HomeMy WebLinkAbout09/02/1997BOOK
1. Call to Order
2. Roll Call
MAPLEWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION
Tuesday, September 2, 1997
7:00 PM
City Hall Council Chambers
1830 County Road B East
3. Approval of Minutes
August 4, 1997
4. Approval of Agenda
5. New Business
a. Easement Vacation (Burr Street right-of-way, next to 500 Ripley Avenue)
b. Enterprise Rent-a-Car Conditional Use Permit (2130 Rice Street)
c. Ramsey County Compost Site Conditional Use Permit (Lower Afton Road)
o
~/isitor Presentations
Commission Presentations
a. August 11 Council Meeting: Mr. Thompson
b. August 25 Council Meeting: Mr. Thompson
c. September 8 Council Meeting: Mr. Rossbach
d. September 22 Council Meeting: Ms. Fischer
8. Staff Presentations
Development Moratorium (south and east of Interstate 494)
9. Adjoumment
WELCOME TO THIS MEETING OF THE
PLANNING COMMISSION
This outline has been prepared to help you understand the public meeting process.
The review of an item usually takes the following form:
The chairperson of the meeting will announce the item to be reviewed and
ask for the staff report on the subject.
Staff presents their report on the matter.
The Commission will then ask City staff questions about the proposal.
The chairperson will then ask the audience if there is anyone present who wishes to
comment on the proposal.
o
This is the time for the public to make comments or ask questions about the proposal.
Please step up to the podium, speak clearly, first giving your name and address and
then your comments.
o
After everyone in the audience wishing to speak has given his or her comments, the
chairperson will close the public discussion portion of the meeting.
The Commission will then discuss the proposal. No further public comments are
allowed.
8. ' The Commission will then make its recommendation or decision.
All decisions by the Planning Commission are recommendations to the City Council.
The City Council makes the final decision.
jwlpc~pcagd
Revised: 01/95
MINUTES OF THE MAPLEWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION
'1830 COUNTY ROAD B EAST, MAPLEWOOD, MINNESOTA
AUGUST 4, 1997
III.
IV.
Vm
CALL TO ORDER
Chairperson Fischer called the meeting to order at 7 p.m.
II. ROLL CALL
Commissioner Bunny Brueggeman
Commissioner Barbara Ericson
Commissioner Lorraine Fischer
Commissioner Jack Frost
Commissioner Kevin Kittridge
Commissioner Gary Pearson
Commissioner William Rossbach
Commissioner Milo Thompson
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
July 21, 1997
Present
Absent
Present
Present
Absent
Present
Absent
Present
Commissioner Frost moved approval of the minutes of July 21, 1997, as submitted.
Commissioner Thompson seconded. Ayes--Fischer, Frost, Pearson, Thompson
Abstain--Brueggeman
The ~otion passed.
APPROVAL OF AGENDA
Commissioner Frost moved approval of the agenda as submitted.
Commissioner Pearson seconded. Ayes--all
The motion passed.
NEW BUSINESS
A. Quality Restoration Services Conditional Use Permit (Frost Avenue)
Ken Roberts, associate planner, presented the staff report. Commissioner Thompson was
concerned about the broad hours of operation and felt they were subject to interpretation if a
problem arose. Roger McGuire, the applicant, responded to Mr. Thompson's comments.
Mr. McGuire said the people with the dumpsters, now at the site, are only using the space. If
Mr. McGuire purchases the property, the dumpsters will no longer be there. However, he has
given permission to the owner of a semi-tractor to park on the property. Mr. McGuire had no
problem with any of the recommendations in the staff report.
Planning Commission
Minutes of 08-04-97
-2-
Commissioner Brueggeman moved the Planning Commission recommend adoption of the
resolution which approves a conditional use permit to allow an outdoor storage yard south of
Frost Avenue, east of Edward Street (formerly 1160 Frost Avenue.) Approval is based on the
findings required by code, subject to the following conditions:
1. All construction shall follow the site plan date-stamped June 11, 1997. The director of
community development may approve minor changes.
2. The city council shall review this permit in one year.
3. Clean the site by removing all vehicles, unused and inoperable equipment, sod piles, unusable
dirt piles, debris and all other unused/unusable items.
The temporary storage of work-related materials, such as dirt piles and cable spools, for example,
may be permitted. These materials may be kept on site for no more than one month. No more
than 25 percent of the site shall be used for the storage of such materials.
Commissioner Pearson seconded.
Commissioner Thompson asked for a friendly amendment to specify allowable hours of operation.
Commissioner Brueggeman was agreeable to the addition of the following condition:
5. Normal hours of operations shall be 6:30 a.m. to 7:30 p.m., Monday through Friday. Exceptions
will be allowed to provide emergency service to customers.
Ayes--all
The motion passed.
B. Street and Alley Vacations (West of Ariel Street, South of County Road C)
Ken Roberts, associate planner, presented the staff report. Mr. Roberts answered questions from the
commissioners.
Commissioner Frost moved the Planning Commission recommend adoption of the resolution which
vacates the unused portions of Oak Avenue, Connor Avenue, Demont Avenue, Edgehill Road,
German Street and alleys between Ariel Street and White Bear Avenue. The city should vacate these
street right-of-ways because:
1. It is in the public interest.
2. The city and the adjacent property owners have no plans to build streets or alleys in these
locations.
3. The adjacent properties have street access.
This vacation is subject to the city keeping utility and drainage easement over all of the
vacated street right-of-ways.
Commissioner Brueggeman seconded.
Ayes~all
The motion passed.
Planning Commission
Minutes of 08-04-97
-3-
VI. VISITOR PRESENTATIONS
There were no visitor presentations.
VII. COMMISSION PRESENTATIONS
July 28 Council Meeting: Mr. Roberts reported on this meeting.
August 11 Council Meeting: Mr. Thompson will attend this meeting.
August 25 Council Meeting: Ms. Ericson is scheduled to attend this meeting.
Commissioner Frost asked about the Ariel Street project. Commissioner Fischer asked about
the new sewer billing procedures.
VIII. STAFF PRESENTATIONS
Ken Roberts, associate planner, said he anticipates having a report on the new compost site
ready for the next planning commission meeting.
Commissioner Fischer mentioned the National Night Out observation and an open house to
be held by the Ramsey-Washington Metro Watershed Board.
IX. ADJOURNMENT
The meeting adjourned at 7:40 p.m.
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
LOCATION:
DATE:
MEMORANDUM
City Manager
Ken Roberts, Associate Planner
Easement Vacation
Burr Street fight-of-way, south of Ripley Avenue
August 22, 1997
INTRODUCTION
Mr. Richard LeFebvre is proposing to vacate an unused utility easement. This easement is in the
former Burr Street fight-of-way, south of the former Ripley Avenue fight-of-way. This area is
between Bradley and Desoto Streets, north of Kingston Avenue. (See the maps on pages 3 and
4.)
BACKGROUND
On May 14, 1984, the city council vacated the following:
1. Ripley Avenue between Desoto and Burr Streets. This vacation was subject to the city
keeping a utility easement over the vacated fight-of-way.
2. Ripley Avenue between Burr and Bradley Streets. This vacation was subject to the city
keeping a utility easement over the vacated right-of-way.
3. A part of the Burr Street fight-of-way lying south of Ripley Avenue.
4. 'Fhe alley in Block 3 of Kings Addition to Saint Paul.
(Please see the maps on pages 4 and 5.)
DISCUSSION
Maplewood has no plans to install any utilities in the Burr Street alignment. Mr. LeFebvre is
requesting this vacation so he may expand his garage to the west into the easement area. (See
the site plan on page 5 and his statement on page 6.)
RECOMMENDATION
Adopt the resolution on page 7. This resolution vacates the utility easement in the former Burr
Street fight-of-way, south of Ripley Avenue. The city should vacate this easement because:
1. It is in the public interest.
2. The city and the adjacent property owners have no plans to build utilities in this location.
3. The adjacent property has access to utilities.
REFERENCE
SITE DESCRIPTION
Existing land use: Undeveloped (next to the house at 500 Ripley Avenue)
SURROUNDING LAND USES
North:
East:
South:
West:
Property with 1781 Burr Street and Ripley Avenue
Property with 500 Ripley Avenue
Property with 1773 Burr Street and Ripley Avenue
Vacant property west of the applicant's house
p:sec1711efebvre.vac
Attachments:
1. Location Map
2. Property Line Map
3. Site Plan
4. Applicant's Statement
5. Vacation Resolution
Attachment 1
CONNOR
IADA
Sondy
Loke
SKILLMAN AVE.
MT. V[RNON
DOWNS AVE.
BELL.WOOD AVE.
SUMMER AVE.
BEL~4ONT LN
SKILLMAN
~ VIKIt
" LAURIE Cl*.
~URKE
AV.
BELLWOOD
KINGSTON ~ AVl.
AVE.
BURKE CT.
SAINT
PAUL
LOCATION MAP
3
MEMORANDUM
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
LOCATION:
DATE:
City Manager
Ken Roberts, Associate Planner
Easement Vacation
Burr Street right-of-way, south of Ripley Avenue
August 22, 1997
INTRODUCTION
Mr. Richard LeFebvre is proposing to vacate an unused utility easement. This easement is in the
former Burr Street right-of-way, south of the former Ripley Avenue right-of-way. This area is
between Bradley and Desoto Streets, north of Kingston Avenue. (See the maps on pages 3 and
4.)
BACKGROUND
On May 14, 1984, the city council vacated the following:
1. Ripley Avenue between Desoto and Burr Streets. This vacation was subject to the city
keeping a utility easement over the vacated right-of-way.
2. Ripley Avenue between Burr and Bradley Streets. This vacation was subject to the city
keeping a utility easement over the vacated right-of-way.
3. A part of the Burr Street right-of-way lying south of Ripley Avenue.
4. The alley in Block 3 of Kings Addition to Saint Paul.
(Please see the maps on pages 4 and 5.)
DISCUSSION
Maplewood has no plans to install any utilities in the Burr Street alignment. Mr. LeFebvre is
requesting this vacation so he may expand his garage to the west into the easement area. (See
the site plan on page 5 and his statement on page 6.)
RECOMMENDATION
Adopt the resolution on page 7. This resolution vacates the utility easement in the former Burr
Street right-of-way, south of Ripley Avenue. The city should vacate this easement because:
1. It is in the public interest.
2. The city and the adjacent property owners have no plans to build utilities in this location.
3. The adjacent property has access to utilities.
REFERENCE
SITE DESCRIPTION
Existing land use: Undeveloped (next to the house at 500 Ripley Avenue)
SURROUNDING LAND USES
North:
East:
South:
West:
Property with 1781 Burr Street and Ripley Avenue
Property with 500 Ripley Avenue
Property with 1773 Burr Street and Ripley Avenue
Vacant property west of the applicant's house
p:sec17/lefebvre.vac
Attachments:
1. Location Map
2. Property Line Map
3. Site Plan
4. Applicant's Statement
5. Vacation Resolution
2
Attachment 1
IADA "~ ~ ~' ~
__ .u.x~ ~v ' lie
_ ~ ,.~~,, ~_ .~ ~ ,~.~/~!~ ......... ~
SAINT PAUL
LOCATION MAP 9
~ N
Attachment 2
SUMN£R
AVE
I,~O
(?4)
1790,
oND 2
:~ROPOSED EASEMENT VACA'~i~'h
GS ON
LIFT STATION
I.IS~...
RIPLEY AVENUE
? (~.).
PROPERTY LINE MAP
PROPOSED EASEMENT VACATION 4
(7?9 ~A
Attachment 3
~ 60 71 i ~4
O0 71
9
lO
~60. ?0
40
· ~-.- 6£$. 6'G" '
66
SITE PLAN
5
Attachment 4
Richard LeFebvre
500 Ripley avenue
Maplewood, MN 55117
(612)-776-8697
May 5, 1997
To Ken Haider,
My wife and i would like to build an attached garage to the West of our
house on about 8' of vacated land owned by us. We own the land on both
sides of this vacated street, but it has an utility easement recorded on it. I
believe this utility easement is in place because when we had Ripley
Avenue, Burr Street and the alley vacated in 1984, it was easier to write up
the agreement with the retention of utility easements on all of the vacated
land. However because there are no utilities now covedng or crossing this
piece of land we would like to build upon itand see no reason for the city's
need to retain this particular utility easement. The power lines run on the
Ripley easement and the sewer easement runs on the alley. This land lies
between the two, and is not affected by either easement.
Thank you for your attention to this matter.
Attachment 5
EASEMENT VACATION RESOLUTION
WHEREAS, Mr. Richard LeFebvre applied for the vacation of the following-described utility
easement:
That easement over the vacated Burr Street right-of-way lying east of Lots 2 and 3, Block 5,
Kings Addition to the City of Saint Paul in Section 17, Township 29, Range 22, Maplewood,
Minnesota.
WHEREAS, the history of this vacation is as follows:
On September 2, 1997, the planning commission recommended that the city council
approve this vacation.
On ,1997, the city council held a public hearing. The city staff published a
notice in the Maplewood Review and sent a notice to the abutting property owners.
The council gave everyone at the hearing a chance to speak and present written
statements. The council also considered reports and recommendations from the city
staff and planning commission.
WHEREAS, after the city approves this vacation, public interest in the property will go to the
following abutting properties:
Lots 2 and 3, Block 5 and Lot 6, Block 3, Kings Addition to the City of Saint Paul in Section
17, Township 29, Range 22, Maplewood, Minnesota.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the city council approve the above-described
vacations for the following reasons:
1. It is in the public interest.
2. The city and the adjacent property owners have no plans to build utilities in this location.
3. The adjacent property has access to utilities.
The Maplewood City Council adopted this resolution on
,1997.
'7
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
LOCATION:
APPLICANT:
DATE:
MEMORANDUM
City Manager
Chad Bergo, Community Development Intern
Conditional Use Permit - Car Rental Lot
2130 Rice St. North
Enterprise Rent-a-Car
August 25, 1997
INTRODUCTION
Project Description
Mr. Sydney Speer proposes to open a motor vehicle rental business. This is the former site of
the Auto Glass Store at 2130 Rice St. North. (See the maps on pages 5 and 6.) Enterprise
Rent-A-Car would use this space for cleaning of the rental cars and for an office. Mr. Speer
said that he plans on having 5-15 cars on the site varying on customer demand and no car will
sit for more than 24-48 hours on the site. (See his statements on pages 8 and 9.) He is not
proposing any changes to the building or site.
Requests
Mr. Speer is requesting that the city council approve:
A conditional use permit (CUP) for a used car rental lot.
BACKGROUND
On July 14, 1986, the city council approved site plans for this building. Council also approved a
parking space reduction.
DISCUSSION
Conditional Use Permit
The proposed car rental lot on this site would be compatible with the adjacent auto-related
businesses. (Jiffy Lube and Car-X)
Parking
The site currently has 24 parking stalls, while the city code requires 50 parking spaces.
However, the council approved a parking reduction authorization for the building in 1986. The
city has not received any complaints on the parking and Cub Foods provides overflow parking
to this site.
On 8-22-97, Mr. Speer said that he would obtain written permission from Cub Foods, to park
any of their over flow cars in Cub Food's parking lot.
Site Maintenance
The site must meet several original conditions before allowing occupancy to Enterprise Rent-A-
Car. These include:
Condition 2. All trash dumpsters shall be stored in screening enclosures with a 100%
opaque wooden gate and shall be a color and material compatible with the building. There
are two dumpsters in a parking stall on the south end of the property and one dumpster in a
parking stall on the east end of the property. The owners or operator shall put all dumpsters
into enclosures.
Condition 3. Any of rooftop equipment shall be decoratively screened, hidden from view and
properly maintained. The fence screening is damaged and needs to be repaired.
Condition 12. All required landscape areas shall be continually and properly maintained.
There are a number of shrubs that are overgrown, one is blocking the exit sign of the
property and the overall landscaping should be improved and maintained.
Condition 15. Stop signs shall be posted at the two exits to the south. There are two exits
on the south that do not have stop signs posted.
RECOMMENDATION
Adopt the resolution on pages 10 and 11. This resolution approves a conditional use permit for
a motor vehicle renal lot at 2130 North Rice Street. The approval is subject to the following
conditions:
1. The owner or operator shall follow the site plan approved by the city. The director of
community development may approve minor changes.
2. The city council shall review this permit in one year.
3. If there is not enough parking on the site, the operator or property owner shall reduce the
number of vehicles for rent on the site or shall arrange to park employee vehicles
elsewhere.
4. The normal hours of operation shall be Monday-Friday 6 a.m. - 6 p.m. and from 6 a.m. -
noon on Saturdays.
5. The owner or operator shall stripe all vehicle display and parking spaces. All spaces
shall meet city size standards.
6. The owner or operator shall repair the existing chain-link fence on the west side of the
property.
7. All trash dumpsters shall be stored in screening enclosures with a 100% opaque wooden
gate and shall be a color and material compatible with the building. Enclosures shall be
2
protected by concrete-filled steel posts, or the equivalent, anchored in the ground at the
front corners of the structure. If the enclosure is masonry, the protective posts may be
omitted. Appearance and placement is subject to staff approval.
8. Any exterior building or rooftop equipment shall be decoratively screened and hidden
from view. The screening material is subject to staff approval.
9. The owner or operator shall repair the landscape area on the west side of the property.
10. All required landscape areas shall be continually and properly maintained.
11. Stops signs shall be posted at the two exits to the south.
12. Obtain written approval from Cub Foods to park a maximum of 10 excess rental cars
in parking lot east of Enterprise and west of Cub Foods before starting work.
This conditional use permit does not include signage. Sign approval will be handled by city
staff.
REFERENCE
SITE DESCRIPTION
Site size: 30,885 square feet (.70 acres)
Existing land use: Commercial Auto Service
SURROUNDING LAND USES
North: Sinclair Gas Station and Cub Food Parking lot
South: Schroeder Milk
East: Cub Foods
West: Multi-tenent office building across of Rice Street
PLANNING
Land Use Plan designation: BC (business commercial)
Zoning: BC
Ordinance Requirements
Section 36-151(b)(5) requires a CUP for the rental of used motor vehicle in the Business
Commercial District.
Criteria for Conditional Use Permit Approval
Sectibn 36-442(a) states that the city council may approve a CUP, based on nine standards.
(See findings 1-9 in the resolution on pages 10 and 11. )
p:secl 8\enterpri.cup
Attachments:
1. Location Map
2. Property Line/Zoning Map
3. Site Plan
4. August 6, 1997 letter from Mr. Sydney Speer
5. August 8, 1997 letter from Mr. Sydney Speer
6. CUP Resolution
Attachment
LOCATION MAP
Attachment 2
Little Canada
j.'F. E I 5 E N M E~t'l''G= E
L. $ Cub Foods
BC
,/;
,/../ \
PROPERTY LINE I ZONING MAP
Attachment 3
SITE PLAN
7
2484 Norfl~ Cleveland Ave
Roseville, MN 55113
612 628 9000
'Attachment 4
August 6, 1997
City of Maplewood
1830 County Rd. B East
Maplewood, MN 55109
To Whom it May Concern:
It is the intent of Enterprise Rent-A-Car to operate a rental branch at 2130 Rice St. North. We
currently operate 28 location throughout the state of Minnesota. We locate in the communities
we do business in typically in a Retail Strip Center or an Auto Mall. At this site we will have
approximately 2,100 square feet consisting of office space and a bay to vacuum and handwash
our cars.
Our parking demands vary from five to fifteen spaces depending on customer demand, however,
the same car never sits for more that 24-48 hours.
Enterprise rents only late model cars and we do not "display" our vehicles other than parking
them in their assigned space. We are a very conservative company and operate very professional
locatigns.
We feel the City of Maplewood offers a very exciting business climate and we look forward to
becoming a part of your community. If ! may be of any further assistance, then please do not
hesitate to contact me at (612) 635-4248.
Sincerely,
Sydney A. Speer
Group Rental Manager
8
2484 North Cleveland Ave.
Roseville, MN 55113
612-628-9000
AugustS, 1997
City of Maplewood
1830 County Road B East
Maplewood, MN 55109
To Whom it May Concern:
We feel that the Conditional Use Permit for Enterprise Rent-A-Car should be approved based on
the following criteria:
* The use would not change the existing character of the site as it is currently auto related.
Our use would not depreciate property values, but would instead bring value to the
property as we are a National Credit tenant.
We would not be performing any mechanical work on our vehicles so we are a very
"light" use when compared to other uses surrounding us.
Our business generates minimal traffic and tends to cycle opposite of other retail business
which lowers the amount oftraftic during peak retail demand.
The only changes we will be making to the structure are cosmetic internal changes. We
would not change the exterior nor create any additional demand on city services.
Sincerely,
Sydney A. Speer
Group Rental Manager
~,U~ - 8 1997
Attachment 5
RESOLUTION
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
WHEREAS, Enterprise Rent-A-Car, applied for a conditional use permit. The conditional use
permit is to operate a automotive rental in the BC (business commercial) zoning district.
WHEREAS, this permit applies to the property at 2130 Rice Street North. The legal description
is:
Subject to Rice Street, Tract B, of RLS 432, Ramsey County, Minnesota.
WHEREAS, the history of this conditional use permit revision is as follows:
1,
On ................... , the planning commission recommended that the city council
reviewed this permit.
On ..................... , the city council held a public hearing. The city staff published a
notice in the paper and sent notices to the surrounding property owners within 350 feet,
as required by law. The council gave everyone at the hearing a chance to speak and
present written statements. The council also considered reports and recommendations
of the city staff and planning commission.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the city ccuncil approve the above-described
conditional use permit, because:
1.
The use would be located, designed, maintained, constructed and operated to be in
conformity with the city's comprehensive clan and code of crdinances.
2. The use would not change the existing or planned character of the surrounding area.
The use would not depreciate property values.
The use would not involve any activity, process, materials, equipment or methods of
operation that would be dangerous, hazardous, detrimental, disturbing or cause a
nuisance to any person or property, because of excessive noise, glare, smoke, dust,
odor, fumes, water or air pollution, drainage, water runoff, vibration, general
unsightliness, electrical interference or other nuisances.
The use would generate only minimal vehicular traffic on local streets and would not
create traffic congestion or unsafe access on existing or proposed streets.
The use would be served by adequate public facilities and services, including streets,
police and fire protection, drainage structures, water and sewer systems, schools and
parks.
10
7. The use would not create excessive additional costs for public facilities or services.
The use would maximize the preservation of and incorporate the site's natural and
scenic features into the development design.
9. The use would cause minimal adverse environmental effects.
Approval is subject to the following conditions:
1. The owner or operator shall follow the site plan approved by the city. The director of
community development may approve minor changes.
2. The city council shall review this permit in one year.
If there is not enough parking on the site, the operator or property owner shall reduce the
number of vehicles for rent on the site or shall arrange to park employee vehicles
elsewhere.
4. The normal hours of operation shall be Monday-Friday 6 a.m. - 6 p.m. and from 6 a.m. -
noon on Saturdays.
5. The owner or operator shall stripe all vehicle display and parking spaces. All spaces
shall meet city size standards.
6. The owner or operator shall repair the existing chain-link fence on the west side of the
property.
All trash dumpsters shall be stored in screening enclosures with a 100% opaque wooden
gate and shall be a color and material compatible with the building. Enclosures shall be
protected by concrete-filled steel posts, or the equivalent, anchored in the ground at the
front corners of the structure. If the enclosure is masonry, the protective posts may be
omitted. Appearance and placement is subject to staff approval.
8. Any exterior building or rooftop equipment shall be decoratively screened and hidden
from view. The screening material is subject to staff approval.
9. The owner or operator shall repair the landscape area on the west side of the property.
10. All required landscape areas shall be continually and properly maintained.
11. Stops signs shall be posted at the two exits to the south.
12. Obtain written approval from Cub Foods to park a maximum of 10 excess rental cars
in parking lot east of Enterprise and west of Cub Foods before starting work.
The Maplewood City Council approved this resolution on .................................. .
3.3.
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
LOCATION:
APPLICANT:
DATE:
MEMORANDUM
City Manager
Chad Bergo, Community Development Intern
Conditional Use Permit - Car Rental Lot
2130 Rice St. North
Enterprise Rent-a-Car
August 25, 1997
INTRODUCTION
Project Description
Mr. Sydney Speer proposes to open a motor vehicle rental business. This is the former site of
the Auto Glass Store at 2130 Rice St. North. (See the maps on pages 5 and 6.) Enterprise
Rent-A-Car would use this space for cleaning of the rental cars and for an office. Mr. Speer
said that he plans on having 5-15 cars on the site varying on customer demand and no car will
sit for more than 24-48 hours on the site. (See his statements on pages 8 and 9.) He is not
proposing any changes to the building or site.
