Z ~
'~r.\:~l. R :z
-) '.j ~ ~ ~,
-;.
Tii~
fM~~
1i'~",,':'
~. It :7,.
).; :tfJ
~ .';t.,
l:. Lq
',ie',
" ~.
'f
~
.
~
''.
).....-=
. ~
-21
:x:.
.<:#- . .
'jg.. .
----
. .
. .~' ..il
..', "
I-~-- .9"
~-~:'l ..~~
"',.j-'I:l,
.' ':.t:. ',~
"1
,
"
i
i
i
.~
l.~
.
~ln"
;.t',-~;
~.:,,~
'i~.r ~
.?1-~~
~~1}1-
; it ,l~
~-~
fI
"3"
~:t
.~t~
i ~
--+
....... '
~ --',--- ~
I :~
Vd#fJ i
'~~,)l',u i
I: ~i
. 1-. ,-_,
\' ~!. \
~ ~
..
r-
I
~
i-
:n'
~
....
, IE:=
I~,':
~__.i
=
""
..
.
'&
'I:
~
'1;0
i!
Jl
.~
,
1
t
7
~
~
t
--
~ .i.
1;.
(t~
'-
'I
)0 ::~
~-...-.-0
----".. V
C',
1)
::0
~
.
1
I
'5-'
~. ~.'
!--k-., .
~ - ,
."'
~ "
~~~
f-.. ~J;
.:. .. -><r- -@
. ,
;
I
l.
~
i @'f
~ ~
i"""'%,.
I ~-I!-
I ~'.#,
~~:; "__.n __. _ ..
... I
I 1-
;; ~
,
~~
~
~::
~
.ft ';
I ~
) ,,:,i
----..>o<;-@
I
-. ~ ---, -. -"-- H--:--
I
I
I
I ,
:------ .-1_
---.- -II!--w.
, I
P-Pr-,~ti. . -- ) .t".J i
"-11-- ._- -----.ll
I ,4",7; I
..--r-.- -"- -'''-~#I~Q'Z,l -,--.
e e
,p'",
.tJ.,n
)(.
.~
~
':-'
~,
L.
-~ ," -,~
I,
.:!,,,,~l .
_. ....--0
,;,-:n,
lj
'v.....7,
Q
C)
G r
'J of
-'. -I.
\ .
I, I
. 4'
I,J
1
1
!
('
- --
. . :----i"
1t',1t' I~. 'I
P/bfo "
I
I
I
I
..~.
,/
- . . .....'
I
1{1~ It' p~. :
~I
"
I
""~UI"I'.""""'"
L"I>',," ,', :,'_ ',,_.., ::_~'~l"'i:~' :
t , <,',,."':"',,.:'; ',.,,-.' ~~~:'::;f<.
-1' . -.'
:"/;'1;:"" ",',' ,.1."
"":-.""'!r","'r~_.
I
I'
I(
. ,
.\ "
'I "
II., .
..
.._- ....---- _._------.._~
'-iL>} .
~
~I
Jr~~-~-" -I.
. I
lOt
1
\.
.,4
to;,.
I'
I
L 'I'~ 'M'Ub
C.'
"I'tll'~I"~.~~
1
,. tlWl" w~u..
.." Vt..1
. T".... Roe.f
.....
!i:,
! 'I
I~
%
I
.I UNI1 1f'~ i I
L I
'~ ~MiJ 'I
g ".'"'L__:
,
I
1
Go'-
- -. --,- .. -
~
,'vl
", \\'1
,,, J UNIT t~ [
I uNIT 1t 4 [
""'] UNIT 1t~ I.
(0 . if:
~'.",
!
i
*
j
I
<V
-" ....i...,;- -...
II~~~ k~:.,~J L-~,;~~~.....1'lI1i~ ~ I, ..
1f .,,' ..... ~ ,114'.0' r _ _u'.~'
...'---:-t -, ,..... .. ....,
<D (0
~.,.Il-Af11 ^ 4
"
,""~t'
I'
(~)
I
o
: "i.,l
, ...::
I ",
i
I )1
, , Sl
G)_.l._-~-
II"
.,
llv
~~1I1it1
i
~..
I)i""~ ".
,,::~'t"/.;'
I " . ,,~i;r~; i
, 1..O~ .,.,' 'J~";I...'
r- ." ,.i r..'fl.').j
" .1.: ,&":. .
I . 1"..-, '~';"
!' . ,
" <:.~ i
I -, .' " I' J'
.' 1- :... l":- I'l\ ,
, I .