Requests
Mr. Speer is requesting that the city council approve:
A conditional use permit (CUP) for a used car rental lot.
BACKGROUND
On July 14, 1986, the city council approved site plans for this building. Council also approved a
parking space reduction.
DISCUSSION
Conditional Use Permit
The proposed car rental lot on this site would be compatible with the adjacent auto-related
businesses. (Jiffy Lube and Car-X)
Parking
The site currently has 24 parking stalls, while the city code requires 50 parking spaces.
However, the council approved a parking reduction authorization for the building in 1986. The
city has not received any complaints on the parking and Cub Foods provides overflow parking
to this site.
On 8-22-97, Mr. Speer said that he would obtain written permission from Cub Foods, to park
any of their over flow cars in Cub Food's parking lot.
Site Maintenance
The site must meet several original conditions before allowing occupancy to Enterprise Rent-A-
Car. These include:
Condition 2. All trash dumpsters shall be stored in screening enclosures with a 100%
opaque wooden gate and shall be a color and material compatible with the building. There
are two dumpsters in a parking stall on the south end of the property and one dumpster in a
parking stall on the east end of the property. The owners or operator shall put all dumpsters
into enclosures.
· Condition 3. Any of rooftop equipment shall be decoratively screened, hidden from view and
properly maintained. The fence screening is damaged and needs to be repaired.
Condition 12. All required landscape areas shall be continually and properly maintained.
There are a number of shrubs that are overgrown, one is blocking the exit sign of the
property and the overall landscaping should be improved and maintained.
· Condition 15. Stop signs shall be posted at the two exits to the south. There are two exits
on the south that do not have stop signs posted.
RECOMMENDATION
Adopt the resolution on pages 10 and 11. This resolution approves a conditional use permit for
a motor vehicle renal lot at 2130 North Rice Street. The approval is subject to the following
conditions:
The owner or operator shall follow the site plan approved by the city. The director of
community development may approve minor changes.
2. The city council shall review this permit in one year.
If there is not enough parking on the site, the operator or property owner shall reduce the
number of vehicles for rent on the site or shall arrange to park employee vehicles
elsewhere.
4. The normal hours of operation shall be Monday-Friday 6 a.m. - 6 p.m. and from 6 a.m. -
noon on Saturdays.
5. The owner or operator shall stripe all vehicle display and parking spaces. All spaces
shall meet city size standards.
6. The owner or operator shall repair the existing chain-link fence on the west side of the
property.
7. All trash dumpsters shall be stored in screening enclosures with a 100% opaque wooden
gate and shall be a color and material compatible with the building. Enclosures shall be
protected by concrete-filled steel posts, or the equivalent, anchored in the ground at the
front corners of the structure. If the enclosure is masonry, the protective posts may be
omitted. Appearance and placement is subject to staff approval.
8. Any exterior building or rooftop equipment shall be decoratively screened and hidden
from view. The screening material is subject to staff approval.
9. The owner or operator shall repair the landscape area on the west side of the property.
10. All required landscape areas shall be continually and properly maintained.
11. Stops signs shall be posted at the two exits to the south.
12. Obtain written approval from Cub Foods to park a maximum of 10 excess rental cars
in parking lot east of Enterprise and west of Cub Foods before starting work.
This conditional use permit does not include signage. Sign approval will be handled by city
staff.
3
REFERENCE
SITE DESCRIPTION
Site size: 30,885 square feet (.70 acres)
Existing land use: Commercial Auto Service
SURROUNDING LAND USES
North: Sinclair Gas Station and Cub Food Parking lot
South: Schroeder Milk
East: Cub Foods
West: Multi-tenent office building across of Rice Street
PLANNING
Land Use Plan designation: BC (business commercial)
Zoning: BC
Ordinance Requirements
Section 36-151(b)(5) requires a CUP for the rental of used motor vehicle in the Business
Commercial District.
Criteria for Conditional Use Permit Approval
Section 36-442(a) states that the city council may approve a CUP, based on nine standards.
(See findings 1-9 in the resolution on pages 10 and 11. )
p:sec18\enterpri.cup
Attachments:
1. Location Map
2. Property Line/Zoning Map
3. Site Plan
4. August 6, 1997 letter from Mr. Sydney Speer
5. August 8, 1997 letter from Mr. Sydney Speer
6. CUP Resolution
Attachment
LOCATION MAP
5
Attachment 2
Little Canada
i'.','
2158
j,'F'. E I ,5 E N M F..N G [ IR $
L.. $ Cub Foods
BC
G A, R.D E .N - -
u ty d B:~'-~'~--
:0 n Roa ,,,.., ....
Be
Tri-District School L
.....
PROPERTY LINE I ZONING MAP
6
Attachment
/ ' T'- i !J
q-- ."11 · e''~'A
I* ., -JiffyLube,
~.~, --~ t ' ' [ lit ~.~ L ~ ' ~ "" '
" ',',; -' '~,~ I,
'--- I / I · x ~ ., f' ...... ,
SITE PLAN
· ~ rent-a-car
2484 Nortt~ Cleveland Ave
Roseville, MN 55113
612-628 9000
'Attachment 4
August 6, 1997
City of Maplewood
1830 County Rd. B East
Maplewood, MN 55109
To Whom it May Concern:
It is the intent of Enterprise Rent-A-Car to operate a rental branch at 2130 Rice St. North. We
currently operate 28 location throughout the state of Minnesota. We locate in the communities
we do business in typically in a Retail Strip Center or an Auto Mall. At this site we will have
approximately 2,100 square feet consisting of office space and a bay to vacuum and handwash
our cars.
Our parking demands vary from five to fifteen spaces depending on customer demand, however,
the same car never sits for more that 24-48 hours.
Enterprise rents only late model cars and we do not "display" our vehicles other than parking
them in their assigned space. We are a very conservative company and operate very professional
locations.
We feel the City of Maplewood offers a very exciting business climate and we look forward to
becoming a part of your community. If ! may be of any further assistance, then please do not
hesitate to contact me at (612) 635-4248.
Sincerely,
Sydney A. Speer
Group Rental Manager
8
2484 North Cleveland Ave.
Roseville, MN 55113
612-628-9000
August 8, 1997
City of Maplewood
1830 County Road B East
Maplewood, MN 55109
To Whom it May Concern:
We feel that the Conditional Use Permit for Enterprise Rent-A-Car should be approved based on
the following criteria:
* The use would not change the existing character of the site as it is currently auto related.
Our use would not depreciate property values, but would instead bring value to the
property as we are a National Credit tenant.
We would not be performing any mechanical work on our vehicles so we are a very
"light" use when compared to other uses surrounding us.
Our business generates minimal traffic and tends to cycle opposite of other retail business
which lowers the amount of traffic during peak retail demand.
The only changes we will be making to the structure are cosmetic internal changes. We
would not change the exterior nor create any additional demand on city services.
Sincerely,
Sydney A. Speer
Group Rental Manager
Attachment 5
RESOLUTION
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
WHEREAS, Enterprise Rent-A-Car, applied for a conditional use permit. The conditional use
permit is to operate a automotive rental in the BC (business commercial) zoning district.
WHEREAS, this permit applies to the property at 2130 Rice Street North. The legal description
is:
Subject to Rice Street, Tract B, of RLS 432, Ramsey County, Minnesota.
WHEREAS, the history of this conditional use permit revision is as follows:
On ................... , the planning commission recommended that the city council
reviewed this permit.
On ..................... , the city council held a public hearing. The city staff published a
notice in the paper and sent notices to the surrounding property owners within 350 feet,
as required by law. The council gave everyone at the hearing a chance to speak and
present written statements. The council also considered reports and recommendations
of the city staff and planning commission.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the city ccuncil approve the above-described
conditional use permit, because:
The use would be located, designed, maintained, constructed and operated to be in
conformity with the city's comprehensive clan and code of crdinances.
2. The use would not change the existing or planned character of the surrounding area.
3. The use would not depreciate property values.
The use would not involve any activity, process, materials, equipment or methods of
operation that would be dangerous, hazardous, detrimental, disturbing or cause a
nuisance to any person or property, because of excessive noise, glare, smoke, dust,
odor, fumes, water or air pollution, drainage, water runoff, vibration, general
unsightliness, electrical interference or other nuisances.
The use would generate only minimal vehicular traffic on local streets and would not
create traffic congestion or unsafe access on existing or proposed streets.
The use would be served by adequate public facilities and services, including streets,
police and fire protection, drainage structures, water and sewer systems, schools and
parks.
10
7. The use would not create excessive additional costs for public facilities or services.
The use would maximize the preservation of and incorporate the site's natural and
scenic features into the development design.
9. The use would cause minimal adverse environmental effects.
Approval is subject to the following conditions:
1. The owner or operator shall follow the site plan approved by the city. The director of
community development may approve minor changes.
2. The city council shall review this permit in o'ne year.
If there is not enough parking on the site, the operator or property owner shall reduce the
number of vehicles for rent on the site or shall arrange to park employee vehicles
elsewhere.
4. The normal hours of operation shall be Monday-Friday 6 a.m. - 6 p.m. and from 6 a.m. -
noon on Saturdays.
5. The owner or operator shall stripe all vehicle display and parking spaces. All spaces
shall meet city size standards.
6. The owner or operator shall repair the existing chain-link fence on the west side of the
property.
All trash dumpsters shall be stored in screening enclosures with a 100% opaque wooden
gate and shall be a color and material compatible with the building. Enclosures shall be
protected by concrete-filled steel posts, or the equivalent, anchored in the ground at the
front corners of the structure. If the enclosure is masonry, the protective posts may be
omitted. Appearance and placement is subject to staff approval.
8. Any exterior building or rooftop equipment shall be decoratively screened and hidden
from view. The screening material is subject to staff approval.
9. The owner or operator shall repair the landscape area on the west side of the property.
10. All required landscape areas shall be continually and properly maintained.
11. Stops signs shall be posted at the two exits to the south.
12. Obtain written approval from Cub Foods to park a maximum of 10 excess rental cars
in parking lot east of Enterprise and west of Cub Foods before starting work.
The Maplewood City Council approved this resolution on ...................................
3.3.
MEMORANDUM
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
LOCATION:
DATE:
City Manager
Ken Roberts, Associate Planner
Conditional Use Permit--Compost Site
North of Lower Alton Road, between Century Avenue and McKnight Road
August 27, 1997
INTRODUCTION
The Saint Paul - Ramsey County Department of Public Health, Environmental Health Section, is
asking Maplewood to approve a conditional use permit (CUP) for a new compost site. They want
to create this site on Ramsey County Correctional Facility property north of Lower Alton Road
between Century Avenue and McKnight Road. (See the maps on pages 10 and 11.)
BACKGROUND
Beam Avenue Compost Site
On September 9, 1996, the city council reviewed the permit and listened to neighborhood
residents' concerns with the compost site. A motion was made and seconded to reduce the size
of the compost to 10,000 cubic yards. This motion resulted in a split vote---2 nays and 2 ayes
(Mayor Bastian was absent). The council tabled this item for two weeks for full council
consideration.
On September 23, 1996, the council again considered the CUP for the Beam Avenue compost
site. The council approved a motion to change the CUP for the Beam Avenue compost site.
These changes were to make it a transfer station, with a new site to be developed in southern
Mal~lewood for composting leaves. The council noted that the site being considered for the new
composting facility was the Ramsey County Workhouse property. The change also allowed the
county to continue to use the existing site for people to pick up wood chips and compost from the
site.
On October 14, 1996, the council again considered the CUP for the Beam Avenue compost site.
At this meeting, the council adopted 17 conditions of approval for the Beam Avenue site. (See
the minutes starting on page 16.) Conditions 10 and 11 changed the use of the Beam Avenue
site to limit it to only a transfer (no composting) location. That is, people may drop off and pick up
materials, but the county may not compost the yard waste on the site. Condition 14 of the revised
permit directed the county to make best efforts to develop a yard waste composting site on
county property near the workhouse, north of Lower Afton Road.
DISCUSSION
The Need for a Compost Site
The State law about yard waste has increased the need for compost sites. Property owners have
three options for disposing of their yard waste. They may pay their haulers extra to pick up yard
waste, compost it in their yards or take their yard waste to a compost site.
The Beam Avenue yard waste site is one of the three busiest of the eight compost sites in the
County. The following chart shows the usage and amount of material collected at the Maplewood
site. About half the users are Maplewood residents.
Cubic Yards(CY) CY Managed
Year Numberof Visits Received On-site(leaves)
1990 60,041 19,123 10,000
1991 62,497 13,613 5,905
1992 60,491 22,477 17,317
1993 66,901 27,480 21,240
1994 63,136 24,600 13,370
1995 58,702 24,760 12,235
1996 64,063 25,846 4,450
CY Transferred
(.qrass/leaves)
9 123
7 710
5 160
6 240
11 230
12 525
21 396
In 1993, the amount of yard waste received was unusual because of the high rainfall.
Ramsey County needs to find another site to compost the materials that residents leave at the
county yard waste sites. This is because the city changed the conditional use permit for the
Beam Avenue site (to limit it to only a transfer site). The county's search for a new compost site
on public land (preferably county owned), led them to the proposed site north of Lower Alton
Road. They believe that it is a good site for composting because it has access from a county
road, it would be on county property and would have the compost at least 1,100 feet from the
nearest residence. (Please see the maps on pages 12 and 13.)
Odors
The City should approach the odor issue in two ways. The first is to establish objective
procedures to verify and measure odor complaints. The second approach should be to set up
ways to reduce the potential for odor.
.Cohcerning the first point, the city had an odor consultant train City employees in 1994 to verify
or measure odors. The environmental health officer responds to odor complaints dudng the day
and the police department responds at night. If the City inspector detects a significant odor, he or
she will measure it or call an independent testing company to measure the odor. The inspector
would use a scientific testing method. Based on the testing scale, the conditional use permit
would set specific odor limits. The County would pay for any additional training and testing.
Concerning the second point, the City's environmental health officer believes that the strongest
odors from a compost site come from the turning or moving the old piles of materials that are still
decomposing. This is especially true when there is mostly grass in the yard waste. There is very
little odor from transporting newly-dumped leaves or finished compost or from pushing the freshly
dumped leaves together.
Many strong odors arise from grass clippings. Grass clippings sealed in a plastic bag for a couple
of days or longer can be very smelly when the bags are opened. The.County does not want to
compost grass clippings on this site. The County collects the grass on their existing yard waste
sites and then removes the grass to outside vendors.
Compost sites create odor. The challenge is to limit and manage the odors so they are not a
nuisance. Ramsey County should start by seeing what they can do to lessen the potential for
2
odors by site management. Woodbury has been successful with this option. Site management is
the key to controlling odors. Charles Cannon, executive vice president of The Composting
Council (Alexandria, VA), states:
"Odor control is a cdtical management challenge for composting operations. The single most
important cause of odor formation is inadequate management of organic material."
Site management may include limiting the amount of matedal stored on the site, turning the piles
whenever necessary to minimize odors (done only when the wind is blowing right), the use of
deodorizing sprays or water on the piles or regularly removing the materials. However, there may
be people who will object to even the slightest odor.
In preparing their application for this site, the county hired a consultant to study the proposed site
and the existing conditions to model possible odor conditions. The model uses local information
including topography, vegetation and weather patterns (wind direction and speed, humidity and
temperatures) to predict what areas the odors might affect. For this site, the model showed that
possibly nuisance odor levels could occur in the park, near the fire station on Londin Lane and to
the northeast into Woodbury. The highest potential for odors, according to the model, would
occur in these areas for up to 10 minutes once a year. (See page 56 and the map from the model
on page 57.) The model also showed that for the '~vorst" 60 minutes of a year, the highest odor
levels would occur all within the park and county correctional property. (See the maps on pages
58 and 59.)
Proposed Site
The maps on pages 12-15 show the plans for the proposed compost site. It would be on about 5
acres of the Ramsey County Correctional Facility property and at least 1,100 feet north of
Connemara Condominiums. Access to the site would be on a new, paved road to the two pad
areas and a stockpile area. They are proposing to screen the site by planting at least 70 trees on
the south, southwest and north sides of the site. (See the proposed plans on pages 13 - 15.)
On pages 100 - 111, is the proposed operations plan for the new compost site. This plan outlines
how the county and their contractors will run and use the site, including specifications,
equipment, operations, security and how complaints are to be handled.
Truck Traffic
To compost materials on the proposed site, the county will bring materials to the site in trucks.
County staff estimates that there would be 600 - 900 trucks per calendar year, all running on
weekdays. Most of the truck trips would be in April and May and again in October and November.
At the peak of site activity, there would be an average of about 15 trucks a day.
Ramsey County is proposing to have the trucks approach the site from the east on Lower Afton
Road and then turn fight into the site. For exiting the site, the county proposes to have the trucks
turn fight onto Lower Afton Road and then go west to McKnight Road. Having the trucks making
only right tums to and from the site should help lessen the potential for accidents and should also
minimize the amount of disruption to traffic flow. (See pages 53 through 55 of the county's report
for more information.) These routes will keep the additional traffic from this site away from the
existing residential neighborhoods in the area. The routes proposed by the county are major
existing streets and roads that the city, county and state intend for truck traffic. Specifically,
3
Maplewood has planned Century Avenue, Lower Afton Road and McKnight Road as major or
principal arterial streets. These streets are planned and built to carry the highest volume of traffic
and to provide subregional, regional and inter-community access. Having trucks use these
streets is consistent with the goals and policies of the city, county and state.
Composting Concepts Site in Woodbury
In recent years, Woodbury had an odor problem with a commercial composting site. Composting
Concepts operates a 20-acre composting site in Woodbury. From 1988 to 1994, the site was only
available to commercial haulers. In 1991, the Woodbury City Council revoked the interim special
use permit for the site and gave Composting Concepts one year to move their operation.
Composting Concepts took the city to court. The judge strongly encouraged the city and
Composting Concepts to work out a negotiated settlement. In 1992, Woodbury and Composting
Concepts negotiated a new interim special use permit for the site.
In 1993, the Woodbury City Council extended the permit for Composting Concepts to continue
their operation. The permit has standards for site management and procedures for testing and
verifying odors. Since adopting the permit in 1993, Woodbury has not had a complaint about
odors that staff could trace to the compost site. The city attributes this to the site operator
learning how to manage site odors. It is the opinion of the Woodbury staff that any earlier
problems with odors from Composting Concepts have been corrected.
Since 1994, Woodbury has leased a one-acre site from Composting Concepts for their residential
composting site. Woodbury residents may leave yard waste and brush at the site. The city works
with Composting Concepts to provide finished compost and wood chips from the materials that
the residents drop off at the site.
The 1993 permit renewal had specified that the site was to not accept yard waste after
December 1, 1997. However, in July 1997, the Woodbury City Council granted Composting
Concepts an indefinite time extension for their permit. This allows the business to continue in the
current location and allows the city to keep their existing residential yard waste site.
CUP Criteria
For the city council to approve a conditional use permit, they must find that the proposal meets
nine standards. These standards are in the resolution starting on page 130. The county, with
their application, reviewed and discussed these criteda as they apply to their proposal. (See the
information starting on page 19.)
Conclusion
When considering this request, Maplewood should consider the concerns of area residents in
context with the need of Ramsey County to provide a service (composting) to all county
residents. This is a balancing act that must consider both the local land use issues and the larger
issues of having sites for recycling and composting in a metropolitan area. Since the city
changed the permit for the Beam Avenue compost site, the county has worked to locate a new
compost site on public land that is not near residences. The proposed site does that.
4
RECOMMENDATION
Approve the resolution starting on page 130. This resolution approves a conditional use permit
for Ramsey County to establish and operate a compost site for yard waste on the county
correctional facility property. This site would be north of Lower Afton Road, between Century
Avenue and McKnight Road. This permit shall be subject to the following conditions:
1. All construction shall follow the site, grading and erosion control and tree plans approved by
the city. The director of community development may approve minor changes.
2. The proposed site work and use must be started within one year of council approval or the
permit shall become null and void. The council may extend this deadline for one year.
The site shall not be open to the public for delivery or pickup. It shall only be for the
composting of yard waste materials brought in by contractors from other Ramsey County
yard waste sites.
4. The site may be open and operational between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m.
The site shall accept only the following materials: garden waste, weeds, prunings of soft-
bodied plants, leaves along with materials like pine cones, fruit and small twigs that people
pick up with their yard waste. Ramsey County shall monitor and remove any unacceptable
materials brought to the site.
6. The City prohibits the dumping or storing of the following materials: brush, branches, grass,
garbage or refuse.
7. The County shall monitor and remove unapproved items (including garbage) and debris
from the site.
8. The City Council shall review this permit in June 1998.
9. The County shall manage the compost site to control odors. Management procedures shall
include the following:
Procure, maintain and use wind direction and speed monitoring equipment. The County
shall provide this equipment so it is accessible to the City staff.
b. Record wind speed and direction during pile turning.
Co
Turn the piles of materials only when the wind is blowing at least five miles per hour.
The contractor or operator shall only turn the piles between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and
5:00 p.m. Monday through Friday.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
d. Keep a wdtten record of:
(1) The times of pile turning and the haul-out of materials
(2) Compost pile temperatures
(3) A description of the compost quality
(4) The initial date and aging of the compost piles
The Community Development Department shall handle odor complaints during regular
business hours and the police department shall handle odor complaints after regular hours.
The inspector shall vedfy and measure whether there is an odor that violates the odor
standards of this permit. To determine if there is a violation of this permit, the inspector
shall follow the procedures in Attachment A of this permit. A violation of this permit shall
occur when the inspector has recorded ten shiftings of the ambient air over a period of thirty
minutes with a geometric average OIRS of (a) 3.0 or greater if the property at which the
testing is being conducted contains a permanent residence or (b) 4.0 or greater if the
property at which the testing is being conducted does not contain a permanent residence.
(See Attachment B of this permit for a description of the odor scale.) If there is a violation,
the inspector shall investigate to establish the source of the odor. The City shall notify the
County of the violation. The County shall advise the City of the reason for the problem and
correct it to meet the standards of this permit. The County or site operator shall cooperate
with the City or its representative regarding such investigations.
The County shall deposit with the City an escrow deposit of $2,000 for 1998. After that, on
or before January 1 of each year, the County shall deposit with the City an escrow deposit of
an amount to bring the balance up to $2,000. The City shall use this deposit to:
Pay for City staff time or the costs to hire a third party to verify and measure odors,
following complaints received by the City
b. Train City staff persons and others for wind and odor monitoring
Co
Pay for an odor consultant to help in preparing this permit or future revisions to this
permit.
If needed, the County shall pay for any consulting costs above the escrow deposit that the
City needs to reevaluate this permit.
The site operator shall use water or other means to suppress dust and odors from the
compost piles, as necessary.
The County is requested by the City to continue to look for an alternate yard waste site in
the northeast part of the County that would be used to reduce the traffic at the Beam
Avenue site.
The yard waste composting site on County property west of the Workhouse, north of Lower
Alton Road may be up to 6 acres in size, and shall not be open for residents to drop off or
pick up materials. The county and the contractors shall follow the county's operation plan
for the site, as may be amended by the city council.
6
15.
The County shall make improvements to the site, including: paving the entrance road
installing a gate, installing the berming and plantings for screening and installing traffic
control signs before using the compost site.
NEIGHBORHOOD SURVEY
City staff did not do a neighborhood survey with this request. This is because there is no
residential property within 1,000 feet of the site. In addition, the county held two open houses this
summer in the neighborhood to present the proposed plans to area residents and to answer
questions from persons in attendance.
REFERENCE
Code Requirements
Section 36-437(1) of the City Code allows the City Council to approve a conditional use permit for
a public utility, public service or public building uses in any zoning district.
Section 36-442(a) states that the city council may approve a CUP, based on nine standards.
Refer to the findings in the resolution on pages 130 through 133.
Section 36-446(a) of the City Code allows the Council to suspend or terminate a permit if the
approved conditions have been violated or the use is no longer in effect.
Section 36-446(b) of the City Code says that the City Council may review a permit any time. If
the Council decides to consider adding, dropping or changing conditions, this requires a review
of the permit by the Planning Commission and a public hearing with the City Council.
Background - Beam Avenue Compost Site
In 1984, Hubbard Broadcasting (the property owner) signed an agreement with the city to allow a
comp, ost site on the Beam Avenue property.
In 1986, Hubbard Broadcasting gave the city permission to expand the Beam Avenue compost
site.
On January 1, 1990, a State law went into effect that prohibits haulers from collecting yard waste
with household garbage. Haulers will pick up yard waste separately, but they charge extra.
On November 25, 1991, the City Council approved a CUP for the Beam Avenue compost site
subject to seven conditions.
On May 9, 1994, the city council reviewed and amended the CUP for the Beam Avenue site.
On August 8, 1994, the city council accepted a report from the county about the compost site.
The council directed the county to continue researching conditions and techniques for compost
site operations.
On August 14, 1995, the city council extended the CUP for one year and amended a condition to
require the county to submit a status report to the city yearly about the compost site.
p:sec 1-28/compost.mem
Attachments:
1. Location Map
2. Area Map
3. Property Line/Zoning Map
4. Site Plan
5. Proposed Grading Plan
6. Proposed Erosion Control and Tree Plan
7. 10-14-96 council minutes
8. CUP Application Information Memo
9. August 20, 1997 Compost Site Report
10. CUP Resolution and attachments
9
16
1. HUhmNGTON CT.
2. OAKRIDGE LA.
C~ Cf~'[~' JAMES
UPPER AF'I'ON RD.
1 LONDIN CT.
2 POND CT.
3 DORL, N~D IN.
4 IX)RI.AND DR.
LOWER
,5 ~D
DORLN, ID Pt.
7 1,4NLAHD CT.
8 ~D CT.
ON(RIDGE DR.
HILLWOOD
LINWOOD
AVE.
T.
LOCATION
10
RAMSEY COUNTY
CORRECTIONAL
FACILITY
MAP
Attachment
/
Tor~ner~
Lok,;
Attachment 2
o
LOWER
1000
A~-r_r2H
~ Proposed
Site
Proposed
Access Road
SCALE
2000
3000 4000 Feet
I
FIGURE I
PROPOSED
YARD WASTE
COMPOSTING
SITE LOCATION
KEY
~"~ Proposed Site
r---~ Parcel Boundaries
~ Water
r------~ Regional Park
C Lutheran Church of
Peace
F Fire Station
S Carver Elementary
School
SP Proposed Swimming
Pond
W County Workhouse
Ramsey County's
Batlle Creek Yard
Waste Site
N
AREA
MAP
11
Attachment 3
F
BATTLE CREEK REGIONAL PARK ,
~ I ' ['-"~C--I,~'--PROPOSE~ COMPOST S,TE
F
_ . ~ I~ .... ,~-:.:
- COUN~ WORKHOUSE
!
.... POND.~ .... ._~
)IN
PUD
FIRE STATION
,RI
PROPERTY LINE I ZONING MAP
12
/tub 2. 0 1997
Attachment 4
II /'
SITE
PLAN
13
' PROPOSED POND
Attachment 5
Attachment 6
. /
PROPOSED'CREES
',,.%,
PROPOSED TREES AND BERM
~'., '. ',' i' ]' .L ~-~ :%
, +::;~:7,:y'"'--~.. !
Attachment 7
Ramsey County Compost Site Conditional Use Permit Review (Beam Avenue)
a. Manager McGuire introduced the staff report.
b. Director of Community Development Coleman presented the specifics of the
report.
c. Mayor Bastian asked if anyone wished to speak before the Council
regarding this matter. The following were heard:
Zach Hanson, Ramsey County Health Department
Ralph Sle~ten, 2749 Clarence
Patrick 0 Brien, 2759 Hazelwood Avenue
Dan Sletten, 2199 Helen Street, No. St. Paul
James Behrens, 1395 Kohlman
do
Council member A11 enspach ~-fol 1 owi r~g Resolution and moved
96 - 10 116
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT REVISION
WHEREAS, the Director of Community Development is requesting that the City
Council change the conditional use permit conditions for a compost site on Beam
Avenue;
WHEREAS, this permit applies to he property on the south side of Beam Avenue,
west of the railroad right-of-way. The legal description is:
Lots 81-84, Gardena Addition in the North 1/2 of the SW 1/4
of Section 3, Township 29, Range 22.
WHEREAS, the history of this conditional use permit is as follows:
1. On April 4, 1994, the Planning Commission recommended that the City Council
approve these changes.
16
10-14-96
o
On May 9, 1994, the City Council held a public hearing. The City staff
published a notice in the paper and sent notices to the surrounding property
owners. The Council gave everyone at the hearing a chance to speak and
resent written statements. The Council also considered reports and
recommendations of the City staff and Planning Commission.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the conditions for the above-described permit
shall read as follows.
1. The site may be open to the public between March 24 and December 6 of
each year.
2. The site may be open to the public between the hours of 9:00 a.m. and
8:00 p.m.
3. The County shall provide at least one monitor at the site for all hours
that it is open to the public.
The site shall accept only the following materials: wood chips, garden
waste, lawn cuttings, weeds, prunings of soft-bodied plants, leaves
along with materials like pine cones, fruit and small twigs that people
pick up with their yard waste. Ramsey County shall monitor and remove
any unacceptable materials left at the site.
5. The City prohibits the dumping or storing of the following materials:
brush, branches, garbage or refuse.
6. This permit shall have a five-(5) year term.
7. The County shall manage the yard waste site to minimize the amount of
objectionable odors.
The Community Development Department shall handle odor complaints during
regular business hours and the police department shall handle odor
complaints afte[ regular hours. The inspector shall verify and measure
whether there is an odor that violates the odor standards of this
permit. To determine if there is a violation of this permit, the
inspector shall follow the procedures in Attachment A of this permit.
A violation of this permit shall occur when the inspector has recorded
ten sniffings of the ambient air over a period of thirty minutes with a
geometric average OIRS of (a) 3.0 or greater if the property at which
the testing is being conducted contains a permanent residence or (b) 4.0
or greater if the property at which the testing is being conducted does
not contain a permanent residence. (See Attachment B of this permit for
a description of the odor scale.) If there is a violation, the
inspector shall investigate to establish the source of the odor. The
City shall notify the County of the violation. The County shall advise
the City of the reason for the problem and correct it to meet the
standards of this permit. The County or site operator shall cooperate
with the City or its representative regarding such investigations.
9. County shall monitor and remove unapproved items from the site.
10. The County shall be allowed to complete the process of composting the
leaves that were collected in the fall of 1995 and spring of 1996 and
that are on site as of October 1, 1996. This material will be
considered finished in the spring of 1997.
11. Beginning with material received in the fall of 1996, the site shall
operate as a transfer site. Leaves received during April-May and
October-November transferred from the site on a regular basis. Leaves
may not be stored on site for a period of longer than three (3) weeks.
17 10_14_9~
In the event of weather conditions, such as a snowstorm in the fall
that preclude haul-out of leaves within three (3) weeks, the
Director of Community Development may grant permission to the county
to store leaves on the north part of the site until such time that
the leaves may be hauled out. Under such circumstances, leaves
shall be removed from the site by April of the following year.
The County shall have the grass clippings removed from the site June-
September at least three times a week or other days if necessary to help
prevent objectionable odors.
12. The County shall place wood chips and finished compost on site for
citizens to take.
13. The County is requested by the City to look for an alternate yard waste
site in the northeast part of the County that would be used to reduce
the traffic at the site on Beam Avenue.
14. The County shall make best efforts to develop a yard waste composting
site on County property in the vicinity of the Workhouse, north of Lower
Afton Road. The site would be up to 10 acres in size, and would not be
open for residents to drop off material. The City will assist the
County in obtaining permits for this site.
15. The southern part of the site on Beam Avenue shall not be used for yard
waste management by the County after the spring of 1997.
16. Should the County be unsuccessful in siting and permitting a site in the
vicinity of the Workhouse, then the City Council will review this permit
and may allow the County to compost material on the northern portion of
the site on Beam Avenue.
17. The County is granted permission to make improvements to the site,
including: widening and paving the entrance road; installing a new,
wider gate; installing four light posts and fixtures; and installing
traffic control signs.
Seconded by Mayor Bastian Ayes - Mayor Bastian, Councilmembers
Allenspach, Koppen
Nays - Councilmember Rossbach
2. Hazelwood Forest Preliminary Plat (County Road C)
18
Attachment 8
From Saint Paul - Ramsey County Department of Public Health,
Environmental Health Section, August 20, 1997 ~ ,_~
1. Applicant/business nazne: Saint Paul - Ramsey Coun~epartment of
Public Health, Environmental Health Section
Contact person:
Address: 1670 Beam Avenue, Suite A, Maplewood, MN
Telephone (work): 773-4444 (home):
Fax: 773-4454
Zack Hansen, Manager, Environmental Health Section
55109
N/A
Interest in property: Owned by Ramsey County
2. Property owner(s) of record: Owned by Ramsey County
Address: c/o Ramsey County Workhouse, 297 S. Century Ave.,
Maplewood, MN 55119
Telephone (work):
(home): N/A
298-5525 (for Art Cavara, Superintendent)
Fax: 298-5432
3. Legal description: Compost site, including compost pads, stockpile
area, and stormwater retention ponds: part of Section 1, T. 28N,
R. 22W. Access road: parts of Sections 1 and 12, T. 28N, R. 22Wo
4. Existing use: The proposed site area is currently not in use. In
the past most of it was used as farmland to raise either hay or
corn as part of the Ramsey County Workhouse. A small portion of
the proposed site had been earmarked for the tree nursery currently
being developed by the Workhouse.
5. Proposed use: Yard waste composting site; for composting only, not
to be open to the public; site would be essentially for leaves
received at one or more County sites during spring and fall; no
grass clippings generated during the summer (June-September) would
be received and composted at the new site.
6. State the locations of any similar buildings 'or facilities in the
Twin Cities: Ramsey County has eight yard waste management sites.
Composting of at least some of the yard waste received occurs at
five sites. The sites most similar to the proposed site would be
the County's Frank & Sims site on the East Side of Saint Paul,
where a windrow turning machine is used to turn the piles, and the
County's site in White Bear Township. Another similar site,
operated by Anoka County in Andover next to Bunker Hills Regional
Park, also uses a windrow turning machine. There are a number of
19
other privately- and publicly-operated yard waste sites in or near
the metropolitan area with varying degrees of similarity to the
proposed composting site.
FILING REQUIREMENTS
1. A Community Design Review Board application: N/A
2. A written statement describing the intended use of the property and
why the City should approve your request. (Refer to the attached
criteria.):
Written statement describinq the intended use of the proDert¥:
Please see the attached report:
* The Introduction on pages 1-8 and Appendix 1 (a briefing paper
on the County's yard waste system) provide background
information.
* The Site Plan is shown on Figure 2 and is discussed on pages 8-9
of the report and in Appendix 2, the report from the County's
composting consultant, E & A Environmental Consultants, Inc.
* The Operations Plan is discussed in the report on pages 9-10 and
in Appendix 3, the draft New Site Operations Plan.
* The remainder of the report discusses various issues related to
the proposal: Traffic (pages 11-13); Odor (pages 14-18 and in
Appendix 2); Bioaerosoals, Including Asperqillis ~
. (pages 18-19 and in Appendix 2); Noise Impacts (page 20 and in
Appendix 2); Visual Effects (page 21); Property Value Impacts
(pages 21-22 and in Appendix 4, a report from John Genereux, a
consultant on property values hired by the County); Water Issues
(page 23 and in Appendix 5, a letter from the Ramsey Soil and
Water Conservation District, and Appendix 6, a letter from the
Ramsey-Washington Metro Watershed District); Security Issues
(pages 23-24); Wildlife/Nuisances (page 24-25); Site Size (page
25); Cost (pages 25-27); Finished Compost (pages 27-28); Impact
on Park Land (page 28); and Complaints (page 28).
Also, the Ramsey County Public Works Department is providing copies
of the site, grading and erosion control plans to the Community
Development Department.
Why the City should approve the request:
Please see response to Criteria for Approval of a Conditional Use
Permit.
3. A list of property owners and their addresses for your site and for
all properties within 350 feet. An abstract company or Ramsey
County must prepare and certify this list. Abstract companites
area listed in the yellow pages.
2O
Ail the property within 350 feet of the proposed site is owned by
Ramsey County. Contact persons are as follows:
Art Cavara, Superintendent, Ramsey County Workhouse
297 S. Century Ave., Maplewood, MN 55119.
Gregory A. Mack, Director, Ramsey County Department of Parks &
Recreation, 2015 N. Van Dyke St., Maplewoood, MN 55109.
At the request of City staff, the Department of Public Health will
supply to the City the mailing list used to inform interested
parties of the open houses held on July 31 and August 7, plus
additional names of persons who indicated interest while attending
those open houses. This list contains about 150 names.
4. Application fees: The Maplewood Community Development Department
has indicated that it waives fees for public sector applicants.
NOTES
1. Try to discuss your proposal with adjacent property owners before
you submit a formal application. Any conflicts that you can
resolve ahead of time will make it easier and faster for the City
to process your application.
The Department of Public Health has held several meetings with
residents and property owners. In April 1997 the Department
proposed an initial composting site, which would have had access
from Century Avenue. A meeting was held on April 3 to which the
most immediate neighbors to the site were invited. Large public
meetings were held at Woodbury City Hall on April 9 and at Carver
Elementary School in Maplewood on April 17. Approximately 50-60
persons attended each meeting. These meetings were publicized in
the local newspapers, and the Department notified many residents by
mail in both cities living in the general area of the proposed
site. The Department actively sought comments from the public at
meetings, by mail, telephone, and E-mail.
Many issues were raised at these meetings (and by telephone and
mail), including many comments related to the specific location of
the proposed site. In response to this input the Department of
Public Health reexamined the location of the proposed site in
conjunction with the County Department of Corrections. As a
result, in late April the County moved the location of the proposed
site farther to the west, as shown in the attached report on Figure
1.
To provide an opportunity for residents living near the proposed
relocated site to learn more about the proposal and to ask
questions, the County sponsored two open houses, both from 3 p.m.
until 8 p.m., on July 31 and on August 7 at the East County Line
Fire Station on Londin Lane. The County's composting consultant,
Dr. Eliot Epstein from E & A Environmental Consultants, was present
for both entire open houses to discuss technical issues, especially
issues related to odor and health issues. The Department of Public
Health developed a draft of the attached report for availability at
these open houses (a few minor changes were made from the draft
report). The report describes the proposed composting site and
includes responses to issues raised by residents and other
interested parties between April and late July. No significant new
issues were raised at the open houses.
To publicize the open houses, the Department of Public Health
submitted press releases to the local newspapers serving woodbury,
Maplewood, and the District 1 Community Council neighborhood in
Saint Paul. The Department also sent (by mail or fascimile) a
cover letter and executive summary of the report to a number of
local officials and to all persons who had indicated interest in
being on a mailing list (persons who had indicated interest after
attending the meetings in April or who had contacted Department of
Public Health or City of Maplewood staff). This list totalled
about 95 and 115 addresses for the July 31 and August 7 open
houses, respectively. About 45 persons attended each of the open
houses.
2. The Director of Community Development may require a consultant,
such as a landscape architect, forester, or appraiser, to review
your application. If the Director requires a consultant's review,
you must provide a cash escrow to pay this fee. One of the
planners will notify you if the Director requires a consultant.
The City staff has not required any consultants. Nevertheless, the
County retained the services of a national composting consultant, E
& A Environmental Consulting, Inc., and also a consultant with
substantial experience in analyzing property value impacts, John
~enereux (of John and Michele Genereux, Research Consultants in the
Social Sciences). Both of these consultants prepared reports to
the County, and those reports are summarized and included as
appendices in the attached report.
3. In addition to the application fee for a conditional use permit,
the City shall charge the following fee at the time of issuing a
permit for mining. N/A
4. The proposed construction must be substantiall~ started ~r th~.
proposed use utilized within one year of Counczl approval or the
permit shall become null and void. The Council may grant up to one
one-year extension of the permit if just cause is shown.
5. For a new personal wireless communication tower or monopole... N/A
6. Development costs: N/A
CRITERIA FOR APPROVAL OF A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
The City Council may approve, amend or deny a conditional use permit
application, based on the following standards for approval, in
addition to any standards for a specific conditional use found in the
zoning ordinance:
1. The use would be located, designed, maintained, constructed and
operated to be in conformity with the City's comprehensive plan and
Code of Ordinances.
At the request of County staff, City staff provided information
concerning goals in the City of Maplewood Comprehensive Plan. The
following is a listing (in bold type) of relevant goals, and a
response as to how the proposed composting site addresses those
goals.
A. Metropolitan Goal: The City will actively participate in
finding solutions to metropolitan problems which affect the City
or its citizens.
The proposed site is consistent with the State and metropolitan
goals concerning solid waste abatement. Ramsey County provides
yard waste services in accordance with the Ramsey County Solid
Waste Management Master Plan, adopted in 1992 by the County
Board and approved by the Metropolitan Council. This Master
Plan was developed in accordance with State requirements,
including a requirement that the Master Plan be in conformance
with the Metropolitan Solid Waste Policy Plan. Pursuant to the
Legislature's yard waste ban, since 1990 it has been illegal in
the metropolitan area to place yard waste in the trash. Ramsey
County's yard waste system addresses the yard waste ban by
providing convenient drop-off locations throughout the County
for residents, including residents of the City of Maplewood.
B. Significant Natural Features Goal: The City will preserve,
conserve and use wisely its significant natural features.
The site would be located adjacent to a portion of Battle Creek
Regional Park. To minimize any potential adverse impacts to the
park, and as requested by the Ramsey County Department of Parks
and Recreation, the Department of Public Health would add
screening on the north (a berm and trees) and west (trees) sides
of the north compost pad.
C. Urban Design Goal: The City will strive to improve the
appearance of the City, maintain compatible land uses, and
encourage a sensitive integration among activities, man-made
facilities and the natural environment.
The proposed site would have essentially no effect on the
appearance of the City. Visual screening would be added on the
north (berm plus trees) and west (trees) sides of the north
compost pad, and on the south and west sides of the stockpile
Z3
area (trees at the top of the ridge). The site would not be
visible from most directions. It would only be visible from
adjacent portions of the park, and would only be slightly
visible from the Workhouse and a portion of Century Avenue,
about 2200 feet to the east-southeast.
The site would be a good use of land that is currently idle and
would be compatible with the Workhouse functions, including the
nursery. The site would be compatible with residential
neighborhoods in the area as it would have a significant amount
of buffer area in all directions to residences. Screening of
the site would help minimize potential impacts on adjacent park
land.
D. (Overall land use goals)
1) Provide for orderly development
The proposal is consistent with orderly development within
the City. The proposed site would use government-owned land
that is already off the tax rolls. It would not have a
significant impact on other uses of the Workhouse property,
it would be designed and operated to minimize potential
impacts on park land, and it would be well-buffered from
residential neighborhoods in the area. Because the site
would not be open to the public, the site would only generate
about 600 to 900 truck trips per year, which would not be a
significant increase in the current traffic level (see
attached report on pages 11-13 for discussion of traffic
issues).
2) Protect and strengthen neighborhoods
The proposed site would be well-buffered from residential
neighborhoods in the area. The site would be located about
1100 feet from the nearest residential properties (the
condominiums south of Lower Afton Road). The site would not
be visible from neighborhoods to the north, west, or south,
and would be slightly visible to a few houses along Century
Avenue, over 2200 feet to the east-southeast.
3) Preserve significant natural features where practical.
See response to 1. B. above.
4) Minimize conflicts between land uses.
The proposed site would not have a significant impact on
other uses of the Workhouse property, it would be designed
and operated to minimize potential impacts on park land, and
it would be well-buffered from residential neighborhoods in
the area.
5) Prevent premature use, overcrowding or overuse of land,
especially when supportive services and facilities, such as
utilities, drainage systems or streets, are not available.
The proposed site would not be a premature use of land, nor
would it result in overcrowding or overuse of land. It would
not require use of any public utilities. The County would
install stormwater retention ponds, so City drainage systems
would be unafffected. There would be a very slight increase
in traffic. As shown in the attached report on pages 11-13,
in comparison to average daily traffic counts on Lower Afton,
McKnight, and Valley Creek Roads, during the busiest times of
year in fall, the increase in traffic would be only 0.1% to
0.3%. According to the Ramsey County Public Works
Department, there would be an increase in truck traffic of
1-4%, which would not result in a significant increase in
road wear.
6) Provide safe and attractive neighborhoods and commercial
areas.
The proposed site would be well-buffered in terms of both
distance and visual screening from residences and commercial
areas.
7) Maintain and upgrade environmental quality and, where needed,
reclassify land uses.
Composting is basically an accelerated natural process which
can help maintain and improve the environment of Ramsey
County by creating a compost product from yard waste
materials. The proposed site would enable the County to
produce more compost that would be available within Ramsey
County for residents and non-profit and governmental entities
to "green" their surroundings.
E. (General development policies)
1) The City will not approve new development without providing
for adequate public facilities and services, such as streets,
utilities, drainage, parks and open space.
The proposed site would not require use of any public
utilities. The County would install stormwater retention
ponds, so City drainage systems would be unaffected. There
would be a very slight increase in traffic. As shown in the
attached report on pages 11-13, in comparison to average
daily traffic counts on Lower Afton, McKnight, and Valley
Creek Roads, during the busiest times of year in fall, the
increase in traffic would be only 0.1% to 0.3%. According to
the Ramsey County Public Works Department, there would be an
increase in truck traffic of 1-4%, which would not result in
a significant increase in road wear. There would be little
or no use of other City services. As part of the County's
25
contingency plans for all of its sites, the County provides
information to police and fire departments, which might be
needed at the site only in case of an emergency.
2) Safe and adequate access will be provided for all properties.
Access to the site would be from Lower Afton Road, as
described in the Site Plan and on pages 8-9 of the attached
report. The access road design, including the entrance and
exit, are being designed by the Ramsey County Public Works
Department to provide safe and adequate access. A
deceleration lane would be provided on Lower Afton Road for
westbound trucks entering the site.
3) Transitions between distinctly differing types of land uses
should not create a negative economic, social or physical
impact on adjoining developments.
The proposed site would be well-buffered in terms of both
distance and visual screening from residences and commercial
areas. Screening would be added to minimize potential
impacts on park land.
The County hired a consultant to examine potential impacts on
property values, as discussed in pages 21-22 of the attached
report and in Appendix 4 to that report. Because the
consultant found no existing property value studies that
directly addressed the effect of compost sites on residential
property values, he examined studies of other types of
facilities, concluding that in the worst case scenario,
effects on property values from a compost yard [site] would
be limited to a quarter-mile or so. He added, ,,...facilities'
that are well run, or are made to run well, should not cause
significant long term problems for their neighbors." He
concluded his report by saying, "...good public relations and
good management should facilitate the acceptance of the
[compost] yard over time. Good management should also reduce
the probability of any loss of property value, even in an
isolated case."
4) Whenever possible, changes in types of land use should occur
so that similar uses front on the same street or at borders
of areas separated by major man-made or natural barriers.
The proposed site would continue the existing pattern in the
area, whereby governmental property uses are generally on one
side of Lower Afton Road, Upper Afton Road, and Century
Avenue, and residences are on the other side.
26
5) The City requires all development to meet state and federal
laws, including Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA)
regulations, unless the developer gets a variance from the
regulating agency.
The only regulations for yard waste sites are the
administrative rules promulgated by the Minnesota Pollution
Control Agency (MPCA). These rules are a portion of rules
for all solid waste composting facilities, which include
mixed municipal solid waste (MSW or garbage) facilities, for
which there are much more stringent rules. Facilities that
compost only yard waste, including the proposed composting
site, are permitted by the MPCA as permit-by-rule facilities,
meaning that site operators obtain permits by notifying the
MPCA of their operations and by complying with the MPCA
rules. The County has maintained permit-by-rule status at
all eight of its sites since the inception of these
regulations in 1989. Upon approval of the conditional use
permit, the County would seek a permit-by rule for the
proposed site from the MPCA and would operate in accordance
with the current yard waste regulations.
6) The City may require that a developer do sound tests to
verify compliance with MPCA regulations.
At times the County would have trucks on site to deposit yard
waste and pick up finished compost, and would use front-end
loader and windrow turning machinery to manage the compost
piles (windrows). The trucks and machinery would generate
some noise when in operation. Noise impacts are discussed on
pages 20-21 and in Appendix 2 of the attached report.