I :,1
T I
. ,,$'f..L I ,
, .i. ,:..;.~ .;t--"L.". .,,', \,~':;
~ ""~. ,,1._ ' , I_~, -'~1:~;~"~ ' _ .,':~;:,1:>:.~
. . :e,' '!l f>llt ......" , "--",),if ,,' . .....
1 \ ~1 .~~i:. _.tT:<~' J. '. ,~r}~.~ft~/.:~~' ~~;~~;;,'~
~. iii" ~"'J" ti '..,h' '" .11" .~.. .,
-":St~~,-",- oft>:; ~~. \ " -j -~1::~ ~:_~'''~'~
"'1''''' ~'.~~~ ~', ; \,.{"~
. ~.",.\J~'f~~':~~ ' ,~:1-",. ;-:,~j
.:. I '. ,I", '. ..,. .: '),
"r .. ,",~~~~~;~ ' "':1
'.~' ' I"i,':':-' /to ,~:~ ",~
'~,: '. . (I
,., ,,',:-- '.r ", <. i' ~"
.~ , 1 ~ - - i..:-j~~."
I r" ., ,';1
; ,t,.~;:~
, I~"'~"""I')/ "'1
<;#.J..v" , ,'.1
V1 '1
1
I
,
I
i
j
!
.. ," ~1I'~"1 I (J
~~,,~,}~~
7/if/"~,
a (1C4fi1eJ,
/'t
i ----,-
I ''';' ,
, , \S
I ".,,~.., .. "-
,I'If ,.."....:,1. ':i
, " lee) it
I ",~~'
I '''(''I I--'--'-~-
~
,~
I'
If
:I U~IT .~; L'
I
~:'
r--
" ,,"'/
II., .11'
, ,',.1-/,
~ +ho('~ '"'\;
III ..~...':
1(
~ "
:;/'
.
'..,
'I' t\PUT' WN.~
~
mt
L~tiiT It &> [
" I' f"CiRir"1
tQhn ~ .,'\
, I:
! '1\ 'j
;:
. '
L ...... /
.J'I -.: "r\' \"",-',~
- .,.- -..,
tf~v ..~ r'-."
. '., ,::J, -\ ""r~.~lr., tiT'.,,"""''' llTf" )
" " 'fA""'.. .
"~'1~'
~~ cb
I
1 I
Y-,- ,
'~Cl..,..,...e'~~t:
'iI,'.e" , .
@
~
.II""
. 1
.~
~it'~CI
',,4'.0'.
.j
i,-' ! C
tNV .
k.
, "
~ 1," t"
.""
!..- 'l"
I
I
I 1.'" t"
1- -{ - "'7'".6....,
I -'T
I I ~ I
l-
I I I I
I . I I
, ~. , .", ...
" tV.,.., 7' \''<t-' ,- r'
I .~-l.""~- . I '
~~~ . S~
--'...~'.. -
i~l.
, "
Y'
~I'.;
"1
I'
I
I j
. ,
\,- . ~/'I C./
(, ") J..J)
I
!
i
'oj
1"1,61
..
~~.
.)
'"
2.
q I..)
I,
-)
<(
> "
\U I
-l it
IU. ~
j'
'I
,
Ii
"-----, ~---- ~'1
,
i
I:
I
--Ii
I
~
~-
I
I
1
I
~
f:~:'i: .
~'!'l:'. :-.". ;.'. ',.,' " ' ";'
';.i :~^.
. tJii
! '
~
. ~- .
~
it
~
...
~. : j
~
,,)o_
j ..:;
'>0
'. ,
II' ~
,
>( ~
/'.-
!
t
~
[
":\
z..
~
r--
\.)
:..J
~-
\-=;-
\i: ,
.::~
t\J~
~+~
';J'-.)~
~~-
, ~~~
~ ~.~~
H
<(
>
11o.~
..:.
~~.
~) ~
-'
<(...
"
.u .1
"'of
-
t4JIIJn'J1G~
90( ,SB
+t'''I~I'; tJqJ,Vkl1:: lfnM rn
gf] ~ - .;F\
1<1#1 \
:,
,;
icL .-1 [
H:~WM
: .oIl,..t1Il14'
_1~1~.
I : : ~vJ i 1vl~
r\\.i",
.~. . .""'ntt ...
.')
~'<a
t:!
~
~t:.
-'
"I "
i
'":-111.(,'
I
I
I
, I
-
i
I,
Qo
~-
I,
~ i I :
" 41;ltJ"l1m!f
It j l lj'"
annJ.7
'1-
r.tlIVnd.b7ll 1\11101
j
I
I
'~'''::jl!,''".!~
,"'-'-< ';;.t""Y~",~...
". ~., ';~ "", ,"
'4
"..li,',""
,:~~
,
j
j
j
!