The County's consultants developed a range of sound levels,
assuming one piece of equipment in operation and also two
pieces of equipment. The consultants concluded that noise
levels for residences would be within a set of representative
noise standards, and would be within an "ideal" range of
noise standards for most residences.
They determined that sound level impacts would be higher in
the park land immediately adjacent to the proposed compost
site but would be mitigated somewhat because the park land
lies lower than the proposed compost pads and is wooded.
There would also be some screening installed on the north
(trees and a berm) and west (trees) sides of the north, which
would also mitigate noise.
The consultants used noise standards from a federal agency.
Minnesota noise standards are similar.
7) The City requires drainage and erosion control plans with new
developments. Such plans shall not increase the rate of
runoff and shall prevent erosion.
The site, grading and erosion control plans are attached to
this application. As discussed on pages 9 and 23 of the
attached report, practically all runoff from the compost pads
and stockpile area would be directed to one of two stormwater
retention ponds to be developed on site. The proposed site
would not result in an increase in the rate of runoff or in
erosion. Erosion control measures are shown on the erosion
control plan.
8) Grading and site plans should preserve as many significant
natural features as practical.
Some grading would occur in areas that until recently had
been used as farm fields. The proposed site would not affect
significant natural features. The outlet pipe from the
stormwater pond on the north side of the site would direct
water to a wetland area to the north, which is within Battle
Creek Regional Park. According to a letter from the
Ramsey/Washington Metro Watershed District in Appendix 6 to
the attached report, the wetlands in that area would not be
impacted by the composting site.
9) The City will not remove land from the tax rolls unless it is
in the public interest.
The proposed site would be on property that has already been
removed from the tax rolls.
10)The City supports the improvement, replacement or
redevelopment of substandard or incompatible development.
The proposed c°mposting site would be compatible with
adjoining and nearby land uses.
ll)The City coordinates its planning with neighboring
communities.
Because the initial proposed composting site area proposed in
April was close to Century Avenue, the County informed nearby
residents of the City of Woodbury of the proposal and held a
public meeting at the woodbury City Hall. For the July 31
and August 7 open houses on the relocated proposed site, the
County issued press releases to newspapers serving Maplewood,
Woodbury, and the District I Community Council neighborhood
in Saint Paul.
28
12)The City coordinates land use changes with the character of
each neighborhood.
The County proposed an initial composting site, which would
have had access from Century Avenue. At public meetings in
April many comments were raised related to the specific
location of the proposed site. In response to this input,
the County in later April moved the location of the proposed
site farther to the west, as shown in Figure 1 in the
attached report.
Because the proposed site would be well-buffered from
residential neighborhoods, it would not have a significant
impact on the character of each neighborhood.
13)The City regulates development near or the alteration of
natural drainage systems to manage storm water runoff.
The proposed grading plan and stormwater retention ponds
would manage storm water runoff from the site properly.
14)The City considers the recommendations of the four Watershed
organizations in the review of development requests.
The County has submitted the site, grading and erosion
control plans to the Ramsey/Washington Metro Watershed
District for review.
F. (Residential development policies)
1) Protect neighborhoods from activities which produce excessive
noise, dirt, odors or which generate heavy traffic.
Noise. See response to 1. E. 6) above.
Dirt. The County would take several steps in the design and
operation of the site to ensure that nearby neighborhoods are
not affected by dirt or dust associated with the site. The
access road would be paved with asphalt, and the compost pads
and stockpile area would be covered with recycled asphalt
millings. All trucks delivering yard waste into the site or
taking finished compost away from the site would have their
loads covered.
Particles of partially decomposed compost do become
temporarily airborne when the compost windrows (piles) are
turned; the County's experience at its other composting sites
indicates that this effect is quite localized. According to
the County's composting consultant, "...tree barriers reduce
the dispersion of particulates and also remove particulates
by impaction and deposition on leaves." Residences are
located at such substantial distances from the compost area
that dust particles can be expected to settle to the ground
before reaching residential areas. The County's composting
29
consultant has indicated that after compost turning,
concentrations of one of the organisms involved in the
composting process, Asperqillus ~, generally is found
at background levels within 500 feet, or even closer if there
is substantial vegetation and trees (see the section on
Bioaerosols on pages 18-19 of the attached report and in
Appendix 2 to that report). Once the site was in operation,
the County would continue to refine its operations in an
effort to operate the site as efficiently as possible and to
minimize nuisance potential. For example, the County would
examine potential methods for misting the windrows with a
mist of water during turning.
Odors. Compost sites do produce odors that are part of the
natural decomposition process. Some other odors can occur
but can be reduced through proper management of a compost
site. Based on the County's experience with its current yard
waste transfer and composting sites, odors are usually
confined to the immediate area of the site. The County's
composting consultant has examined potential odors for the
new site by using a computer model. For the complete
discussion on odor, see the attached report, pages 14-18 and
the section on Odor in Appendix 2.
Traffic. For the complete discussion on traffic see the
attached report, pages 11-13.
2) Protect neighborhoods from encroachment or intrusion of
incompatible land uses by adequate buffering and separation.
See response to 1. D. 2) above.
G. (Commercial and industrial development policies)
1) Group compatible businesses in suitable areas.
The proposed composting site would be appropriately grouped
with other governmental uses.
2) Avoid disruption of adjacent residential areas.
See response to 1. D. 2) above.
3) Use planned unit developments (PUDs) wherever practical.
Maintain orderly transitions between commercial and
residential areas.
See response to 1. A. 3) above.
4) Require commercial and industrial developers to make all
necessary improvements to ensure compatibility with
surrounding residential uses.
The County would install visual screening at its expense.
30
5) Require adequate screening or buffering of new or expanded
commercial areas from any adjacent existing or planned
residential development.
See first paragraph of response to 1. C. above.
6) Restrict commercial development which will result in traffic
volumes which are beyond the capacity of the road systems or
generate excessive noise or pollution as defined by state
standards.
The proposed composting site would result in only a slight
increase in traffic. See attached report, pages 11-13.
Some noise would be generated when equipment is used on the
site, but it would be similar to the noise level generated at
the County's current composting sites and would not be
excessive. See response to 1. E. 6) above.
The site would be operated in accordance with Minnesota
Pollution Control Agency standards.
7) Plan land uses and streets to route nonresidential traffic
around residential neighborhoods.
The County would direct that trucks using the facilitY use
only major roads. The County would direct its transportation
vendors using the composting site, to the degree possible, to
have trucks enter the site from the east (I-494 to Valley
Creek Road/Lower Afton Road), and exit to the west (Lower
Afton Road to McKnight Road to 1-94).
2. The use would not change the existing or planned character of the
surrounding area.
The proposed site would be a continued use of governmental property
that was formerly used as a farm.
3. The use would not depreciate property values.
See second paragraph to response to 1. E. 3) above.
4. The use would not involve any activity, process, materials,
equipment or methods of operation that would be dangerous,
hazardous, detrimental, disturbing, or cause a nuisance to any
person or property, because of excessive noise, glare, smoke, dust,
odor, fumes, water or air pollution, drainage water run-off,
vibration, general unsightliness, electrical interference or other
nuisances.
The proposed composting site would be similar to but somewhat
larger than the County's existing yard waste composting sites,
especially the County's Frank & Sims site on the East Side of Saint
31
Paul and its site in White Bear Township. Several other yard waste
composting operations also exist in and near the metro area.
When properly sited, designed and operated, yard waste composting
sites are not dangerous, hazardous, detrimental, or disturbing, nor
do they cause significant nuisances. The site is well-sited
because of the substantial distances to residences and commercial
areas. A portion of Battle Creek Regional Park is adjacent to the
proposed site, but the addition of a berm and some trees would help
minimize impacts on the park. The County hired a renowned national
composting consulting firm, E & A Environmental Consultants, Inc.,
to help it design the proposed site and the site operations plan.
The County would operate the site in accordance with the Minnesota
Pollution Control Agency's standards.
There would be no glare, smoke, fumes, vibration, or electrical
interference from the composting site. Almost all the runoff from
the site would be managed by the two stormwater retention ponds to
be constructed (see attached report, page 23, and Appendices 5 and
6). The site would not be unsightly; it would not be visible or
would be slightly visible (see response to 1. C. above). There
would be some noise generated by machinery, but it would not be
excessive (see response to 1. E. 6) above). Dust and bioaerosols
would be made temporarily airborne when the compost windrows were
turned, but they would not cause nuisance situations (see response
to 1. F. 1) above). Compost sites do generate odors, but it is
anticipated that residents would rarely detect odors because of the
substantial distance of the site to residences. Users of the park
near the proposed site would detect some odors on certain
occasions, but the addition of the berm and trees would help
mitigate such odors. (See response to 1. F. 1) above.)
5. The use would generate only minimal vehicular traffic on local
streets and would not create traffic congestion or unsafe access on
existing or proposed streets.
See Traffic section of attached report, pages 11-13.
6. The use would be served by adequate public facilities and services,
including streets, police and fire protection, drainage structures,
water and sewer systems, schools and parks.
See response to 1. E. 1) above.
7. The use would not create excessive additional costs for public
facilities or services.
The site is not expected to require any significant additional
services from the City of Maplewood.
32
8. The use would maximize the preservation of and incorporate the
site's natural and scenic features into the development design.
The proposed site would be located adjacent to a portion of Battle
Creek Regional Park. To minimize any adverse impacts to the park,
and as requested by the Ramsey County Department of Parks and
Recreation, the Department of Public Health would add screening on
the north and west sides of the north compost pad. A berm would
also be added on the north side.
The site is a fallow farm field that is either not visible or is
slightly visible from nearby roads.
9. The use would cause minimal adverse environmental effects.
The proposed composting site would not cause adverse environmental
effects, and it would have environmental benefits. As previously
discussed, proper design and operation of the site would address
water issues.
Composting is a positive environmental benefit because it recycles
the nutrients and organic matter within yard waste. By keeping the
finished compost within Ramsey County, County residents can benefit
from the "greening" effect of using finished compost as a soil
amendment or a mulch. Also, currently the leaves are hauled to
private vendors located farther away, out of the County;
development of the proposed composting site would decrease use of
energy and generation of air emissions from trucks hauling yard
waste.
10. The City Council may waive any of the above requirements for a
public building or utility structure, provided the Council shall
first make a determination that the balancing of public interest
between governmental units of the state would be best served by
such waiver.
33
Attachment 9
REPORT
ON THE PROPOSED
YARD WASTE COMPOSTING SITE
IN SOUTHERN MAPLEWOOD
Saint Paul- Ramsey County Department of Public Health
Environmental Health Section
· August 1997 .
34 ' __-... ~__~.._..__.!
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Paqe
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ....................................... Exec. Sum.-1
INTRODUCTION ....................................................... 1
Purpose of This Report ............................................. 1
Ramsey County's Yard Waste System .................................. 1
Pursuit of a New Composting Site ................................... 3
Selection of the Workhouse Area .................................... 3
Change in Proposed Site Area ....................................... 4
Schedule and Process for Public Input, Permitting, Construction .... 5
Opportunities for Public Input ..................................... 5
Applicant for Permits .............................................. 6
Permitting Schedule ................................................ 6
Permit Conditions .................................................. 6
Construction Schedule .............................................. 6
Format of this Report .............................................. 8
LOCATION AND SURROUNDING LAND USES ................................. 8
Site Location ...................................................... 8
Surrounding Land Uses .............................................. 8
SITE PLAN .......................................................... 8
OPERATIONS PLAN .................................................... 9
TRAFFIC ........................................................... 11
Volume, Timing, and Routing of Traffic Generated .................. 11
Road Wear from Truck Traffic ...................................... 13
Traffic and Schoolchildren ........................................ 13
ODOR .............................................................. 14
BIOAEROSOLS, INCLUDING ASPERGILLUS FUMIGATUS, AND HEALTH ISSUES...18
NOISE IMPACTS ..................................................... 20
VISUAL EFFECTS .................................................... 21
PROPERTY VALUE IMPACTS ............................................ 21
WATER ISSUES ...................................................... 23
SECURITY ISSUES ................................................... 23
WILDLIFE/NUISANCES ................................................ 24
SITE SIZE ......................................................... 25
35
COST .............................................................. 25
Capital Costs ........ ' ............................................. 25
Operating Costs ................................................... 25
Beam Avenue Site Only: Transfer All Yard Waste Out of County ..... 25
Beam Avenue Plus New Composting Site .............................. 26
Comparison of Operating Costs ..................................... 27
Payback of Construction Costs ..................................... 27
FINISHED COMPOST .................................................. 27
IMPACT ON PARK LAND ............................................... 28
COMPLAINTS ........................................................ 28
FIGURES
Figure 1: Proposed Yard Waste Composting Site Location ............ 2
Figure 2: Preliminary Plan ........................................ 7
Figure A-I: Ramsey County Yard Waste Composting Facility
Maximum Projected Odor Concentration Per Year (10 Minute Peak)..15
Figure A-2: Ramsey County Yard Waste Composting Facility
Third Highest Projected Odor Concentration Per Year ............. 16
Figure A-3: Ramsey County Yard Waste Composting Facility
Sixth Highest Projected Odor Concentration Per Year ............. 17
APPENDICES
Appendix 1: Ramsey County Yard Waste Briefing Paper
Appendix 2: Report to Ramsey County from E & A Environmental
Consultants, Inc.
AppeNdix 3: Division of Solid Waste Yard Waste Program:
Draft New Site Operations Plan
Appendix 4: Report by John Genereux: Property Value Impacts of
Compost Yards
Appendix 5: Letter from Ramsey County Soil and Water Conservation
District
Appendix 6: Letter from Ramsey/Washington Metro Watershed District
36
REPORT ON THE PROPOSED YARD WASTE COMPOSTING SITE
IN SOUTHERN MAPLEWOOD
August 1997
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
INTRODUCTION
Ramsey County is proposing to develop and operate a new yard waste
composting site on County-owned property near the County Workhouse in
Maplewood. The location of the site is shown in Figure 1.
This is an Executive Summary of a larger report, which can be obtained
by contacting the Saint Paul - Ramsey County Department of Public
Health, Environmental Health Section, at 773-4444. Much of the
technical information for the report has been developed by the
County's composting consultant, E & A Environmental Consultants, Inc.
A document prepared by E & A is attached to the full report.
One purpose of this report has been to provide information to
residents in the general vicinity of the proposed site, including
responses to issues raised between April and July by residents and
other interested parties. This information was made available for
discussion at two open houses held on July 31 and August 7 at the East
County Line Fire Station on Londin Lane in Maplewood (the final report
includes only minor changes from the draft report distributed at the
open houses). A second purpose of this report is to provide
information to the Maplewood Planning Commission and Maplewood City
Council as an attachment to the Department of Public Health's
application to the City of Maplewood for a conditional use permit for
the compost site.
Residents and property owners will have the opportunity to comment at
the Maplewood City Planning Commission meeting, and City Council
meeting and public hearing, both anticipated to occur during
September, when this proposal will be considered. If approvals are
received, the County plans to construct the site this fall if
possible, and have yard waste delivered for composting this fall or
next spring.
The site would be used for composting of yard waste received during
spring and fall at the County's existing yard waste site on Beam
Avenue in Maplewood, and possibly from other County sites. The yard
waste material would be leaves. The proposed site would not be
available to the public for dropoff of their yard waste.
The County currently operates eight yard waste sites. At three sites,
including the Beam Avenue site, all yard waste received is
transferred. Composting of some or all of the yard waste received
occurs at five sites. The County pays private vendors to transport
and manage yard waste that cannot be composted on site.
In February the Ramsey County Board of Commissioners approved the
concept of siting, developing and operating a composting site on
Exec. Sum. -1
37
County property near the Workhouse. There is a considerable amount of
undeveloped land near the Workhouse, which no longer uses the land as
a farm but is developing a nursery on a substantial portion of it.
The County is pursuing development of this site to continue to provide
a full-service yard waste system to County residents. The current
~full-service system allows residents to drop off leaves and grass
clippings and pick up finished compost. Use of this new composting
site could also allow the County to save money in comparison with
hauling yard waste to private sites located outside of the County.
The new site is needed because the County lost a substantial portion
of its yard waste composting capacity when the Maplewood City Council
in 1996 revised the conditions in the conditional use permit for the
Beam Avenue site to no longer allow composting on site.
The Department of Public Health initially proposed a site on 14 acres
identified by the County Department of Corrections, on the
northeastern edge of the Workhouse property. Access to the site by
trucks serving the County would have been from Century Avenue. The
Department held public meetings in April 1997 to discuss this proposed
site. The meetings were well attended, and residents raised many
issues, including many comments related to the specific location of
the proposed site. In late April the County moved the location of the
proposed site farther to the west on County property.
LOCATION
The site would be 1/4 mile south of Upper Afton Road, 2200 feet west
of Century Avenue, 900 feet north of Lower Afton Road, and 1/2 mile
east of McKnight Road, and would be adjacent to Battle Creek Regional
Park,. Access by trucks would be from Lower Afton Road. The nearest
residences would be 1100 feet to the south and 1300 feet to the north.
SITE PLAN
Figure 2 shows the site plan for the site. The site would consist of
two compost pads, 1 1/2 and 2 acres in size, plus a 3/4 acre stockpile
area. The compost pads and stockpile area would have a hard surface
composed of recycled asphalt millings. Two stormwater retention ponds
would be constructed. The access road would be paved.
OPERATIONS PLAN
The site is being designed to accommodate at least the quantity of
yard waste received from the County's Beam Avenue site that is
generated in spring and fall, when the material received is
predominantly leaves. This amount was about 20,000 cubic yards in
1996 (6,000 in spring and 14,000 in fall). Leaves may also be
accepted from other County yard waste sites if capacity is available.
One or more companies contracted by Ramsey County would deliver yard
waste to the site and take finished compost away from the site. A
front-end loader contracted by the County would then place yard waste
into piles (windrows). The windrows would be turned periodically,
monthly to weekly, by a windrow turning machine. Turning promotes
Exec. Sum. -2
38
faster decomposition and reduces the potential for odor generation.
Yard waste received at the site would become finished compost within
one year. The compost would be hauled to the Beam Avenue site and to
other County yard waste sites for distribution to the public, and to
community gardens, as needed.
TRAFFIC
The compost site would not be open to the public. Total estimated
truck traffic would be 600 to 900 trucks per year, and would only
occur on weekdays. Most of this would occur during April, May,
October, and November when trucks would deliver yard waste and, in
many cases, haul out finished compost. Trucks would also enter the
site periodically with equipment used to consolidate or turn windrows.
The County would direct trucks using the compost site, to the degree
possible, to enter from the east (I-494 to Valley Creek Road/Lower
Afton Road), and exit to the west (Lower Afton Road to McKnight Road
to 1-94), to minimize left turns and spread truck traffic over a
larger amount of roadway. Truck traffic would account for only a
fraction of one percent of total traffic on Valley Creek, Lower Afton,
and McKnight Roads. The County Public Works Department has determined
that average daily truck traffic would increase by 1-4% and would not
result in a significant increase in road wear. Hauling schedules
would take school bus route traffic into consideration.
ODORS
The Maplewood City Council could choose to approve a conditional use
permit for the site and to include odor standards in the permit.
Compost sites do produce odors that are part of the natural
decomposition process. Some other odors can occur but can be reduced
through proper management of a compost site. Based on the County's
experience with its current yard waste transfer and composting sites,
odors are usually confined to the immediate area of the site.
The County's composting consultant has examined potential odors for
the new site by using a computer model that incorporates local
meteorological conditions, topography, and specific information about
the design and operation of the site, and then projects the movement
of odor from the site. The consultants have included some
conservative assumptions in the model to ensure that odor impacts are
not underestimated. The model predicts the maximum concentrations per
year during a ten-minute time period that will be experienced under
"worst case" conditions. The consultant has assumed that a certain
level of odor could have a nuisance potential.
The model shows that for no more than one to two ten-minute periods
each year, odors generated from the site at the presumed level of
nuisance could be detected as far as sections of Upper Afton Road and
Lower Afton Road, the Workhouse, Carver School, west of McKnight Road,
and northeast of the site into Washington County. According to the
consultant, "Based on the assumptions used in the model, odors will
not cause significant nuisance conditions at these locations."
Exec. Sum~ -3
39
The model shows that maximum odor concentrations above the nuisance
level are projected to occur in Battle Creek Regional Park immediately
west and north of the compost site, particularly during certain
weather conditions: early mornings following cool, clear nights, and
on muggy, still evenings after sunset. The consultants, in noting
that there is a partial buffer created by trees between the site and
the park that could not be taken into account by the model, stated
that the results may be ,,somewhat over-predictive of actual
conditions." It should also be noted that the County plans to install
additional screening near the park (a berm and trees on the north side
of the site and trees on the west side of the north compost pad).
BIOAEROSOLS, INCLUDING ASPERGILLUS FUMIGATUS, AND HEALTH ISSUES
The Department of Public Health contracted with E & A Environmental
Consultants, Inc. as its composting consultant because this firm has a
national reputation in analyzing the public health impacts of all
types of composting operations. According to E & A, the site
location, which is away from residences and other buildings, should
reduce or eliminate the concerns discussed below.
Bioaerosols are organisms or biological agents that can be dispersed
in the air and affect human health. The most common bioaerosol of
concern in composting operations from a public health point of view is
the fungus ~ ~' A. ~ is a very common
fungus, as it has been found wherever there is organic matter,
including in homes, backyards, parks, potting soil, mulches, and
composting operations. It plays a major role in everyday decay of
leaves, wood, and other organic matter.
During certain composting activities, A. ~ can be found at
very high levels. A majority of the studies on the dispersion of A__=
~ and other bioaerosols from composting facilities indicate
that background levels are achieved within 500 feet of a composting
site. Buffer zones of vegetation will reduce the dispersion of spores
as well, as they act as windbreaks.
A- ~ spores, when dispersed in the air, can be inhaled and
enter human respiratory systems. A. ~ is a secondary or
opportunistic pathogen (a pathogen is an organism that can invade and
infect humans) that generally only invades and infects debilitated
individuals or persons on immuno-suppressive medication. Nearly all
of the reports on infection due to A- umi~qD-~~ have been from
hospitals, where people are already severely debilitated.
Although most people are not at risk for illness due to A- u i~,
exposure to it can result in allergic-type symptoms such as irritation
to the eyes, nose, and throat. A comprehensive study by the State of
New York found that increases in allergy and asthma symptoms were not
associated with airborne A. fu__q~atus or other molds.
Intensive studies of workers at yard waste composting facilities have
shown that workers have not had any adverse effects, suggesting that
the potential for infection is minimal.
Exec. Sum~ -4
4O
NOISE IMPACTS
The consultants examined noise impacts for operation of the site.
They developed a range of sound levels, assuming one piece of
equipment in operation and also two pieces of equipment. The
consultants concluded that noise levels for residences would be within
a set of representative noise standards. Sound level impacts would be
higher in the park land immediately adjacent to the compost site but
would be mitigated somewhat because the park land lies lower than the
compost facility and is wooded.
VISUAL EFFECTS
The site would not be visible to most of the public. It could be
visible from some residences over 2000 feet away to the east on
Century Avenue, and from parts of the Workhouse complex. Trees would
be planted to screen the site from residences on a hill to the south.
The site could be visible to some users of the park, primarily users
of a trail close to the northwest corner of the site, although
the planned addition of a berm and trees to the north side of the site
and trees on the west side would help mitigate this.
PROPERTY VALUE EFFECTS
Ramsey County hired a consultant with expertise in property value
issues, John Genereux, to examine existing available information that
could be applicable. He found no property value studies that directly
addressed the effect of compost sites on residential property values.
He examined studies of the effect on property values of several other
type~ of facilities, such as landfills, manufacturing plants,
railroads, and prisons. He concluded that in the worst case scenario
effects on property values from a compost yard would be limited to a
quarter-mile or so, and that it is unlikely that it would engender the
kind of wide-ranging impact associated with a power plant or landfill.
Based on his discussions with several sources involved in composting,
he stated, "...facilities that are well run, or are made to run well,
should not cause significant long term problems for their neighbors."
He concluded his report by saying, "...good public relations and good
management should facilitate the acceptance of the [compost] yard over
time. Good management should also reduce the probability of any loss
of property value, even in an isolated case."
WATER ISSUES
The site would be graded so almost all runoff would be directed to one
of the two stormwater retention ponds to be constructed. The Ramsey
County Soil and Water Conservation District has stated in a letter,
"...the probablility of the proposed compost site impacting
groundwater in the area may be low .... and the probability of the wells
on Century Avenue being impacted by the proposed compost site may be
low." The Ramsey/Washington Metro Watershed District has stated in a
letter, "The proposed treatment ponds to be provided as part of the
new site are designed to provide adequate treatment of site runoff
Exec. Sum. -5
prior to discharging into the Open Space wetland system. It is our
opinion that the wetlands in this area will not be impacted by the
location of the Yard Waste Composting operation at this site."
Discussions with Watershed District and County Public Works staff have
indicated no runoff is expected to travel to lakes or streams.
SECURITY ISSUES
Access to the site would be limited. The access road would have a
locked gate. The boundary with the park is fenced as is the entire
Workhouse property. The stormwater ponds would also be fenced.
WILDLIFE EFFECTS
Wildlife experts were contacted at the University of Minnesota and the
Minnesota Department of Natural Resources. In general, activity at
the site, such as turning of the windrows, would tend to discourage
wildlife from being on site. The populations of woodchucks, rats,
skunks, and raccoons would not be expected to increase. Habitat would
be reduced for grassland nesting birds. No direct impact on wildlife
in the park would be expected.
SIT___~ESIZE
The County does not expect to expand the compost site in the future,
as there will be no available land to do so.
COST
Annual operating costs (excluding site monitors) for the Beam Avenue
site. only are estimated at $180,100. Costs for the Beam Avenue site
plus the new site, including the estimated value of the finished
compost, are estimated at about $152,000 per year, a difference of
about $28,000 per year. A total of $288,500 was budgeted for the
capital costs for the new site. Preliminary estimates of costs are
about $185,000, which would require about 6.5 years to pay back.
COMPLAINTS
When composting was allowed at the Beam Avenue site, the City of
Maplewood included odor monitoring requirements in the County's
conditional use permit for the site. The City could choose to impose
similar requirements in a conditional use permit for the new
composting site. There could be other permit conditions as well.
Once the site were operating, concerns or complaints could be made to
either the City of Maplewood or the Saint Paul - Ramsey County
Department of Public Health, Division of Solid Waste, or both. If the
complaints were about odor, the County or City would respond as soon
as possible to determine the level of odor, and the City would
determine if a level of odor identified in the permit was violated.
If an odor problem occurred, the County would determine if any
operational procedures and management practices for the site had not
been followed or if any of the procedures needed to be altered.
Exec. Sum. -6
REPORT ON THE PROPOSED YARD WASTE COMPOSTING SITE
IN SOUTHERN MAPLEW00D
August 1997
INTRODUCTION
Ramsey County is proposing to develop and operate a new yard waste
composting site on County-owned property near the County Workhouse in
Maplewood. The location of the site is shown in Figure 1.
Purpose of This Report
One purpose of this report has been to provide information to
residents in the general vicinity of the proposed site, including
responses to issues raised between April and July by residents and
other interested parties. This information was made available for
discussion at two open houses held on July 31 and August 7 (from 3
p.m. to 8 p.m. each day at Station #4, East County Line Fire Station,
2501 Londin Lane, in Maplewood).
A second purpose of this report is to provide information to the
Maplewood Planning Commission and Maplewood City Council as an
attachment to the Department of Public Health's application to the
City of Maplewood for a conditional use permit for the compost site.
Ramsey County's Yard Waste System
Ramsey County operates a yard waste collection system consisting of
eight sites, which County residents may use to dispose of leaves and
grass clippings. The sites are open 38 hours per week from April
through November.
Three sites operate entirely as transfer sites, at which all the
leaves and grass clippings received are transported to private yard
waste vendors. One of these sites, located on Beam Avenue in
Maplewood, became a transfer site when the Maplewood City Council in
October 1996 amended the County's conditional use permit for the site
to no longer allow composting to occur. (Two sites operate as
composting sites, at which all the leaves are composted. Three sites
operate as combination transfer/composting sites, where some leaves
are composted on site. All grass clippings received during the summer
months at all sites but the site in White Bear Township are
transported to private yard waste vendors.)
Ramsey County not only provides sites for dropoff of leaves and grass
clippings, but also provides finished compost for use by residents,
government and non-profit agencies. Wood chips are also provided at
the sites for residents, when wood chips are available.
The County uses private vendors for the transfer and disposal of a
portion of the yard waste, and for maintenance of the compost process
at the sites. County staff serve as site monitors and manage the
system.
-1-
43
JlJllllllllltl]
JJlllJlltllllJ
lq IllllllltllL]
Illlllllllllllll
~r'x-tt III III II III H ~
"'~'~\lll!!lllltlllJ I 'J ,I j' ~J :.,? ·
The sites serve about 330,000 site visitors per year, representing
about 64,000 households that deliver leaves, and 32,000 households
that deliver grass clippings.
See the attached yard waste briefing paper, Appendix 1 for more
information. '
Pursuit of a New ComDostinq Site
In February 1997 the Ramsey County Board of Commissioners approved the
concept of siting, developing and operating a new yard waste
composting site on County property near the Ramsey County Workhouse in
the southeastern part of the County, within the City of Maplewood.
The Board also authorized the Department of Public Health to proceed
with seeking approvals and permits necessary to develop the new site.
The County is pursuing development of this site in order to continue
to provide a full-service yard waste system to the residents of Ramsey
County. The current full-service system allows residents to drop off
leaves and grass clippings and pick up finished compost. The proposed
site would be used to compost leaves collected at the County's other
yard waste management sites, especially the Beam Avenue site. The
proposed site would not be available to the public for dropoff of
their yard waste.
Use of this new composting site would also allow the County to save
money because large amounts of yard waste are currently hauled, at
considerable expense, from the County's sites to yard waste vendors
located outside the County. The composting site would also enable the
County and its residents to use substantially more finished compost
within the County.
The new site is needed because the County lost a substantial portion
of its yard waste composting capacity when the Maplewood City Council,
in 1996, revised the conditions in the conditional use permit for the
Beam Avenue site to no longer allow composting on site. The site.is
on private property leased to the City, and provided to the County for
use as a yard waste site. Some site neighbors over a period of years
have raised concerns about the site, and despite the County's
compliance with all previous permit conditions, the City decided to
convert the site to a transfer-only site, and work with the County to
identify a new site.
Selection of the Workhouse Area
At public meetings held in April 1997 there were many comments about
the location of the site, both the selection of the Workhouse property
as the site and the location of the composting area on the Workhouse
site itself.
The County has been working since 1994 to identify alternate or
auxiliary sites to the Beam Avenue site, but has had little success in
finding a site in the northeastern part of the County. Unlike all
other counties in Minnesota, Ramsey County is essentially fully
-3-
45
developed. Land which is currently undeveloped, has adequate acreage,
and is either publicly owned or reasonably priced, is difficult to
find. In addition, potential sites would need to meet other criteria,
such as safe traffic access, and availability (in terms of local
zoning and land use plans and property deed restrictions). Staff from
the Department of Public Health have done an extensive search of
northern Ramsey County and have been unable to find property that
meets these criteria.
The Arsenal site in Arden Hills was identified by some participants in
the public meetings as an alternative. If the Arsenal site were ever
to become available as a potential site, that opportunity would be
very attractive. However, obtaining use of the Arsenal is an
exceedingly complicated process because of many Superfund clean~ps on
the site and the extremely complex and time-consuming process the
Federal government has in place for disbursing land to local
governments; at this time the Department of Public Health does not
expect such land to be available in the near future.
The Workhouse property is currently the only site that was able to
reasonably meet the criteria established by the Department of Public
Health. There is a considerable amount of undeveloped land near the
County Workhouse, which no longer uses the land as a farm. A
substantial portion of this land has been or will be converted to a
nursery, but some undeveloped land remains. (This area had been
considered for a larger-scale composting site by the County in
1988-1989, but plans at that time were discarded, as there was
sufficient composting capacity at the existing County sites. In 1990
the State law that prohibited placing yard waste in the trash went
into. effect, resulting in a large increase in usage of the County's
sites. The County's sites have continued to have a high level of use
since 1990.)
Changes in the permit for the Beam Avenue site have created a need for
additional composting capacity, if the County is going to continue to
provide a full-service yard waste system and keep system costs down.
A site on Workhouse property was selected because:
* It is available at no cost to the County.
* It makes good use of existing County property that would have
been idle.
* It is located next to the County nursery, a compatible land use
and possible future market for finished compost.
* It is accessible.
Chanqe in Proposed Site Area
The County Department of Corrections in late 1996 identified 14 acres
on the northeastern edge of the Workhouse property. The Department of
Public Health then proposed an actual composting area of five to seven
acres within these 14 acres (the remainder would have been buffer
area), set back several hundred feet west of Century Avenue and
located 1/4 mile south of Upper Afton Road. Access to the site by
trucks serving the County would have been from Century Avenue.
-4-
The Department of Public Health held several public meetings to
discuss this proposed site. A meeting was held on April 3, 1997, to
which the most immediate neighbors to the site were invited. Larger
public meetings were held in Woodbury on April 9 and in Maplewood on
April 17, each attended by about 50-60 persons. These meetings were
publicized in the local newspapers, and the County notified many
'residents in both cities in the general area of the proposed site.
Many issues were raised at these meetings, including many comments
related to the specific location of the proposed site. In response to
this input, the Department of Public Health reexamined the location of
the proposed site in conjunction with the County Department of
Corrections. As a result, in late April the County moved the location
of the proposed site farther to the west. The location of the site is
shown in Figure 1. The composting area would be located approximately
1/4 mile (1300 feet) south of Upper Afton Road, 2200 feet west of
Century Avenue, 900 feet north of Lower Afton Road, and 1/2 mile (2600
feet) east of McKnight Road. The western and northern boundaries of
the compost site would be located adjacent to Battle Creek Regional
Park. Access to the site by trucks would be from Lower Afton Road.
To provide an opportunity for residents living near the proposed
relocated site to learn more about the proposal and to ask questions,
the County sponsored two open houses, both from 3 p.m. until 8 p.m.,
on July 31 and on August 7 at the East County Line Fire Station on
Londin Lane. The County's composting consultant, Dr. Eliot Epstein
from E & A Environmental Consultants, was present for both entire open
houses to discuss technical issues, especially issues related to odor
and health issues. The Department of Public Health developed a draft
of this report for availability at these open houses (only some minor
changes have been made from the draft report). This report describes
the proposed composting site and includes responses to issues raised
by residents and other interested parties between April and late July.
No significant new issues were raised at the open houses.
To publicize the open houses, the Department of Public Health
submitted press releases to the local newspapers serving Woodbury,
Maplewood, and the District 1 Community Council neighborhood in Saint
Paul. The Department also sent (by mail or fascimile) a cover letter
and executive summary of the report to a number of local officials and
to all persons who had indicated interest in being on a mailing list
(persons who had indicated interest after attending the meetings in
April or who had contacted Department of Public Health or City of
Maplewood staff). A_bout 45 persons attended each of the open houses.
Schedule and Process for Public Input, Permitting, and Constructio~
Opportunities for Public Input
Once the County submits an application to the City of Maplewood for a
conditional use permit for the site, residents and property owners
will have an opportunity to provide public input at a City Planning
Commission meeting and at a public hearing to be held by the City
Council to consider this proposal.
-5-
ApDlicant for Permit~
The applicant for the permits will be the Saint Paul - Ramsey County
Department of Public Health, Environmental Health Section (which
includes the responsibilities of the former Division of Solid Waste).
At the public meeting held in April at woodbury City Mall, there were
questions concerning whether or not the site could be a joint venture
with the City of woodbury. The City of woodbury has not expressed
interest in any joint venture for composting with Ramsey County.
Permittinq Schedul~
The tentative schedule for permitting is as follows:
Submittal of conditional use permit application August 1997
Maplewood Planning Commission meeting September
Maplewood City Council meeting and public hearing September
(if conditional use permit is approved:)
Review of final grading plan by the City of September
Maplewood Public Works Department
Application for site grading permit from September
Ramsey/Washington Metro Watershed District
Application to Minnesota Pollution Control Agency September
(MPCA) for a yard waste permit-by-rule facility
Permit Conditions
The conditional use permit would be for a period of time determined by
the Maplewood City Council. It would contain conditions under which
the facility must operate. The City of Maplewood would then regulate
the County's activities at the site.
Construction Schedule
Figure 2 shows the site plan for the proposed site. A grading plan
and erosion control plan have also been submitted to the City.
Development of .the site would include construction of the access road,
compost pads, stockpile area, and fenced stormwater retention ponds,
plus installation of a gate. Screening of the site would also be
developed by planting trees on the west side, and a berm and trees on
the north side, of the north compost pad, and by planting trees on the
south and west sides of the stockpile (storage) area.
Assuming that the proposed site is approved by the City of Maplewood,
and approval occurs in September, construc%ion could be completed by
the end of October, depending on weather and other factors. The
County would haul yard waste to the site upon completion of
constuction or next spring.
-6-
48
FIGURE 2 ....
-'7-
Format of This Report
This document has been prepared by the Saint Paul - Ramsey County
Department of Public Health, Environmental Health Section. Much of
the technical information for the report has been developed by the
County's composting consultant, E & A Environmental Consultants, Inc.,
and also by the Ramsey County Public Works Department. A document
developed by E & A for the County, and referred to throughout this
report, is attached as Appendix 2.
The remainder of this report includes the site plan and operating plan
for the new site and responses to issues raised by residents and other
interested parties.
LOCATION AND SURROUNDING LAND USES
Site Locatio~
he eneral location of the proposed composting site.
Figure 1 shows t .g .......... ~r of property owned by Ramsey
It is located in the nor~nw=~=~ ......... - -
County that until a few years ago had been part of the farm operation
operated by the Ramsey County Workhouse. The access road would be
from the south from Lower Afton Road. The compost site, at its
closest point, would be located approximately 1/4 mile (1300 feet)
south of Upper Afton Road, 2200 feet west of Century Avenue, 900 feet
north of Lower Alton Road, and 1/2 mile (2600 feet) east of McKnight
Road.
Surroundinq Land Uses
The proposed site is bordered to the west and north by Battle Creek
Regional Park. To the east is County Workhouse property, much of
which will ultimately be developed as part of the Workhouse nursery
operation. Workhouse property, through which the access road would be
located, is also located to .the south of the proposed site.
To the nearest residential properties, the compost site at its closest
point would be located approximately 1/4/ mile (1300 feet) to the
north (houses on the north side of Upper Afton Road), 2000 feet to the
east (houses on the west side of Century Avenue), 1100 feet to the
south (condominiums on Londin Lane), and 1/2 mile (2600 feet) to the
west (houses on west side of McKnight Road). The boundary of Carver
School property would be about 1700 feet away, and the Workhouse
complex would be about 1600 feet away.
SITE PLAN
Figure 2 shows the site plan for the proposed site. It was developed
by the Ramsey County Public Works Department in conjunction with E&A
Environmental Consultants, Inc.
The entrance from Lower Alton Road woUld be in the vicinity of the
Williams Pipeline easement, which crosses under Lower Alton Road west
of the East County Line Fire Station on Londin Lane, and is located on
-8-
50
the eastern edge of Battle Creek Regional Park. As shown in Figure 2,
the road would start at an existing entrance just west of the
pipeline. This entrance would be improved to be at right angles to
Lower Afton Road. The road would cross the pipeline and then continue
to head north through Workhouse property to the compost site. The
22-foot wide two-way access road would be paved with asphalt and have
two-foot, class 5 shoulders. There would be a deceleration lane on
Lower Afton Road for trucks entering the site from the east. The
access road gate would be set back sufficiently so that one truck
could be staged off the roadway while the gate was being opened or
closed.
The site topography ranges from flat to substantial slopes. For safe
and efficient operation of the equipment needed to operate the site,
relatively flat areas are needed. Consequently, Figure 2 shows two
compost pads where the active composting would occur. Pad S or the
South Pad is already quite flat, and would require little grading.
Pad N or the North Pad would require some grading to achieve the
appropriate surface. A stockpile (storage) area would be located just
south of Pad S. Pads N and S and the stockpile area would all be
covered with recycled asphalt millings. Pad N has an area of about
one and one-half acres. Pad S has an area of about two acres. The
stockpile area has an area of about three-fourths of an acre.
(Note that just west of the South Pad is an area where peat was
deposited several years ago during an unrelated County water quality
enhancement project. This area would not be used because the peat
would not support the weight of equipment.)
When rain and snow come into contact with yard waste and finished
compost in the composting and stockpile areas, there is the potential
for runoff of nutrients. Two stormwater retention ponds would be
constructed to settle out nutrients from runoff through the site.
Pond B would be constructed at the northeast corner of Pad N, and
would be receive runoff from roughly the northern half of Pad N.
Another, larger pond, Pond A, would be constructed at the lowest area
of the site, on its western boundary. It would receive runoff from
the southern half of Pad N and all of Pad S. Both ponds would have
outlet pipes designed to direct excess water from the ponds. The
outlet pipe from Pond A would be developed under the William Pipeline
pipeline to percolate into the ground to the west of the site, and the
outlet pipe from Pond B would direct water to the wetlands to the
north, where any remaining nutrients would be filtered.
According to the City of Maplewood Public Works Department, the sewer
line that traverses the proposed compost site has been abandoned, and
any issues related to this line can be addressed when the City reviews
the grading plan for the proposed site.
OPERATIONS PLAN
The following is a summary of the Operations Plan for the site. A
more detailed operations plan is provided in Appendix 2, the attached
report from E & A Environmental Consultants, Inc. and in Appendix 3, a
-9-
51
draft document developed by the Department of Public Health entitled
"New Site Operations Plan."
The site is being designed to accommodate at least the quantity of
yard waste received from the County's Beam Avenue yard waste site in
Maplewood that is generated in the spring and fall, when the material
.received is predominantly leaves. This amount was 20,306 cubic yards
in 1996, including 6,035 cubic yards received in April and May and
14,271 cubic yards received in October and November. While the
quantities of material vary somewhat from year to year, depending on
weather, the 1996 quantities can be considered to be typical for the
Beam Avenue site. Yard waste may also be accepted from other County
yard waste sites if capacity is available.
Yard waste generated during the summer, which is primarily grass
clippings, would not be managed at this site. Instead, grass
clippings would continue to be hauled to private yard waste facilities
located outside of Ramsey County.
One or more companies contracted by Ramsey County would deliver yard
waste to the site and take finished compost away from the site. Yard
waste would be deposited directly on Pad N (North Pad) or Pad S (South
Pad). On occasion some yard waste might be placed temporarily in the
stockpile area until yard waste on one of the pads had decomposed
sufficiently so that there was space for the yard waste being stored.
A front-end loader contracted by Ramsey County would then place the
yard waste into piles, or windrows. The piles would be turned
periodically, monthly to weekly depending on the season and the age of
the windrows, by a windrow turning machine contracted by Ramsey
County. The size of the windrows would depend on the type of windrow
turning machine used. The width of the windrows could vary from 14 to
20 feet, the height from 5 to 10 feet, and the width between aisles
from 5 to 8 feet. Each windrow would be as long as space permitted.
Turning areas of about 30 feet would be needed for the windrow turner
at each end of the windrow.
Windrows would be turned to ensure that there was adequate oxygen
(air) within the piles, to reduce the size of yard waste material to
promote faster decomposition, and to mix material to provide uniform
consistency within each pile. The microorganisms responsible for
composting need air to be able to break down organic matter
efficiently. Also, the potential for generation of odor is much less
if adequate oxygen is maintained within the piles. The County would
monitor wind conditions prior to turning piles to minimize the
potential for nuisances.
Once leaves are placed in windrows, the windrows tend to shrink in
volume. This shrinkage is particularly rapid in the initial stages of
composting. Once the piles have shrunk sufficiently, they can be
consolidated to allow room for additional yard waste.
Yard waste received at the site would become finished compost within
one year. The County would haul finished compost to the Beam Avenue
-10-
52
site and to other County yard waste sites for distribution to the
public, and to community gardens or for municipal use, as needed~
Dust control is sometimes raised as an issue in conjunction with
compost sites. It has been the experience of the Department of Public
Health that there has not been a significant dust problem associated
with turning windrows. If truck traffic or other equipment causes
dust problems, the County has a vendor under contract to apply dust
suppressant material to the surfaces of the road and site.
Once the site was in operation, the County would continue to refine
its operations in an effort to operate the site as efficiently as
possible and to minimize nuisance potential. For example, the County
would examine potential methods for misting the windrows with a mist
of water during turning.
TRAFFIC
Traffic issues identified at public meetings include the volume and
routing of traffic and when it would occur, wear and tear on the
roadway, and the presence of truck traffic while schoolchildren are at
bus stops.
Volume, Timinq, and Routinq of Traffic Generated
The composting site would not be open to the public. It would simply
be used for composting of yard waste received at other County
composting sites, primarily the Beam Avenue site. Because the County
will continue to haul grass clippings received during the summer
(June-September) to private composting vendors located outside of the
County, yard waste would only be hauled to the new composting site
during spring and fall, when leaves are the predominant form of yard
waste.
Finished compost would also be hauled from the site. The volume of
finished compost is estimated by the County's composting consultant to
be about 40% of the original volume of yard waste received. To the
degree possible the County would have trucks that bring in yard waste
also haul out finished compost as a backhaul. During the summer (and
possibly on occasion during spring and fall) the County might have
trucks sometimes coming to the site to haul away finished compost.
The total number of truck trips below for hauling in yard waste is
based primarily on an assumed amount of yard waste brought to the site
of about 6,000 cubic yards during the spring and about 14,000 cubic
yards during the fall. It is assumed that 30 cubic yard end-dump
trucks would be used. Because this is the smallest size truck
available to the County from its current primary vendor for the Beam
Avenue site, the total number of trucks may be overestimated should
this or another vendor use larger capacity trucks.
The other type of traffic using the new site would be for hauling
equipment to be used on site. A front-end loader would be needed to
create windrows of yard waste. A windrow-turning machine would be
-11-
needed to turn the windrows periodically--one to four times per month,
depending on the season and the stage of the composting process.
Total estimated truck traffic:
January - March
Trucks hauling equipment
April - May
Trucks delivering yard waste
and/or hauling away compost
Trucks hauling equipment
June - September
Trucks hauling away compost
Trucks hauling equipment
October - November
Trucks delivering yard waste
and/or hauling away compost
Trucks hauling equipment
December
Trucks delivering yard waste
and/or hauling away compost
Trucks hauling equipment
5
150-250
10
0-40
15
400-550
10
0-20
1-2
Total Estimated Trucks Per Year (rounded off) 600-900
The County would direct its transportation vendors using the
composting site, to the degree possible, to have trucks enter the site
from the east (I-494 to Valley Creek Road/Lower Afton Road), and exit
to the west (Lower Afton Road to McKnight Road to 1-94) . This would
minimize left turns and would spread truck traffic over a larger
amount of roadway. Trucks would also be directed to operate only on
weekdays, to the degree possible.
The following are the most recent (1995) average daily weekday traffic
counts for the following sections of Valley Creek Road, Lower Afton
Road, and McKnight Road, which were provided by the Ramsey County
Department of Public Works. During the busiest time of year, October
and November, truck traffic to the site would vary from day to day but
would average about 10 to 15 trucks per day. As shown in the table
below, at 15 trucks per day, the percentage increase in traffic on the
roads that would be attributable to the composting site would be very
small--only a fraction of one percent.
Route
Valley Creek Rd. (TH 120) from 494 to Century
Ave. Daily % Increase
Traffic Count Due to New
Site
13500 0.1%
Lower Afton Road from McKnight to Londin
Lower Afton Road from Londin to Century
McKnight Road from Lower Afton to Upper Afton
McKnight Road from Upper Afton to North Park Dr.
McKnight Road from North Park Dr. to 1-94
-12 -
54
5450 0.3 %
7900 0.2 %
10600 0.1%
10800 0.1%
12100 0.1%
Road Wear from Truck Traffic
During the busiest times of the year for the proposed compost site,
truck traffic would average about 5 trucks per weekday during the
spring, and about 10 to 15 trucks per weekday during the fall. The
Ramsey County Department of Public Works has determined that average
daily truck traffic on Lower Afton Road and McKnight Road would
increase by about one to four percent, and would not be a significant
increase.