, Mf;fAl.. r.tr fUj
/ :
M1-1Al. rAN~I~
~j~",
.::.
I ,
, ,
;l,'j; ..
, ,
1J ";
r ..:." CUT H ~ L. ~ V A T I C-'N "1
,:".; ,.\ L. e 'l~- - ;'. C.
H~T,\L.. r'Aj'lrt e>
II
~..
C,/V'3
[E.Ab T r ~ i,YAT-L:? t-..1_
~ C--}. &.,. t:.' lif" - ro-&"
\'l.'.'1 :'...~^i'-". ',~"
ff-.Or~w t1"L.-I>I.',J~ f~".
.JCHWt./CH cuN:7Tr'Gl.-.TI{,r~
fNOf- t..At-f. I MII'1NtuT'" I
..p...
(I
CITY. OF PRIOR LAKE 1: ff!I!.~ ~
BUILDING PERMIT, I. If*:' ~
TEMPORARY QERTlFIQATE OF ZONING COMPLIANCE?7 L
AND UTILITY CONNECTION PERMIT Permit No. -0
SPACII NUMIIAID 1 THAU 17 MUIT II 'ILLID IN
BEFORE PERMIT 18 IS8UED (i'I.... Print or Typ. .nd Ilan .t bottom
2. SITE ADD E88
.9IfikJ C<fU1lr ~I '/4' '<.;fI.
3. LEGAL DESCRIPTIONS ;; '1 ~. ~~.-~. CJ
SECTION . f(tJ-J"'r I en.... t::.. ~'S;'
1. DATE
I'z,. 'It. -
IUILDlNG IN'ORMATION
- 0 "41.::t1' .
I-''I\L -.s.. ~ 'f\,~ e.2..2..
BLOCK,
PARCBL NUMBER tS. 901 . t:JII(J-.1
(Addr"l) (Tel. No.)
.
(H'.rt) ~~~h) (o,er;h)
12. NO. OF STORIES
I
13. TVP ON8TRUCTION
~
14. FLOOR AREA APPORTIONMENT
USE
ADD.ITION
4, OWNER
~~
5. ARCHITECT
(N.me)
.Au?Zc-
(Nam.)
(Addr.al)
(T.I. No.)
8. BUILDER.c:.t/....A..J~J~~~..r (Addr...) (Tel. No.)
7. TYPE OF WORK Flr.pl.o.O BtptloO H..UngO PlumblngO R.rooflng
N.w ConltruotlonO Altar.Uonl[;"" Addltlon~ Flnllh AttlcO R.lldlngO
Flnllh all.m.ntO PorohO G.r. .0 Chlmn.yO Mllo._
a. PROPERTY AREA OR ACRES II. PROPERTY DIMENSIONS 10. CULVERT SIZE
S . Ft. Width D. th V.. No
I ~lftby O'rllly I~'I I h.Vllulnlllllcllnlormlllon on Ihl. Ippllo.t1on which 1.10 th. bill 01 Illy knowlldOl I"".nd corraat. , 1110 OIItlly llIelI 1III111e _ or .utllortald llI.nl
for till. .boy. ",,"Uonld properly .nd th.1 .11 _.Iruollon will oonlorm 10 .11 ..I,UIIG .1.1. .nd 1oo.II.w. .nd will p~ 'n IOOOIlIInoI wllh IUbrlIlllld plIn., IIIII.WII. 11111
Ih. building 011101'.' oln.lIVOk.lhl. permit lor lUll alu... "urtlllrrnorl, , hItIby IlIf11lh.1 1111 olty 0111011' or I cllllOlIIIlll'Y Inllt upon 1111 proptt1y 10 PItIorrn neIdId 'n.pea.
"X" J,,~.' "..,Z-89
Dill
115. NUMBER OF OCCUPANTS OR
SEATS
OCCUPANTS
lEATS
IMATED VALUE
17. COMPLETION DATE
WITH APPLICATION
o ENERGY DATA . 0
o PERCOLATION
...I TEST 0
lit- SETS
o COPIES ..i..
",on,
I.ok
llel.
licit
SOIL TESTS
PILING LOGS
PLANS' SPECS
SURVEY
PROPOSED GRADE FOUNDATION
IN RELATION TO CURB OR CROWN
OF STREET
USE OF ~LDIN.ot.J~.~'^~'~~ (
TYPE OF CONSTRUCTI ; I " III IV V
Occupancy GrouPOE I H R M
DM,lon (%>> 4
P.rmlt F.. ........................... · ~i: ~
PI.nCh.oklngF...............,....... ___ _
SI.II Surch.rg. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. ... :;..r.;:p..."