Traffic and Schoolchildren
Hauling schedules would be developed to take school bus route traffic
into consideration. Information concerning 1996-97 school bus routes
and stops, shown below, was obtained from Independent School Districts
%622 (North St. Paul-Maplewood-Oakdale), #833 (Woodbury), and %625
(Saint Paul). The route information provided by the school districts
was reviewed to determine when and where school bus routes
corresponded with potential truck routes to and from the proposed
site. Ail bus route information for the upcoming school year would be
reviewed when bus routes are established in mid- to late August, and
hauling operations would be adjusted accordingly.
Valley Creek Road, between 1-494 and Century Avenue. ISD 833 may
have one or two stops on this stretch. School buses do use this
route in the morning, at about 7:50 a.m. and 8.25 a.m., and in the
afternoon, at about 2:35 and 3:05 p.m., to deliver or pick up
students that attend either Woodbury Elementary or Woodbury Junior
High. Insufficient information was available regarding whether or
not any buses use this route but do not make stops on it.
Lower Afton Road, between Londin Lane and McKniqht Road. ISD 622
uses this route and has two stops on the corner of McKnight Road and
Lower Afton Road that occur at 9:21 a.m. and 12:51 p.m.
Lower Afton Road, between Century Avenue and Londin Lane ISD 622
has no stops on this stretch. One bus uses this route daily.
McKniqht Road, between Lower Afton Road and 1-94. ISD 622 uses this
route and has four stops along this stretch, plus two stops on the
corner of McKnight Road and Lower Afton Road. These six stops occur
at 7:04 a.m., 7:35 a.m., 9:21 a.m., 9:23 a.m., 12:51 p.m., and 12:53
p.m.
ISD 625 has bus routes on McKnight Road between 1-94 and Lower Afton
Road. Because the buses always travel south, all stops are on the
west side of the road. (In contrast, the vast majority of the truck
traffic generated by the compost site would be traveling north on
McKnight Road.) ISD 625 makes efforts to minimize the actual stops
on McKnight. ISD 625 bus routes run before 9:00 a.m. and after 2:30
p.m. More specific information will be available in August when
routes will be established for the new year. Information concerning
bus traffic for students attending magnet schools is not available;
this information changes from year to year.
-13 -
55
ODOR
There have been numerous questions about odor from the composting
process and how it would be monitored.
Odor standards could be included in the Conditional Use Permit for the
site, if the Maplewood City Council approves the site. These
standards would likely be quite similar to the City of Woodbury's
current standards for Composting Concepts (the standards formerly used
by the City of Maplewood for Ramsey County's yard waste site on Beam
Avenue were essentially the same).
Compost sites do produce odors that are part of the natural
decomposition process. Some other odors can occur but can be reduced
through proper management of a compost site. Based on the County's
experience with its current yard waste transfer and composting sites,
odors are usually confined to the immediate area of the yard waste
site.
The County's composting consultant, E & A Environmental Consulting,
Inc., has examined potential odors for the new site by using an odor
dispersion model. The model incorporates local meteorological
conditions, topography, and specific information about the design and
operation of the site, and then projects the movement of odor from the
site.
The model projects odors from several potential sources. Each windrow
represents an area source because odor is emitted from the surface of
each windrow when it is not being turned. The storage pile of
finished compost on the stockpile area is another area source. In
addition, several on-site activities that can also contribute to odor
generation are included in the model, including delivery of yard
waste, windrow turning, and loading of finished material onto trucks.
The data in the model for each of these potential sources was taken by
the consultant from an odor monitoring study performed at a different
yard waste composting facility; according to the consultant, this is
the best data available.
The consultants have included some conservative assumptions in the
model to ensure that odor impacts are not underestimated. For
example, the consultants assumed the largest windrow turning machine
that might possibly be available; use of this machine would allow for
more volume of yard waste to be managed at the site. Also, the
maximum odor concentration measured from the surface of a quiescent
windrow (one that is not being turned) in the other odor monitoring
study was assumed to apply for all quiescent windrows at all times.
The model predicts the maximum concentrations during a ten-minute time
period that would be experienced under given conditions. Thus, the
model shows "worst case scenarios," using some conservative
assumptions. In Appendix 2, there are three figures showing results
of the model, superimposed on a base map. These are included in this
report as well, as Figures A-i, A-2, and A-3 (in the Appendix they are
labeled Figures 1, 2, and 3, respectively).
-14-
56
I
(s.~eleLu) qlJON --- qlnos
57
-15 -
(s~eleu~) qlJON--- qlnos
0
58
· _16~-
~0
(sJeleLu) qlJoN --- qlnos
Vg~t
'IVIJ. N~C
0
o
59
These figures show the highest, third-highest, and sixth-highest
levels of odor concentrations, respectively, shown in ten-minute
intervals, that could occur during a year. The consultant has assumed
that any level of at least 5 D/T, which are a unit of odor
concentration called a dilution to threshold, could have a nuisance
potential. (Note that the figures are a compilation of levels of odor
at different places on the base map. Thus, the highest level of odor
in one location may occur during a ten-minute interval that is
different from the ten-minute interval in another location.)
Figure A-I, which shows the highest level of odor, shows that for one
. ar odors generated from the site at a level
ten-minute period e~ch Ye_~.L_~ ~ .... 1 of nuisance--could be det~cted~as
of 5 D/T or more--~ne presum~u ~=v~
~. ' of U Der Afton Road, Lower Afton Roa~, an~
far as or beyond sections Pt . and northeast of the site
· t Road, the WorKhouse, Carver School, w the
McKnigh ...... ~,res A-2 and A-3, which sh? ~ ,.
into Washington ~ou~y. f~ v 1 of odor, respect~ve±y .~ln _
third-highest and ~l~th~hlgh~s~ ~ e~, ~= ~ ~ D/T or more at any of
ten-minute intervals), ~o no5 sh~ l=ve~ ~t - -- · ....
' 'n that levels of 5 D/T would not De ~e~ecsea
these locations, meanl g . . ..... ~ ==~ year at any of these
- - ...... two ~en-mlnuLe ~~ ~h ~ ~ ~
~or more than on~.u~ '~ ....... ~,= renort, ,,Base~ on ~n=
location · ~- . ~ ~ odors will not cause s~gn~zlcan~
5ions used ~n the ..... el,
The model shows that maximum odor concentrations above 5 D/T, and as
high as 12 D/T, are projected to occur in Battle Creek Regional Park
immediately west and north of the composting site, particularly during
certain weather conditions outlined by the consultant. These
conditions include early mornings following cool, clear nights, and on
muggy, still evenings after sunset. According to the consultant's
report, people who use the park early in the morning are most likely
to detect this. The consultant's report, noting that there is a
partial buffer created by trees between the site and the park that
could not be taken into account by the model, then states, "the
results may be somewhat over-predictive of actual conditions." It
should also be noted that the County plans to install additional
screening on the north side of the site, including a berm and trees,
along with trees on the west side of the north compost pad and on the
south and west sides of the stockpile area.
BIOAEROSOLS INCLUDIN~ ASPERGILLUS FUMIGATUS ~ ~EALT~ ISSUES
Questions have been raised at public meetings about the possible
impacts on human health from having a yard waste composting site
nearby.
The Department of Public Health contracted with E & A Environmental
Consultants, Inc. as its composting consultant because this firm has a
national reputation in analyzing the public health impacts of all
types of composting operations. Accordin~ to E & A, the site
location, which is away from residences and other buildings, should
reduce or eliminate the concerns discussed below. The following
information is summarized from the consultant's report in Appendix 2,
which includes more detail and a detailed bibliography.
-18 -
60
Bioaerosols are organisms or biological agents that can be dispersed
in the air and affect human health. The principal bioaerosols in yard
waste composting operations are fungal spores. Although there are
numerous fungi and other organisms normally found in soils and organic
materials, the most common bioaerosol of concern in composting
operations from a public health point of view is the fungus
Asperqillus ~umiqatus. A. fumiqatus is a very common fungus, as it
has been found wherever there is organic matter, including in homes,
backyards, parks, potting soil, mulches, and composting operations.
It plays a major role in everyday decay of leaves, wood, and other
organic matter. It is common in homes, especially basements and
bathrooms.
A. fumiqatus is a very hardy organism that, unlike pathogens or most
other organisms, can survive the high temperatures generated during
composting. During certain composting activities, it can be found at
very high levels. Screening, mixing, and other activity in which
material is moved or agitated allows the spores to become airborne.
The dispersion of spores in the environment is a function of climatic
conditions of wind and rainfall. A majority of the studies on the
dispersion of A. fumiqatus and other bioaerosols from composting
facilities indicate that background levels are achieved within 500
feet of a composting site. Buffer zones of vegetation will reduce the
dispersion of spores as well, as they act as windbreaks. Tree
barriers reduce the dispersion of particulates.
Of bioaerosols related to composting facilities, A. fumiqatus is the
one of greatest concern to public health. The spores, when dispersed
in the air, can be inhaled and enter human respiratory systems. A.
fumiqatus is a recognized pathogen of birds, animals, and humans and
is considered a secondary or opportunistic pathogen. A pathogen is an
organism that can invade and infect humans. As a secondary pathogen,
~. fumi~atus generally only invades and infects debilitated
individuals or persons on immuno-suppressive medication. Nearly all
of the reports on infection due to A. fumiqatus have been from
hospitals, where people are already severely debilitated.
Although most people are not at risk for illness due to ~. fumiqatus,
exposure to it can result in allergic-type symptoms such as irritation
to the eyes, nose, and throat. It is difficult to isolate the effects
of A. fumiqatus, since many of these symptoms are similar to those
caused by other common allergies and by smoking. A comprehensive
study by the State of New York found that increases in allergy and
asthma symptoms were not associated with airborne A. fumiqatus or
other molds. -
Workers at the more than 3,000 yard waste composting facilities in the
United States are exposed more frequently and to higher levels than
any other population. To date, several intensive studies have shown
that workers have not had any adverse effects, suggesting that the
potential for infection is minimal.
-19-
NOISE IMPACT~
At the public meetings in April there were some questions about how
much noise would be generated by the composting site. Potential noise
impacts from the site would be from trucks using the site and from
equipment operating at the site.
As discussed under Traffic Impacts, about 600 to 900 trucks per year
are expected to use the site. All traffic would be on weekdays, and
would occur primarily during April and May and during October and
November. Noise levels would be typical for large trucks.
The County's composting consultant, E&A Environmental Consultants,
Inc., examined noise impacts for operation of the site, which would
occur on weekdays. As shown in Appendix 2, the consultants cited a
noise standard from the Federal Highway Administration (FHA) for
picnic areas, recreation areas, and residences that is representative
of standards developed by various federal and state agencies: maximum
of 70 dBA or decibels, and ideal of 57-60 decibels.
The County would have trucks unloading yard waste, a front-end loader
forming windrows and also loading trucks with finished compost, a
windrow turner, and possibly a water truck.
To determine the sound level at 'various points in the vicinity of the
composting site, the consultants developed a range assuming one piece
of equipment in operation (the lower number in the table below) and
also two pieces of equipment. They assumed that equipment would be
operating near the center of the site. The results, also shown in
Appendix 2, are shown below.
Lo'cation
Distance
Workhouse
2,210 feet
Sound Level
(dBA)
52.0 - 55.0
Century Avenue
Carver School
Upper Afton Road
Lower Afton Road
Park land
1,950 feet
1,950 feet
1,300 feet
1,100 feet
400 feet
53.1 - 56.1
53.1 - 56.1
58.2 - 61.2
60.2 - 63.2
66.9 - 69.9
The consultants concluded that noise levels would be within the FHA's
standards for residences. The nearest residences are located'on the
north side of Upper Afton Road, on either side of Century Avenue, and
about 200-300 feet south of Lower Afton Road. The consultants also
concluded that sound level impacts would be higher in the park land
immediately adjacent to the composting facility.' They added that
because the park land lies lower than the composting facility and is
wooded, actual sound levels would be lower than indicated in the
table.
The State of Minnesota has noise standards which have been created for
different classifications of land use activities. Classification 1
includes residences and also designated camping and picnicking areas.
-20-
Classification 2 includes parks and recreational activities, except
camping and picnicking areas. LS0 standards can be exceeded 50
percent of the time and L10 standards 10 percent of the time for a
one-hour survey. Because all compost site activities would occur only
during the daytime, only the Daytime standards would be applicable.
Noise Area
Classification
Daytime Nighttime
L50 L10 L50 L10
1 60 65 50 55
2 65 70 65 70
VISUAL EFFECTS
Some residents have asked how visible the proposed composting site
would be. The visual effects of the site include what the site would
actually look like, combined with what would be seen from surrounding
land uses.
The compost site would include two compost pads containing long piles
(windrows) of yard waste in the process of being composted, up to five
to ten feet high, depending on the type of windrow turning equipment
used. There would also be a stockpile (storage) area. Yard waste
being cured (meaning--in the final stages of composting) would be in
piles up to about eight feet high, and finished compost could be
stacked as high as 15 feet. The stockpile area, which is the
southernmost part of the site, would be screened to the south with
trees planted on the south and west sides of the stockpile area.
There would also be two stormwater retention ponds, both surrounded by
a chain-link fence, located on the northeastern corner and the west
side of the site.
To the east and southeast, the site would only be visible, but barely,
over 2000 feet away from some homes on the Woodbury side of Century
Avenue, and also from parts of the Workhouse complex. To the south,
the site would not be visible, except for the entrance from Lower
Afton Road. Some houses located about 2000 feet or more to the south
of the proposed site might see the stockpile area were it not screened
with trees. To the west and north some users of Battle Creek Regional
Park, primarily users of a trail close to the northwest corner of the
site, could see part of the site. The Department of Public Health
would be installing screening, a berm and trees on the north side of
the site, and trees on the west side of the north compost pad.
PROPERTY VALUE IMPACTS
At public meetings, some residents have asked what effect the
composting site could have on property values.
Ramsey County hired a consultant with expertise in property value
issues, John Genereux, to examine existing available information that
could be applicable. He produced a report that is attached as
Appendix 4.
-21- ·
63
In his search of existing research literature, Mr. Genereux found no
property value studies that directly addressed the effect of compost
sites on residential property values. There have been, however, a
number of studies concerning the effect of various other types of
facilities on property values. Mr. Genereux summarized land uses for
which some studies have shown negative property value effects
(landfills, power plants, manufacturing facilities, railroads, and
rental properties), for which studies have shown no property value
effects (prisons and workhouses, and group homes for the handicapped),
and for which studies have shown positive property value effects
(parks and schools, and public housing). He concluded:
Based on this evidence, it seems that compost yards might occupy a
spot on the land use attractiveness list between a manufacturing
plant or a railroad and a well-maintained group home. In that
case, the worst case scenario would be that any effects would be
limited to a quarter-mile or so. It is unlikely that it would
engender the kind of wide-ranging impact associated with a power
plant or landfill.
He added that only a well-designed analysis of existing or recent
compost sites could provide a truly reliable answer.
Mr. Genereux interviewed several sources involved in operating,
regulating, or providing consulting assistance to compost sites. Some
had been involved in situations where there had been significant odor
problems that were ultimately managed to mitigate the problems. Based
on these interviews, Mr. Genereux then stated, ,,...facilities that are
well run, or are made to run well, should not cause significant long
term. problems for their neighbors."
Mr. °Genereux stated that many investigators have used survey data to
ascertain whether certain land uses are acceptable to nearby
residents, either before or after the land use occurred. One
researcher noted that people who have negative attitudes towards
prisons before they are built will continue to do so afterwards,
although negative perceptions tend to fade. Another researcher found
that familiarity breeds comfort. Given a list of various types of
facilities such as a school, fire station, juvenile halfway home,
private mental hospital, etc., one neighborhood with a private mental
hospital found it to be the most desirable, while another neighborhood
hosting a fire station found it to be the most desirable.
In comparison to other solid waste facilities, including a
waste-to-energy plant and landfills, Mr. Genereux concludes, "In terms
of impact, a compost yard should be significantly less than a
waste-to-energy plant. It may not be loved, but it should be the
least hated." He concluded his report by saying, ,,...good public
relations and good management should facilitate the acceptance of the
[compost] yard over time. Good management should also reduce the
probability of any loss of property value, even in an isolated case."
-22-
WATER ISSUES
Concerns were expressed at public meetings about the effect of runoff
from the compost site on surface water, including wetlands, and on
groundwater, particularly for homes served by wells.
As discussed in a previous section concerning the Site Plan,
composting and stockpiling of material would occur on a hard surface.
The site would be graded so that almost all runoff would be directed
to one of two stormwater retention ponds to be constructed on site.
According to the Ramsey County Public Works Department, which
developed the site plan in Figure 2 in conjunction with the County's
composting consultant, Pond A would serve a drainage area of 5.95
acres, Pond B would serve 0.84 acres, and 0.2 acres--a portion of the
North Pad--would drain to the west instead of into a retention pond.
The two ponds would have outlet pipes.
Although a certain amount of groundwater infiltration from the ponds
would occur, the principal water transport mechanism from the ponds
would be surface discharge through the outlets. The ponds would
retain water except during dry periods. The water quality of the
ponds would generally be turbid with periodic algae blooms, which is
similar to observed water quality in other stormwater treatment ponds.
The County Parks and Recreation Department is in general agreement
with the water management plan for the site.
County staff have discussed potential impacts of the compost site on
water resources with the Ramsey County Soil and Water Conservation
District (RSWCD, which has jurisdiction over groundwater) and the
Ramsay/Washington Metro Watershed District (on surface water matters).
Based on available information, the RSWCD has indicated in a letter,
attached as Appendix 5, "...the probability of the proposed compost
site impacting groundwater in the area may be low .... and the
probability of the wells on Century Avenue being impacted by the
proposed compost site may be low." The Watershed District has
indicated in a letter, attached as Appendix 6, "The proposed treatment
ponds to be provided as part of the new site are designed to provide
adequate treatement of site runoff prior to discharging into the Open
Space wetland system. It is our opinion that the wetlands in this
area will not be impacted by the location of the Yard Waste Composting
operation at this site."
Discussions with Ramsey County Public Works Department and Watershed
District staff have indicated that no runoff is expected to travel to
lakes or streams. Runoff from the proposed site area currently is
absorbed into the ground or by wetlands.
SECURITY ISSUES
Some questions have been raised concerning security at the site,
especially whether or not the stormwater retention ponds would be
fenced.
-23 -
Access to the site would be limited. The access road from Lower Afton
Road would have a locked gate. Only approved contractors, County
staff, and emergency personnel would be able to unlock this gate. The
boundary with Battle Creek Regional Park is currently fenced. The
County Corrections property, within which the compost site would be
located, is also fenced. Also, both stormwater retention ponds would
be fenced.
WILDLIFE/NUISANCE~
Some residents have asked what the effect of the compost site would be
on existing wildlife in the area, and whether or not the site would
attract wildlife.
The Department of Public Health contacted wildlife experts at the
University of Minnesota and the Minnesota Department of Natural
Resources. The following is a summary of their comments, developed by
Department of Public Health staff.
In general, activity at the site, such as frequent turning of the
windrows, would tend to discourage wildlife from being on site.
The resident population of small mammals would be displaced,
although there could be some increased activity at the site for
small mammals attracted by increased invertebrate activity in the
composting leaves. Deer would be displaced, at least when there
are activities on the site. However, the compost site would
represent only a very small portion of the deer's habitat. The
populations of woodchucks, rats, skunks, and raccoons would not be
expected to i~crease, and might even decrease, because the compost
site and the materials accepted would not offer a food source.
The loss of open grasslands would reduce habitat for grassland
nesting birds. There is some disagreement concerning the positive
or negative potential effect of the site on birds living nearby.
The composting site operations would not be expected to have any
direct impact on wildlife in Battle Creek Regional Park. Because
the ,'edge" where woods meets fields is more diverse than either the
field or the forest itself, there would be benefit to buffering the
"edge."
Department of Public Health staff and site monitors responsible for
operation of the yard waste sites have not reported any sitings of
woodchucks or skunks near freshly delivered yard waste or composting
windrows. On occasion site monitors have seen a woodchuck or skunk in
the areas surrounding a few of the yard waste sites. Site monitors
have reported sitings of deer, red fox, pheasants and squirrels at
some of the sites. Most of the deer sitings occur at the White Bear
Township site, which is surrounded by undeveloped land and is next to
North Oaks, which has a reputation for supporting a large population
of deer. Deer do not appear to be attracted to the composting
windrows in the summer; there has been evidence of them bedding down
on the edges of piles during the winter months. Deer have been seen
-24-
eating freshly dropped garden wastes and apples brought in by the
public at both the Battle Creek and White Bear Township sites.
SITE SIZE
An issue was raised concerning whether or not the site could be
expanded at a later date.
The Department of Public Health does not expect to expand the site in
the future, as there will be no available land to do so. The County
Corrections Department has plans for its nursery operation for the
remaining areas of Workhouse property that could possibly be used for
a yard waste site. Any expansion of the area would need to be
approved by the City Council after a public input process.
COST
Questions have been raised regarding whether or not the County would
actually save money by developing this new site.
The primary issue that engendered pursuit of this new composting site
was the loss of composting capacity at the County's site on Beam
Avenue in Maplewood. The County might haul leaves to the new site
from some of its other yard waste sites as well, should capacity
exist. For purposes of this cost analysis, only the Beam Avenue and
proposed new composting sites are analyzed.
CaDital Costs
A total of $288,500 has been budgeted for the capital costs of the new
composting site. Preliminary estimates show lower capital costs of
about $155,000, not including costs for screening. If an additional
20% contingency factor is included, the total capital costs would be
about $185,000.
Operating Costs
To compare costs, Department of Public Health staff have developed a
comparison of estimated annual operating costs for the following:
Estimated total costs for operation of the Beam Avenue site in
1998, including continued hauling of all yard waste received to
private vendors located outside of Ramsey County.
Estimated total costs for operation of the Beam Avenue site in
1998, with yard waste received during spring and fall being
composted at the new composting site.
Beam Avenue Site Only: Transfer Ail Yard Waste Out of County
For purposes of this cost estimate, it is assumed that the Beam Avenue
site would continue to operate as a transfer-only site, with no
composting occurring on site; all yard waste would continue to be
hauled to private yard waste vendors outside of Ramsey County. Also,
-25 -
this cost does not include the salaries for site monitors, and it does
not reflect any increases in costs due to inflation.
Costs for 1998 have been projected based on actual costs for managing
the Beam Avenue site for July through November of 1996 and April
through June of 1997. Total costs for 1998 are projected to be
$180,100.
Note that this cost does not reflect any value for finished compost
because no composting will occur.
Beam Avenue Plus New Compostinq Site
There are two suboptions for use of the new composting site.
The first suboption is for all yard waste received at the Beam Avenue
during the spring and fall to be delivered to the new composting site
and composted. As discussed in the composting consultant's report,
Appendix 2, in the operations plan, to do this would require use of a
medium-sized windrow turner. One or more such machines do exist in
the Twin cities area. Because the County has not requested bids for
provision of a medium-sized windrow turner, the costs are not known.
To develop an estimate, costs for the smaller windrow turner currently
under contract with the County were prorated based on the larger
turning capacity of the medium-sized windrow turner.
The second suboption is for as much yard waste as possible received
during spring and fall at the Beam Avenue site to be composted at the
new composting site, using the smaller windrow turner currently under
contract with the County. For this suboption, there would be some
cost. for transferring some of the yard waste received in spring and
fall to a private vendor outside of the County. At the same time, the
costs for forming and turning windrows at the new composting site
would be lower because less yard waste (about three-quarters as much)
would be composted at the new site.
The total cost for operation of the Beam Avenue site plus the
Workhouse site, using the medium-sized windrow turner, is estimated at
about $180,200. The total cost using the smaller windrow turner is
estimated at about $176,000.
These costs, though, do not reflect the value of the finished compost.
Because the County does not currently sell the finished compost, the
value can only be estimated. County contract prices for procuring top
soil average $7.30 per cubic yard. Because the Yard waste compost is
not screened, it has been assumed that the value of the compost could
be one-half of the top soil price, or $3.65 per cubic yard.
When the value of the finished compost is included, the total cost for
operation of the Beam Avenue site plus the Workhouse site, using the
medium-sized windrow turner, is estimated at about $150,600. The
total cost using the smaller windrow turner is estimated at about
$154,100. There is larger total estimated value for the finished
compost for the medium-sized windrow turner because more finished
-26 -
68
compost would be produced with use of that machine. Because these
operational costs are very close, an average of $152,000 per year in
total operational costs can be used.
Comparison of operating costs
Total Direct
Costs
Less Value of
Compost
Total Oper
Oper.
Beam Ave. Only
$180,100 $ 0 $180,100
Beam + New Site
Medium-sized
windrow turner
$180,200 $ 29,600 $150,600
Smaller
windrow turner
$176,000 $ 21,900 $154,100
Average $152,000
Payback of Construction Costs
As shown in the table above, annual operating costs for the Beam
Avenue site only are estimated at $180,100, and costs for the Beam
Avenue site plus the new site, including the estimated value of the
finished compost, are estimated at about $152,000. This is a
difference of about $28,000 per year.
As discussed above, a total of $288,500 has been budgeted for the
capital costs of the new composting site. Preliminary estimates of
the costs are $185,000. At a capital cost of $185,000 and an annual
savings of $28,000 per year, the payback would be about 6.5 years. If
the entire budgeted amoUnt were used for construction, the payback
would be about 10 years.
FINISHED COMPOST
Some questions were asked about what is in finished compost, and how
the compost would be used.
The finished compost would be hauled to the Beam Avenue and other
County yard waste sites for distribution to public, and to community
gardens and municipalities.
The State only requires operators of yard waste sites to test for the
level of inert materials. The County for many years has tested its
compost, which is currently tested for the level of heavy metals,
PCBs, nutrients, inerts, and pH. The State does have testing
requirements and standards for municipal solid waste (garbage)
composting facilities that do include heavy metals and PCBs. When the
results for the yard waste sites are compared with the standards for
municipal solid waste composting sites, the yard waste site results
-27-
are always well within the standards. The testing results are
available upon request from the Department of Public Health.
IMPACT ON PARK LAND
Users of Battle Creek Regional Park have asked what effect the site
would have on the park, park users, and wildlife. These issues have
been addressed in other sections of this report.
Park users could from time to time detect odors or noise from the
operation of the compost site. The Department of Public Health would
be installing a berm and planting trees on the north side of the site
and trees on the west side of the site to help provide an additional
visual buffer and to help mitigate odors, noise, and dispersion of
bioaerosols. There would not be direct impacts on wildlife within the
park.
The Department of Public Health would like to work with the Department
of Parks and Recreation to explore possible opportunities to use the
proximity of the site to educate park users about composting and to
encourage park users to compost at home.
COMPLAINTS
Some residents have asked how the County would respond to any
complaints about the site, should the site be permitted and developed.
Among other conditions included by the City of Maplewood in the
County's conditional use permit for the Beam Avenue site, when
composting was allowed at the Beam Avenue site, were requirements for
odor' monitoring. These requirements were essentially identical to the
odor monitoring requirements used by the City of Woodbury for a
private yard waste composting vendor. The City could choose to impose
similar requirements in a conditional use permit for the new
composting site. There could be other permit conditions as well.
If concerns arose once the site were operating, those concerns or
complaints could be made to either the City of Maplewood or the Saint
Paul - Ramsey County Department of Public Health, Environmental Health
Section, or both. If the complaints were about odor, the County or
City would respond as soon as possible to determine the level of odor,
and the City would determine if a level of odor identified in the
permit was violated. If an odor problem occurred, the County would
determine if any of its operational procedures and management
practices for the site had not been followed or if any of the
procedures needed to be altered.
It should be noted that the Department of Public Health would
entertain any comments, including complaints, regardless of whether or
not the comments were from residents of Maplewood, Saint Paul,
woodbury, or elsewhere.
-28-
APPENDIX 1
P. AMSEY COUNTY YARD WASTE BRIEFING PAPER
?l
RAMSEY COUNTY
Ramsey Count' Department of Public Health
Division of Solid Waste
Briefing paper
YARD WASTE MANAGEMENT
INTRODUCTION
Minnesota Statute § 115A.931 prohibits yard waste from being placed in with mixed
municipal solid waste and being disposed of in a landfill or resource recover>' facility.
Yard waste is defined in statute to include leaves, grass clippings, garden ~vaste, and tree
and shrub waste.
The yard waste system in Ramsey County is designed to 1) reduce yard waste to the
greatest extent, and 2) manage yard waste that is generated as efficiently and effectively
as possible. The County relies on extensive public information to encourage yard waste
reduction, and on yard waste collection and disposal services operated by both public
agencies and private organizations, including the County's customer-service oriented yard
waste sites, to manage the yard waste generated.
POLICIES AND SYSTEM
Ramsey County policies related to yard waste are contained in the Ramsey County Solid
Waste Management Master Plan. These policies provide that the Count>' will continue to
have a system for managing soft-bodied (non-woody) yard xvaste at a network of sites in
a manner that is convenient and financially accessible to all residents.
Residents in Ramsey County have several options for managing soft-bodied (non-woody)
'yard waste (Shrub and Tree Waste is addressed in a separate section of this document):
Yard Waste Reduction. Residents can reduce the amount of yard waste
generated. Ramsey County strongly encourages residents to reduce the amount of
yard waste they generate through changes in turf management (e.g., leaving grass
clippings on the lawn, avoiding excessive fertilization) and backyard composting.
The County also encourages residents to use wood chip mulch. The programs to
promote this include a public information program through the mass media,
dissemination of fact sheets with specific instructions for reducing yard waste, and
one-on-one contact with residents through the Minnesota Extension Service -
Ramsey County's Master Gardener program.
Yard Waste Management. For yard waste that is generated, residents have
several options:
Pickup bv Hauler: Residents (and businesses) can pay a refuse hauler or other
collector to pick up yard waste. In most of Ramsey Count>', residents have
"open" collection, whereby they can choose their refuse hauler. Several
72
communities provide for yard waste pickup as part of contracts with one or
more refuse haulers for organized residential collection.
Haulers can still legally collect yard waste, as long as it is not mixed with
other garbage. In 1990 Ramsey County provided a site that haulers and lawn
services could use for yard waste disposal to assure that a site was available.
In 1991 the Count>' determined that it no longer needed to assure a site to
haulers, because several sites had opened in or near the metropolitan area.
This situation has not changed; currently, several sites are available for use by
haulers.
Delivery to a Private Site: Residents (and businesses) can deliver yard waste
to a private yard waste site (all are located outside of Ramsey County) or a
private transfer station (in or outside of Ramsey County) for a fee.
County Yard Waste Sites: Residents (not businesses) can deliver yard waste
to a County yard waste site at no charge.
Since 1983 Ramsey County has operated yard waste sites for residents to use.
Several municipalities were active in previous years in the development and
operation of the sites. The County took over entire operation of the sites in
1991.
The County currently operates eight yard waste sites where citizens may drop
offyard waste at no charge. The sites are open each year from April through
November, and are open 38 hours each week. Each site has at least one
monitor present who is employed by the County to direct and assist residents
and to prevent illegal dumping.
The sites are located in Saint Paul (Frank and Sims site; Battle Creek site;
Midway site; and Summit Hill site), Arden Hills, Maplewood, Mounds View
and White Bear Township. (See the attached maps.)
Roseville Residents: In addition, residents of Roseville can have leaves
picked up by the City (which will begin implementing a fee for this service in
1997). The City also offers a drop-off site for leaves for its residents.
Public Information. Ramsey County has developed an extensive public
information program about yard waste. The public information program generally
consists of:
Distribution to ever5' resident at yard waste sites of information which
encourage, s waste reduction and states the hours of site operation.
Staffing of sites by Extension Service Master Gardeners during pans of the
year, who actively engage site users and distribute fact sheets on turf
management, backyard composting, and other topics.
A contract with the Minnesota Extension Service - Ramsey County for other
educational services on yard waste reduction, including telephone hotlines and
outreach through a variety of outlets.
A 24-hour yard waste hotline (773-4455), with a recorded message that directs
callers to the nearest yard waste site. This message is also available on
separate phone lines in Spanish (773-4492) and Hmong (773-4490).
A hotline that answers questions people may have about yard waste
management and other solid xvaste issues (633-EASY).
RESULTS: COUNTY YARD WASTE SITES
Based on information gathered annually by the County for reports to the State,
approximately 85% of the leaves and grass clippings generated by County residents is
managed at the County's yard waste sites. The following information is a summary of the
results from the County's yard waste sites from 1991 through 1996. Detailed data is
shoxvn in attachments.
Site Use. There were 329,229 site visits at the eight County sites during 1996.
Since 1991, annual site visits have ranged between about 297,000 and 377,000
visits; the major factor affecting the number of visits each year has probably been
the weather (the amount of rainfall affects plant growth, and the sites have
sometimes closed early in the fall or opened later in the spring because of
snowstorms).
Survey Results. Every other year the County conducts a survey of randomly
selected residents on a number of solid waste matters. The most recent survey in
1995 showed that of residents with leaves to rake, about 49% or 65,400 households
used the County's yard waste sites. Of residents with grass clippings, about 21% or
31,800 households used the County's yard waste sites.
The County also regularly surveys site users regarding the quality of service. On a
scale of 1 - 6, with 1 being "poor" and 6 being "excellent," residents rate the sites
between 5 and 6 on a number of items relating to customer service; only one item,
the quality of finished compost, is rated lower--between 4 and 5.
More detail about the survey results is attached.
74
3
Quantities of Yard Waste Received. About 98,800 cubic yards of yard waste
were received at the eight sites during 1996. This quantity is equivalent to about
36,400 tons. Since 1991, the amount of yard waste received has ranged from about
75,000 to 120,000 cubic yards. Again, weather is probably the primary factor
affecting the quantities received.
Yard Waste Management On-Site Versus Off-Site. How yard waste is
managed varies by site. Because of concerns about odor, all grass clippings
received during the summer months from all sites except the White Bear Township
site are hauled to private yard waste sites outside of the County. In addition, three
sites are strictly transfer sites--Maplewood (as of October 1996), Summit Hill and
Midway sites. All the yard ~vaste received at these sites is hauled off-site. Leaves
are hauled off-site from the other sites if there is not room to compost them on site.
Leaves are taken either to the White Bear Township or Frank and Sims sites, or to
private sites outside of the County.
Leaves are composted at five sites. County contractors turn the piles to produce a
finished product. A windrow turning machine and water truck are used at the Frank
and Sims site, and front-end loaders are used at the other sites. Finished compost is
produced in about a year.
During 1996 about 63,600 of the 98,800 cubic yards of yard waste received at the
sites were hauled to private sites. The amount of yard waste transferred each year
since 1991 has ranged from about 43,100 to 63,600 cubic yards per year.
Usage of and Markets for Yard Waste Compost. Since the beginning of the
program, most of the yard waste compost produced by Ramsey County has been
offered to residents at no charge. During 1996, 31,485 site visitors took finished
compost. The County also provides compost to cities, schools, and non-profit
organizations for use in public areas and gardens. Since 1993 the finished compost
has been exhausted before the end of the growing season, meaning that demand for
the product exceeded supply.
Each year the County has samples of compost from its sites tested by the University
of Minnesota for the content of nutrients and heavy metals. Each year, compost
from the County's sites tests very favorably, with the results being only a fraction of
the State limits for heavy metals for mixed municipal solid waste compost (these
limits are used for comparison because the State does not have any limits for yard
waste compost).
Use of Wood Chips for Mulch. The County encourages its residents to use
wood chips for mulching trees and shrubs. The County provides wood chips for
residents at all. sites at no._charge. Mulching provides benefits to trees and shrubs
such as conserving moisture and moderating root temperatures. In addition, using
75
wood chips is a way of reusing woody waste. In 1996, the County recorded 12,481
site users who took wood chips.
Costs. The costs for operating the County's yard waste system in 1996 were
$690,769, or $6.99 per cubic yard. These costs include costs for site monitors,
managing yard waste on-site, hauling yard waste to other sites, and related costs.
The County's contract with the Minnesota Extension Service - Ramsey County cost
$~9,2.~-~.
SHRUB AND TREE WASTE MANAGEMENT..
Quantities. Most ~voody waste generated in Ramsey County has not been
managed as part of regular refuse collection. Based on a waste composition study
performed at the Ramsey/Washington County Resource Recovery Facility by the
Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) and on information developed by the
Minnesota Department of Natural Resources, Ramsey County staff estimated in
1992 that about 10%, or 5,000 tons per year, of the shrub and tree waste generated
in Ramsey County was collected by refuse haulers. The remaining 90%, about
45,000 tons per year, was separately managed. Separately managed material is
collected by tree services, public utilities, and public works and parks departments,
or is open-burned or illegally dumped.
Change in Law. The 1992 Minnesota Legislature amended the yard waste
prohibition of the Waste Management Act. Since August 1, 1992, shrub and tree
waste has been included in the yard waste category. As of that date, shrub and tree
waste, along with other types of yard waste, cannot be placed in mixed municipal
solid waste (MSW), in a disposal facility, or in a resource recovery facility except
for the purposes of reuse, composting or co-composting, except as authorized by the
MPCA.
In July 1992, the Ramsey County Board of Commissioners requested that the
MPCA grant Ramsey County a waiver to allow residents of the County to place
shrub and tree waste in MSW, and to allow haulers to deliver shrub and tree waste
that is mixed with MSW to the Ramsey/Washington County Resource Recovery
Facility. The MPCA Board authorized this exception to the yard waste ban for one
year, and then at the request of Ramsey County extended the exception until August
1, 1994. Ramsey County sought a change in State law in 1993 to allow residents to
place household quantities of tree and shrub waste in with other waste that would be
processed into fuel and converted to energy. That effort was unsuccessful.
The MPCA has determined that certain types of woody waste are not included in
the yard waste.ban, including holiday decorations such as Christmas trees, and
certain landclearing and U-tility right-of-way woody waste.
76
Management Options. Residents have the following legal options available for
managing tree and shrub waste:
Pay their ;vaste hauler to separately collect the material.
· Deliver it to a transfer station or wood processor and pay a fee to dispose of
the waste.
· Hire a tree service to remove the material.
· Bring it to a city-sponsored cleanup event (there is a charge at many of these
events).
· Purchase or rent a chipper/shredder, and possibly share it with neighbors.
· Store the material on-site if allowed by local ordinance.
77
Jul-97
RAMSEY COUNTY DIVISION OF SOLID WASTE
1996 YARD WASTE PROGRAM SUMMARY
NUMBER OF SITE VISITS
SITE 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 I
996
Arden Hills
Battle Creek
Frank & Sims
Maplewood
Midway
Mounds View
Summit Hill
White Bear Twsp.
Total
30,788
20,291
44,346
62 497
49 129
18 143
55 033
16 896
297 123
33,119
24,848
34,732 31,366 28
28,372 27,538 25
49,279 31,886 33
63,136 58,702 64
60,274 66,039 61
26,412 23,092 30
64,183 63,798 64
23,929 23,959 21
36,932
60,491
55,775
23,452
54,49O
31,383
320,490
33 058
26 951
38 138
66 901
63404
24 369
64 677
60229
377 727
350,317 326,380 329
585
514
359
063
632
131
,565
,379
228
In 1991 the sites closed one month early because of heavy snows. Some or all sites closed slightly
early in a few other years.
NUMBER OF VISITS BY SITE IN 1996
70,000 -
60,000 -
50,000 -
40,000 - 33,359
30,000 ;-- 28,585 25,514 ~
10,000 ~
0
Arden Hills Bs;tle Frank &
Creek Sims
64,063 61,632
Maplewood Midway
SITE
30,131
Mounds
View
64,565
~*Z";;: :;
Summit Hill
21,379
White Bear
Twsp.
SITE
TOTAL YARD WASTE RECEIVED (cubic yards)
1991 1992 1993 1994
1995 1996
Arden Hills 9,473
Battle Creek 5,005
Frank & Sims 6,936
Maplewood 13,613
Midway 12,361
Mounds View 7,463
Summit Hill 12,711
White Bear Twsp.' ' 7,908
10.241
7415
7 633
22 477
15,340
12 911
15 050
8,945
14020
8 440
10 528
27 480
15 540
11 948
15,780
13,000
13,467
8,410
10'773
24 600
13.635
12 838
13 650
12.562
15,635 8,728
8,988 6,698
14,449 9,443
24,760 25,846
14,685 17,245
9,031 8,201
14,205 17,120
18,782 5,471
Total (yd.~ 75,470 100,012 116,736 109,935 120,535 98,752
Total (tons) 36,864 40,264 46,936 43,815 47,872 36,403
Yard waste is measured by volume in cubic yards. To convert cubic yards to tons, a series of
conversion factors are used to reflect the type of yard waste received & the time of year.
78 ~a,,~
30,000 -
25,000 -
20,000 -
15,000 -
10,000 -
5,000 -
0
8,728
6,698
Arden Hills Battle Creek
YARD WASTE RECEIVED IN 1996
25,846
17,245 17,120
~ ~ 5,471
Frank & Sims Maplewood Midway Mounds View Summit Hill VVhite Bear
Twsp,
SITE
SITE
YARD WASTE TRANSFERRED TO PRIVATE VENDORS (cubic yards)
1991 1992 1993 1994 1995
1996
Arden Hills 3
Battle Creek 2
Frank & Sims 3
Maplewood 7
Midway 12
Mounds View 6
Summit Hill 12
White Bear Twsp. 3
202 2,010 2,580
370 1,890 4,020
540 2,310 3,300
710 5,160 6,240
360 15,340 15,540
300 1,380 1,560
710 15,050 '15,780
120
3 421
4 436
3 5O7
11 230
13 635
1 895
13650
3,373
3,468
1,874
7,425
14,685
3,176
14,205
684
1,908
1,548
1,800
21 396
17 245
2 575
17 120
Total (yd3) 51,312 41,130 49,020 51,774 48,890 63,592
"Transferred" refers only to yard waste transferred to private vendors; it does not include waste
transferred from one County site to another.
PROGRAM COSTS
1991 1992 1993 1994
Public Education* $73,550 $93,508 $39,233 $39,233
Yard Waste Sites $582,608 $544,805 $601,441 $599,236
Total $656,158 $638,313 $640,674 $638,469
* Includes contract with Minnesota Extension Service - Ramsey County
1995 1996
$39,233 $39,233
$604,984 $690,769
$644,217 $730,002
1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996
Cost per yd3 $7.72 $5.45 $5.15 $5.45 $5.02 $6.99
Cost per ton $15.80 $13.53 $12.81 $13.68 $12.64 $18.98
-- 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996
Compost Use 26,473 33,601
Wood C-hip Use : 8,741 12,559
Records were not kept prior to 1994 for compost and wood chip use.
The yard waste sites ran out of finished compost before the end of August in 1995 and 1996.
In 1996 wood chips were available on a regular basis at the St. Paul sites only.
31,485
12,481
79
APPENDIX 2
REPORT TO RAMSEY COUNTY
FROM E & A ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTANTS, INC.
8O
RAMSEY COUNTY YARD WASTE COMPOSTING OPERATIONS PLAN
WORKHOUSE SITE
INTRODUCTION
The following operating plan is an example of how to operate the Workhouse Site. It
demonstrates that use of the Workhouse Site is feasible for the projected quantity of yard waste,
based on 1996 records. It is expected that the actual operating plan may differ somewhat
according to actual tonnages received and the preferences of the operator.
ASSLrMtrrlONS
Material Delivery Schedule
Following are the volumes of material received at the County's yard waste site on Beam Avenue
in Maplewood in spring and fall 1996, when the type of waste was predominantly leaves:
Fall
14,271 cubic yards
October and November
Spring 6,035 cubic yards
April and May
The capacity of the pad will depend on the cross-section of the windrow and the spaces between
windrows and will, therefore, depend on the type of windrow turning machine. The following
operating plan is based on a KW-614, which is a typical mid-size, straddle-type windrow turner.
Straddle turners have the engine and cab on a bridge over the windrows, minimizing aisle width
requirements.
There is a KW-614 in the Ramsey County area which may be available for use at the Workhouse
Site. The machine used by Ramsey County. at this time is a Wildcat 750, owned by Composting
Concepts. The Wildcat is powered from the side and mounted on a front-end loader, requiring
a wider aisle on one side.
952C~ywops.fni FINAL
July ~_3. 199'/ I
81
The initial report on options evaluated a SCAT Model 4833 as well - a two-pass machine
providing large windrows with narrow aisles, maximizing pad capacity. This machine may be
available in Rarnsey County, but it is too large to transport conveniently. It would have to be
stationed at the site in a garage.
The Metropolitan Council of Environmental Services, which operates the wastewater treatment
plants in the Twin Cities, has a Scarab windrow turner that could possibly be available under
contract. It is similar in design to the KW-614, but its capacity may differ.
The following table shows the critical dimensions of each turning machine.
KW-614 Wildcat 750 SCAT 4833
Windrow Width (ft) 14 17 20
Windrow Height (f-t) 6 5 10
Volume per lineal foot of windrow (yd3) 2.1 2.1 3.7 - 4.5
Aisle Width (ft) 5 8 5
The Workhouse Site is proposed to have two composting surfaces available - the North Pad and
the South Pad - as well as a storage area. The dimensions of each area and windrow capacity
(based on the KW-614) are as follows:
North Pad
Total Len=m.h 340 feet
Width 200 feet
# Windrows 10
Windrow Length 280 feet
Windrow Volume 5,880 cubic yards
.J
South Pad
Total Length
Width
# Windrows
Windrow Length
Windrow Volume
450 feet
190 feet
9.7 (assume 10)
390 feet
8,190 cubic yards
Storage Area
Total Area
Storage Volume
Continuous Piles
34,000 square feet
6,000 cubic yards
8 feet deep (average)
9$20\ywops. fnl
July 23, 199~
FINAL
2
82
The North and South Pads have 30-foot wide turning areas at each end. Aisle widths between
windrows are as determined by the requirements of the turning machine.
Turning Maehine Productivity
Twenty to 30 feet per minute (will mm both pads in 5 to 7 hours).
Rhrlnkaee Factnrs
The operator of the Beam Avenue cOmposting facility reports that the material delivered in the
fall shrinks to about one-half of its origin,l volume by spring and about one-third of its original
volume when it is finished. Shrinkage reported in the literature ranges from 24 to 41 percent of
original volume within one year. In this operating plan, the following conservative shrinkage
factors are used: 54 percent of its original volume by spring and 40 percent for the final product.
MATERIAL FLOW
Fill both pads in fall
Place in storage until windrows start to shrink
Turn weekly in October and November and 1-2
times per month in winter, weather permitting
Shrink to 54 percent
Consolidate on South Pad in spring
Turn 2 times per month
Remove from site following fall
14,070 cubic yards
201 cubic yards
7,706 cubic yards
7,706 cubic yards
5,708 cubic yards
Snrin~ Material
Fill North Pad in spring
Place extra on South Pad
(temporarily, until shrinkage on North Pad allows
room for this material to be moved to North Pad)
9$20\ywops.fnl
July 23. 1997
FINAL
3
83
5,880 cubic yards
155 cubic yards
Turn Weekly
Shrink to 54 percent
Move material to Storage Area for fall
(material will continue to cure until spring,)
Remove material from site in spring
The operating plan is shown graphically in Figure 1.
3,259 cubic yards
3,259 cubic yards
2,414 cubic yards
CAPACITY WITH ALTERNATIVE WINDROW TURNING MACHINES
Use of the Wildcat 750 will reduce the pad capacity to 74 percent of the capacity it has with the
KW-~14. There will be a 26 percent shortage of capacity in the fall, but no shortage of capacity
in the spring.
Use of the SCAT 4833 will increase pad capacity to 130 percent of its capacity with the KW-614.
The odor dispersion model was developed using the higher tonnages of the SCAT 4833 in order
to cover that possibility.
: FINAL
9520\ywops.fnl 4
July "-3. 1997
FIGURE I: MATERIAL FLOW
HONTH
OCT
NOV
DEC
JAN
FEB
HAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL,
SEP
OCT
NOV
DEC:
FEB
APR
CAPACITY
RECEIVE
I/~,Z71 CY
RECEIVE
6,055 CY
RECEIVE
1&,271 CY
SOUTH PAD
8,190 CY
NORTH PAD
5,880 CY
BUILD BUILD
8,190 CY 5,880 CY
&,&25 CY
7,706 CY-----3,Z85 CY--
BUILD
-'-----155 CY 5,880 CY
REMOVE 3,259 CY
5,708 CY I
START
NEW CYCLE
85
STORAGE AREA
6,000 CY
201 CY
STORE
3,259 CY
REHOVE
2,/,I/, CY
RAMSEY COUNTY YARD WASTE COMPOST FACILITY
ODOR MODELING
QL'A.NTIFYING AND CHARACTERIZhNG ODORS
Odors can be characterized and quantified in terms of concentration and intensity. Odor
concentration is measured in units of dilutions to threshold (D/T). A D/T is equivalent to the
volume of air which must be used to dilute an odor to reach the point at which 50 percent of the
population can no longer detect it. Odor concentration is evaluated by odor panels, a group of
five to eight trained people who are exposed to the odor in a controlled environment. A dilute
form of the odorous sample is piped to each of the panelists; if less than 50 percent of the panel
can detect the odor, the concentration of the sample is increased. The point at which 50 percent
of the panelists can detect the odor is considered the odor threshold.