OFF STREET PARKING
SPACES REa.
SPACES ON PLAN
PERMIT VALUATION
City:
Penalty. . , It. , . , I . . . . . . I . t . . I . I . . . . . .. .
Plumblno-'u. II.. ...... .',',........ i... .
Sewer ',Tap . 11.11. .... II' .,... It..... .
8I\Vtf,Ht\C)k.Up t. ,',... I. .,",... it...... ..
Wltt'-, HoOk.up ... tt,'.... It......... II .
Mlt., Hom.. .,', II... "',,, .',. ti... ,.... .
Wat.rMlt.,.. I" It.. .... .1........... .
'r'.;~'_::,
S.ptlo SYlt.m . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. .
Oth.r..II..." '" .., .... "" ,. ........ .
Subtota'....................... S I::J 1_ 3:.<:::.
tlon Becom'l Your Building PermltWh.n
Ch.ck If
Deferred
o S.wer ',W.ter Connection F.. . . . . . .. .
OWatitr Tow.r F.. ..................... .
By'
.rtlllc.l. of Occup.noy
Issued
D.t. !L - 2c:::,.i..~9
'W.t.ro1t.p-~-..'~:.::......,.. .:..-~-....... ..... .'.
CltYF~:... ;..........:............. ....
Oth.r. i..~ ;'.. ........... ........... ...... .. i
. ,Totll Dut.. .. . .. .. .. .. .. .... .. ; ,/,:),\.~
Paid ';': Rtoef~'
: D.tiJJ.~:.2I- ~ . ,.,.~ . ".:
__II II In IllCIClIlIInoI WllIllili CItY %onlIio OldlMriOllilld IIIIY pI'OClIId. NIlUIItId. TIlII doauo .
II of Zon'ng oom~ end IIIoWI 00riIlrU0lIcIl'1o 0lllIlllIM0I; ....00llUIIIIl0r.. CerlIItloIle.of Ooclupanar
>". ';;,'.!~:$-'r.:,~\:;-(':>-:'~',;:~~):';"; ~'.::~: -''-~_: ' ,,', \-:'; ?;, /;"
-
CITY OF PRIOR LAKE
February 9, 1989
I .
I.
Joseph R. Zuzek
Rainbow Play Systems
4480 Dakota st. S.E.
Prior Lake, MN 55372
RE: BUILDING PERMIT NO. 89-007
Dear Mr. Zuzek:
Your buildinq permit for 5890 Credit. River Road as been ready for
some time.Pleasebrinq1nacheck fOr$12~.~O. If we do not
hear from you by Februarv 21,1989 , we w111 have no choice but
to double fee the.perm1tamount.
ou for you anticipated cooperation in this matter.
GS:rms
C>"'t..
tfIlINO"W tt'tAy.sY.s'?C/YU
41Bt:J CU'1f11r IfItle-c- ,t/O I
4#. 'IM4
~
o
a
CITY'S COpy
~
-0--"'---0
~
.
0-. r-O 0 I
a C}i -0 a
1 0 6 0-
I
;
c 0 0 1
[g@[gDW~ Ii
~ 0 I~ U ITYOFPRIORLAKE l:l!!!~c.:!!I-
IUILDlNCI'PERMIT, ' J. y..~
ImFlCATlOFZONING COM'LIANCE
AND UTILITY CONNICTION' 'IRMIT ....... No. 5"'l....- ~ l ~
1. DATI
Nov 30,1993
.AC8 .........1THIU 1711U1T . PlWD IN
BEFON! PI....IT 18 I..,ED (PIeue Prtnt or Type Met alan at bottom
2. S. '
5980 Rainbow Parkwa Prior Lake, MN
" LEGAL DE8CRIPrION
am
ADDITION 1
4. . OWNER
2-N
.......... INPOIIIIA'nON
11.
~ cn'8"
12. NO. 01' lTOAtU
1
55372
1"
(AdcINII>>
430. Oak Grove
(Addreu)
'......0 _ICO HeltlngO PlumbtngO AIroo noO PorchO
New ConItructtonOAltlratIOntIlSAdcIItIoflO"nllhAUIcO .. RlllctlngO 'Inllh ...a"""tO
Ch,",""OMlec., EXDlosioncontrol for code comDl iance
"PROPERTYAR~Oft~CREI\'.. PROPERTVDtMENItONI 10.CULYERT SIZE N A
Fa. 6 Areas:t 'Width th' vat No
..... ~ ......... ................. *,,,, ............ wllIofllllO tIlI.......,..--............. .............., ........ III _...............
::n~.n..J...:-..~......., -::Z.~r:5~~""'::;'... .,~.'::.-==-:.:-~::~.:=:==--..:-~...,=::...-:-=
X'~Z______ .... ....... ..... > ~. 8D Iq93' . .
'1'''.->' ........ <, . '. ." '.' '."DIIle .
D APPLICATION
o ENERGV DATA 0
o PERCOLATION
TEST 0
o SETS
o
SOIL TESTS
PILING LOGS
PLANS & SPECS
,....
PAOP08ED GRADE FOUNDATION
IN RELATION TO CURB OR CROWN
OF STREET .
USE OF BUILDING
....
....
....
OFF' STREET PARKING
SPACES REQ
SPACES ON PLAN SUAVlY
PERMIT VALUATION ~ ^'~ ~ PLOT
Amount Brouohl Forward .. . . . , . . . . . . .
hrtcDad............................. .
Sac ..;............................... .
Plumbing .. .. .. . .. . .. .. .. .. .. .. .. . ... .
Sewer Tap. . . .. . . . . . . . . . . .. .. . . . . .... .
Sewer Hook-up....................... .
Wat... Hootc-up ........ ... ............ .
Met... Horn;.......................... .
WatatMeler.......................... .
Check If OSewar.&,\V1ter. COnnecllon F.. . . . . . .. .
Deferred OWat.. Tower F.... . . . . . .. . . . .. .. .. ... .
WaterTap... .........................
City F........................ ........ .
COPIES
TYPI OF CONITIWC11ON; III
Occupancy Group ~E I Q:R M
lllwIIlOlllCl) .
CIty:
3../7.0 <:)
Zoc...os
/?'~
Permit F.........I. "I"" ........... .
PlanChacklng F...................... .
State SUrcharge...................... .
Penalty .. .. .. . .. .. .. .. .. .. . .. .. . .. ... .
SeptIcSyalem........................ .
Other................................ .
Subtotal ....................... . s;;,lJr:-.. s: 5:""
~Y--"'-.7
BDate l2-y.; 1-,
Certificate of Occupancy
laaued
Paid
,{
!:::
~
~
>.'"
tit
I"
"'A
1 ~..
~
,
, '" ;, ilel~'~i"k~" lIt ill ",
~'t~:~'f,^.;~~ II 11 m~'Ifi[I~ _'~1'11' ' ::~;'.:; "
,~\:: '(!.:~,~>~, :~" ',~ .~flltfi~ffeHI~tlf;jl!'" '.
'f'('~I~i:": :, f .'~~I'~! i!,
.. ' t}ti .If ~::, !'. ~", t.~ ,',' ""t,
'f" l'f! i't::~:.~ ,rU.tlf"'~\:~''''
-.--~
-..~I,lJ!I ~-:'.""
~1,,, ;, :?~:~~i~~~~~~!it:~:'0.,.;~~~~,~..->_t:: "I{';
. .\
.. -':;:'"
~
0In'H
1
j
,i)';.:1-
~i\\"~
( .':J
'#'.\. ~
,.,
:;. . -.
.'Iot", ;~':" "'~
lL{', "'Il :,~:~i"a.;:;~" "
'\;:'
'---
MIlS
iCl1DNS
~lI'lCIIIl
I
'..d'<'~
... ,
.,
I
~ i
I ;
~ ;
I ,,!
I '~ ~
I
.~ ~
I
,-------,...---
.-
f..'
\~ ~~.
. :,
:;~.:>"
~--_I'II'.
; ~..
,-----------
II
II
II
-tr----------------------- .
II
II
r-----------------------
lIIIII~__
,
~---------------M------
,
I
,
~
1
'j
j
.,
'}
.,
7,'
....If
\ ..
""', .'.y. :iJ:;"/
.q ;,',;!l~.i"f'it.
4 ~~fi;l: \({,. ~~~~~A ::';~-
, . )^'" /{ ". r I~". I,,,
~".".~~" .~~~ ),' :~ ~'..~.: f~_ ~..,~, <."
~~::. :,"~
':..: .:....:tlB~';i;:~::~
;.1.- ~:~.,f"'-::.. ,,",j_~..}!~\,~'
'I""
, ',1<.,"
( -.!:
",11
~h;
ILI'
I
I
I
,
,
,
______J
..
13- 0/13
CD
INTERIOR EUYATlON NORlHJY&L
,~.,.
4....,
I
I
1
t !
".1 I
,~;~i~~___'::'_J
I
1
'1
1
1
I 1
L_______J
..~..,~',.,
--.... .----......-....
IlII'UlIllIIlIDISlIl
II
II
II
-tr--------
II
II
r--------
lIIIIDI'IlII
cp
4....,