The odor panel also undergoes a series of exercises to determine the relationship between odor
concentration and odor intensity for the s~mple. Following an established and regulated protocol,
the panel compares the odor with standard concentrations of butanol to determine a relationship
between odor concentration and a butanol scale. The scale ranges between no odor (0) to very
strong odor (8). Three (3) on the butanol scale is considered the point at which most people will
detect an odor. Therefore, the concentration of a sample at which the odor intensity'correlates
to a 3 on the butanol scale is considered to be the concentration at which a particular odor will
constitute a nuisance.
The City of Maplewood established odor standards in the County's permit for the yard waste site
on Be'am Avenue using an alternative form of the butanol scale. This is a scale which ranges from
1 to 5, where 3 or above constitutes a violation of the standard. These standards are essentially
identical to the standards used by the City. of Woodbury.
Data collected at several composting facilities indicate that the type of odors generated by
composting have a nuisance potential at concentrations above 5 D/T. This result varies,
depending on the type of material composted, the composting operation, and the extent of odor
control measures; nuisance thresholds of 3 to 7 have also been found.
The point at which an odor becomes a nuisance is highly subjective. The definition of nuisance
varies, depending not only on the particular intensity of an odor, but also on the hedonic tone, or
acceptability of an odor. Some odors may be tolerated in higher concentrations or intensities
because they are considered pleasant, while other odors may be considered unacceptable at any
level. The sensitivity of a particular community which is subject to the odors may also vary. For
example, urban communities may be less tolerant of the odors of organic materials than a farming
community.
9520~xlrmod¢l. f. ul FINAL
July 2,~ 19~7 1
: 86
WEL&T LEVEL IS REGULATED?
There are no Federal regulations limiting the output of odor units or the concentration of odor
which can be emitted to the atmosphere. Some states are beginning to write regulations and
permit restrictions based on the impact of new facilities on the surrounding communities. These
limits are usually written in terms of odor concentrations at the facility property lines or at
receptors points. For example, the Massachusetts Draft Odor Policy mandates that permit
applicants demonstrate that the operation of the proposed facility will not result in an odor
concentration greater tbarl 5 D/T at the property boundary. Other states require that applicants
demonstrate that no nuisance conditions will be created.
ODOR DISPERSION MODELING
The odor dispersion model incorporates local meteorological conditions, topography, and site-
specific design and operational parameters and projects the movement of odor from a site. The
meteorological data used was for 1991 from the Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport and
was obtained from the EPA's electronic bulletin board. This is the most recent data which was
available. The data is Listed hourly and includes wind speed and direction and vertical temperature
g'radients which affect mixing. The most extreme odor incidents occur when there is little mixing.
The model used for Ramsey County is the ISCST3 Model. The model predicts one-hour average
concentrations of pollutants. When used to assess odor impacts, the results are adjusted to predict
ten-minute concentrations, due to the transient and acute nature of odor incidents. Since ten-
minute concentrations are higher than one-hour concentrations, the model is, in effect, more
conservative. This is standard practice for odor modeling. The ISCST3 is the model most widely
used and recognized by regulatory agencies.
The model predicts the maximum concentrations that will be experienced under given conditions.
The model is run for an entire year of meteorological data and is set up to predict the maximum
odor concentration that will occur within one year. Results are presented graphically as a series
of concentric isopleths surrounding the odor source which show how odor impacts decrease as
distance from the odor source increases. The isopleths are plotted from a grid of data points-at
100-meter intervals. Each odor incident represents a ten-minute time period. Therefore, the
maximum odor impact shown only represents the concentration that is projected to occur for a ten-
minute time period. If absolutely no odor impacts are tolerated at the receptor points, then this
is the key information that the model provides.
In order to assess the full range of impacts that a site may have on a community, it is also
important to consider the frequency of odor impacts. The model can also be used to predict the
number of times odor concentrations at a particular receptor point are projected to exceed the
nuisance threshold levels. For some communities or receptors, it may be acceptable to experience
a mirtimal number of odor impacts each year. Other communities or particularly sensitive
receptors may consider any odor unacceptable.
9$20\odrmodel.ful .~. : FINAL
July ~. 1997 2
87
For this task, E&A used the model to project 1) the maximum odor concentrations that will be
experienced, 2) the odor concentration that will not be exceeded during more than two ten-minute
time periods per year, and 3) the odor concentration that will not be exceeded during more than
five ten-minute time periods per year. The model is superimposed on a base map that
encompasses Carver School, the County Workhouse, and residential areas on and east of Century
Avenue, north of Upper Afton Road, south of Lower Alton Road, and west of McKnight Road.
IN-PUTS
This model input is based on an operational plan which utilizes the SCAT 4833 turning machine.
Use of this SCAT model will allow the largest possible tonnage of materials in the windrow at any
one time. It is, therefore, conservative, and odor impacts would be expected to be lower if a
smaller turning machine were used and less material were handled.
There are eight 280-foot long windrows on the northern pad and seven 390-foot long windrows
on the southern pad. The windrows are 20 feet wide and 9 feet high, for a total volume of 18,390
cubic yards. Each windrow represents an area source, as odor is emitted from the surface of each
windrow when it is not being turned. The storage pile of finished material located to the south
of the southern pad is another area source; this pile is 100 feet by 162 feet in size and 10 feet
high. All odor sources and related parameters are listed in the following table.
SOURCE
Quiescent Windrows
Windrow Turning
Material Delivery
Loading of Finished Material
Storage Pile
PARA.MJ~'I'I~R$
The flux rate from the windrows is 0.000641 m:/sec-m: from one-half of
the surface area of the pile. The average flux rate over the entire pile is
0.000321 re%cc-m:. The odor concentration of surface emissions is
1,093 D/T.
3,000 yda of material are turned each hour. The plume volume generated
is equal to the volume of material turned, for a plume generation rate of
3,000 yda/hour, or 0.64 m%ec. Pile turning takes a total of 6.5 hours.
The odor concentration in the turning plume is 586 D/T.
350 yd~ of material are delivered each day. Based on actual 1996 data,
an average of 325 yd~ was delivered daily on a five-day-per-week basis in
the fall, so the number used in the model is conservative. The plume
volume generated is equal to the volume of material handled. If delivery
takes place for four hours each day, the plume generation rate is 0.019
ma/sec. The odor concentration in the delivery plume is 1,093 D/T.
210 yda of finished compost are loaded into trucks and taken from the site
each day. Based on actual 1996 data, an average of 130 yda of fall
product could be removed per day, so the number used in the model is
conservative. If this takes place over a four-hour period, the plume
generation rate is 0.011 m%ec. The odor concentration of this plume is
50 DFr.
The storage pile has an average flux rate of 0.000321 ma/sec-m:· The
odor concentration of the surface emissions is 50 DIT.
9520\odrmodel.flfl
July 23. 1997
FINAL
88
Several on-site activities also contribute to odor generation: windrow turning, material delivery,
and loading of finished material onto trucks. It is assumed in the model that the windrows are all
turned in one day; this process takes six to seven hours. It is assumed that an average of 350
cubic yards of fresh material are delivered and that 210 cubic yards of finished material are loaded
into trucks and taken away each day. Based on 1996 fall numbers, an average of 325 cubic yards
of fresh material was delivered on a five-day-per-week basis, with 130 cubic yards of finished
compost produced, so the numbers used in the model are conservative.
The results of the model are not affected significantly by the daily operating schedule for the
following reasons: 92 percent of the odor is generated by the stationary windrows and storage
pile: 7 percent is generated by turning; and less than 1 percent is generated by delivery and
loading activities. Therefore changes in turning, delivery, and loading schedules will have
relatively little impact. Furthermore, most off-site odors occur in the evening and the early
morning, when there is 1/ale atmospheric mixing. During these hours, there will be no trucking
or turning activities.
The odor concentration and flow rate from each of the sources were taken from an odor
monitoring study performed at a different yard waste composting facility. Some of the
assumptions make this model a conservative assessment. The maximum odor concentration
measured from the surface of a quiescent windrow in the earlier study was used for the surface
emissions of all of the windrows in this model. Although the monitoring study showed a decrease
in surface emissions over time, the site at which the measurements took place is a more actively
run operation; piles are turned several times each week, and material is composted within two
months. The rate of composting, and the corresponding decrease in composting odors seen at that
facility, may be faster than the rates expected at the Ramsey County facility. It seems reasonable,
if soi:newhat conservative, to assume that active composting will continue throughout the retention
period of the material.
The assumptions about odor generation may also be conservative because the site at which samples
were collected handles slightly different material than the Ramsey County site. The data used is
currently the best information available from a yard waste site; it is conservative but reasonable.
MODEL RESULTS
The results of the model are presented in Figures 1, 2, and 3. The isopleth labels represent odor
concentrations in dilutions to threshold (D/T). A concentration of 5 D/T or greater is considered
to constitute an odor impact. Figure 1 shows the maximum odor concentrations that are projected
to occur during a one-year period. It should be noted that the model projects odors in terms of
ten-minute odor incidences. As can be seen in Figures 2 and 3, most areas are projected to
experience fewer than five odor impacts each year; many of the areas are projected to experience
fewer than two incidents each year. This means that there will be between 10 and 50 minutes per
year of actual odor impacts.
9$20\odrmodel. fra FINAL
~uly 23. 1997 4
89
The contours are concentric around the composting facility, indicating that these maximum odor
conditions will occur in the absence of wind. Typically, these maxima occur on early mornings
following cool, clear nights and on mugg'y, still eve 'nings after s~m~et.
Figures 2 and 3 show that the 5 D/T contour does not reach Upper Afton Road or Lower A/ton
Road, Century Avenue, Carver School, McKnight Road, or the County Workhouse. Based on
the assumptions used in the model, odors will not cause significant nuisance conditions at these
locations. Odors will be notable for no more than 20 minutes per year at most of these points.
The figures also show that odor concentrations up to 12 D/T will occur in Battle Creek Park
immediately north and west of the composting site, particularly during the weather conditions
outlined above. It must be noted that there is a partial buffer created by trees between the sim and
the park. This could not be taken into account by the model, so these results may be somewhat
over-predictive of acu.ml conditions.
RECONEV~NDATIONS FOR MINIMIZING ODOR
Turning and material b~dling activities should be minimized during very light southwest winds
combined with overcast skies.
The best way to monitor odor is to keep an accurate log of any complaints, noting time, date,
weather conditions, and on-site activities at the time of the complaint. Rapid response will help
to ensure good relations with neighbors and will provide practical information on how to prevent
similar incidents in the future.
A barrier of trees would be helpful in increasing dispersion during light winds, reducing off-site
odor impacts close to the site.
9520~,edrmodel.fnl
July 23. 199'~
FINAL
90
South --- North (meters)
0
AREA RES 'TIAL A
. . ~ .~. ,~.. ~~ ,.~ ......... ~ ............
0o
0
0
0
91
o ~
o
o
{3.
o
o
o
. . . TIAL
AREA
92
0
0
'-1
0
o_.
I
I
I
RES~ENTIAL
~REA
McKnight Road|
South --- North (meters)
RESIDEN3 AL
AREA
........................................
................... t ................... I
.....
RESIDENTIAL
AREA
Century Avenue
0 ~
93
BIOAEROSOLS IN YARD WASTE COMPOSTING OPERATIONS
INTRODUCTION
Bioaerosols are organisms or biological agents that can be dispersed in the air and affect human
health. The principal bioaerosols in yard waste composting operations are fungal spores, since
fun~ are present in soils, grass, leaves, and woody material. Although there are numerous fungi
and other organisms which are normally found in soils and organic materials, the most common
bioaerosols of concern in composting operations from a public health point of view is the fungus
A~pergiIluxfumigatus (A. fumigatus). A. fumigatus is a very common fungus. It has been found
wherever there is organic matter, including in homes, back yards, parks, potting soil, mulches,
and composting operations (Epstein, 1997). It plays a major role in everyday decay of leaves,
wood, and other organic matter (Auk and Schott, 1993). It is universal and ubiquitous and has
been found to grow on paper, fabrics, rubber, and plastic. It is common in homes, especially
basements and bathrooms (I-Iirsch and Sosman, 1976). Rippon (1974) states "Aspergillus spores
are akborne and constantly inhaled."
Because A. fumigatus is associated with organic matter, it is present in wood chips, leaves, yard
waste, and compost. A. fumigatus is a very hardy organism; unlike pathogens or most other
or_~anisms, it can survive the high temperatures generated during composting. During certain
co~mposting activities, it can be found at very high levels. Screening, mixing, and other activity
in which material is moved or agitated allows the spores to become airborne.
The dispersion of spores in the environment is a function of climatic conditions of wind and
rainfall. A majority of the studies on the dispersion of A. fumigatus and other bioaerosols from
composting facilities indicate that back~ound levels are achieved within 500 feet of a composting
site (Millner, et al., 1994; Clayton Environmental Consultants, Inc., 1983-1986; Passman, 1980).
During rainfall, or after the compost site is subjected to rain, there is very little dispersion of
spores. Buffer zones of vegetation (woods) will reduce the dispersion of spores as well, as they
act as windbreakers. Tree barriers reduce the dispersion of particulates and also remove
particulates by impaction and deposition on leaves.
BIOAEROSOLS AND PUBLIC HEALTH
As stated earlier, the bioaerosol of greatest concern to public health is A. fumigarus. The spores
of this organism, when dispersed in the air, can be inhaled and enter our respiratory systems. Our
bodies' immune systems normally respond as they do to numerous other materials we breathe
(Auk and Schott, 1993).
A. fumigatus is a recognized pathogen of birds, animals, and human-q and is considered a
secondary pathogen, or an opportunistic pathogen. A pathogen is an organism that can invade and
infect humans. Unlike primary pathogens (bacteria, viruses, or parasites) which can invade and
9520\bioacros.rpt I
lu~>. 24. 1~7 : 94
infect healthy persons, A. fumigatus generally only invades and infects debilitated individuals or
persons on immuno-suppressive medication.
Nearly all of the reports on infection due to A. fumigatus have been from hospitals where people
are akeady severely debilitated (due to heart and kidney transplants, leukemia, AIDS, and other
debilitating diseases).
Although most people are not at risk for illness due to A. furnigatus, exposure to A. fumigarus can
result in allergic-type symptoms such as irritation to the eyes, nose, and throat. It is difficult to
isolate the effects of A. fumigatus, since many of these symptoms are similar to those caused by
other common allergies and by smoking.
A comprehensive study by the State of New York Department of Health (NYDOH, 1994) in and
around the Islip composting facility concluded the following:
"Increases in allergy and asthma symptoms were not associated with airborne A.
fumigatus or other molds during the 72-day study period. Analysis restricted to
the 20-day period for which hourly A. fumigatus counts were available did not
show a positive relationship between A. fumigatus spore levels and the incidence
of aller~ or asthma symptoms. However, the occurrence of these symptoms was
associated with ragweed pollen, ozone, temperature, and day of the study."
There are over 3,000 yard waste composting facilities in the United States. Workers at
composting facilities are exposed more frequently and to higher levels than any other population.
To date, several intensive studies have shown that workers have not had any adverse effects; this
fact ~uggests that the potential for infection is minimal. We believe that although there is no data
in the literature, highly debilitated persons on immuno-suppressant medication (e.g., Cystic
fibrosis patients) should not visit composting facilities.
BEST M~NAGEM2ENT PRACTICES
Any operation which reduces the potential for dispersion of bioaerosols will reduce any potential
environmental impacts. The following are some suggested measures:
·
·
·
·
·
Spraying water during turnin, g of windrows
Reducing road dust
Using methods to control dust during operations
Curing the compost for one month or more (Millner et al., 1994)
Providing a tree barrier or windbreak
Bioaerosols can be monitored. Monitoring or measuring of bioaerosols can provide information
on best management practices and changes in operations to reduce dispersion. The method of
measurement consists of collecting dust and spores using specific standard techniques.
9$20\bioacros.rpt 2
Jul>, 24. 1997
REFERENCES*
Auk, S.K., and Schott, M. 1993. Aspergillus, aspergillosis, and composting operations in
California. Rep. No. Technical Bulletin No. 1. California Environmental Protection Agency,
California Integrated Waste Management Board, Sacramento, California.
Clayton Environmental Consultants, Inc. 1983. Air sampling progTam for total coliforms,
particulates and fungal spores at selected areas in the Windsor West Pollution Control Plant.
Windsor, Ontario.
Epstein, E. 1997. The Science of Composting. Technomic Publishing Co. Inc., Lancaster,
Pennsylvania.
Hirsch, S.R., and Sosman, J.A. 1976. A one-year survey of mold growth inside twelve homes.
Annls. Allerg. 36, 30-38.
Hryhorczuk, D., Scheft, P., Curtis, L., Keys, N., Chung, J., Rizzo, M., and Lewis, C. 1996.
Environmental characteristics of bio-aerosol emissions from the DK Recycling Systems, Inc.
composting facility in Lake Forest, Illinois. Rep. No. Health Hazard Evaluation Report 96-001.
The Great Lakes Center for Occupational & Environmental Safety & Health, The University of
Chicago, School of Public Health, Chicago, Illinois.
Millner, P.D., Olenchock, S.A., Epstein, E., Rylander, R., Haines, J., Walker, J., Ooi, B.L.,
Home, E., and Maritato, M. 1994. Bioaerosols associated with composting facilities. Compost
Sci. & Util. 2, 6-57.
NIOSH. 1995. ALERT Request for Assistance in Preventing Organic Dust Toxic Syndrome.
National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health, Cincinnati, Ohio.
NYDOH. 1994. A prospective study of health symptoms and bioaerosol levels near a yard waste
composting facility. Islip Composting Facility, Town of Islip, Suffolk County, New York. State
of New York, Dept. of Health, Albany, New York.
Passman, F.J. 1980. Monitoring of Aspergillus fumigatus associated with municipal sewage
sludge composting operations in the State of Maine. Portland Water District, Portland, Maine.
Rippon, J.W. 1974. Medical Mycology. The Pathogenic Fun~ and The Pathogenic
Actinomycetes. W.B. Saunders, philadelphia, Pennsylvania.
*The references selected were unbiased and represented the most important citations in the
literature.
9520\bioaeros.rpt 3
~dY "a' ~'~ 96
NOISE, WILDLIFE, AND LEACHATE IMPACTS
NOISE h-MPACTS
Ambient noise standards have been developed by several Federal and State agencies. The
following standard is representative and is from the Federal Highway Administration's (FHA)
"Noise Standards and Procedures" (CFR 23 Part 772):
Standard f or picnic areas, recreation areas, and the like ... and
residences.., etc.
Maximum 70 dBA
Ideal 57-60 dBA
The KW-614 turning machine has a sound output of 85 dBA at 50 feet; loaders and 10 wheel
trucks are similar. Sound levels are logarithmic and do not add linearly. The combined sound
level for two pieces of equipment is 88 dBA at 50 feet. Sound level ranges in the table below are
for one and two pieces of equipment running simultaneously.
Attenuation with distance is affected by terrain and vegetative cover and is generally around -6
dBA per doubling of distance. The following table indicates the distances to sensitive receptors
and estimated sound levels, assuming two pieces of equipment operating simultaneously at the
center of the site.
Location
Correctional Facility
Century Avenue
Distance
2,210 feet
1,950 feet
Carver School 1,950 feet
Upper Alton 1,300 feet
Lower Afton
Park Land
1,100 feet
400 feet'
Sound Level (dBA)
52.0 - 55.0
53.1 - 56.1
53.1 - 56.1
58.2 - 61.2
60.2 - 63.2
66.9 - 69.9
aAssuming equipment is operating near the center of the site.
This table shows that noise levels will be within the FI-IA's standards for residences. Sound level
impacts will be higher in the park land immediately west of the composting facility. Because the
park land lies lower than the composting facility and is wooded, actual sound levels will be lower
than indicated in the table.
9520~uw&limpa. rpt 1
July '~4, 1997
: 97
WILDLIFE IMPACTS
The site is presently a hay field or disturbed grass land, which will be lost as habitat. Deer and
fox which are seen in the neighboring area may be driven away by noise and human activity
during site operations. This would occur with any increase in land use activity.
Yard waste is not a food source and will not attract rodents, raccoons, or gulls. In general,
animals do not make burrows in compost windrows because of the frequent disturbances and high
temperatures.
The County will need to maintain the site properly to ensure that puddles of leachate do not form
which could attract flies and mosquitoes.
LEACHATE IMPACTS
The volume and characteristics of leachate will vary greatly according to weather conditions and
site activities. Data from existing Ramsey County yard waste sites would be particularly useful.
Windrows absorb rainfall, and all of the run-off will be generated by the uncovered areas and the
perimeter toe areas of the windrows. Peak monthly nm-off volumes can be calculated according
to the following assumptions:
Peak Monthly Rainfall
Total Area of Aisles and Turn-Around Areas
Run-off Factor (C)
8 inches
60,000 square feet
0.5
Run-off volume is estimated to be 150,000 gallons per month.
The following table shows some run-off characteristics from a yard waste site in Washin~on.
In Treatment Pond
Un~e~ed
BOD (rog/l)
Solids (mg/1)
Ammonia Nitrogen (mgll)
TIGN (rog/l)
265 1,500
85 1,900
80 580
110 750
9520~w&limpa.rpt
July 24. 19q7 ~.
2
APPENDIX 3
DIVISION OF SOLID WASTE YARD WASTE PROGRAM
DRAFT NEW SITE OPERATIONS PLAN
99
SAINT PAUL -RAMSEY COUNTY
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC HEALTH
DIVISION OF SOLID WASTE
YARD WASTE PROGRAM
NEW SITE
OPERATIONS PLAN
DRAFT
July, 1997
100
TOPIC
CONTENTS
I. Site specificatic~ns
· Location
· Legal ownership
· Size
· Surfacing Materials
· Access (entrance/exit)
· Use
· Materials composted
· Annual receiving capacity
· Annual production
II. Equipment
· Hauling
· Windrow forming and consolidation
· Windrow turning
· Maintenance
}II. Operations
· Transportation
· Forming and consolidating windrows
· Windrow turning
· Maintenance
· Finished compost hauling
· Screening
IV. Security
V. Complaints
Attachments:
# 1 Division Staff Contact List
#2 Contractor Li.s.t
#3 Site Plan
PAGE
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2-3
2
3
3-4
3
3-9
3-4
4
5-6
4-8
9
9
9
9
1
101
I. Site specifications
Location
· 1/4 mile south of Upper Afton Road, 2,200 fi. west of Century Avenue, 900 fi.
north of Lower Alton Road, 1/2 mi. east of McKnight Road
2. Legal ownership
· Ramsey County
Size
· Approximately 5 acres total
· Compost pads: 1.5 acres and 2 acres
· Stockpile area: .75 acres
4. Surfacing materials
· Millings/crushed asphalt
Access (entrance/exit)
· Off Lower Aflon Road using existing entrance west of Williams Pipeline
easement
Use
· As a compost site for materials received in spring and fall, which are primarily
leaves
· Scheduled hauling and on-site operations by contracted private vendors only
· Not for use by general public
Materials composted· Spring and fall leaves received at the Maplewood site located on Beam Ave.
· Spring and fall leaves from one to three yard wastes in Saint Paul, if capacity
exists
· Very small quantities of grass mixed in with the leaves toward the end of the
spring hauling season and beginning of the fall hauling season
Annual receiving capacity
· Approximately 20,000 yd~/yr.; site is designed to compost all yard waste
received at the Beam Avenue site in spring and fall; actual capacity could Vary
depending on the type of windrow turning machine used
Annual production (finished compost)
· Approximately 8,000 yd~
II. Equipment
Hauling (on hhd off site)
· 30-50 yd~ end-dump type trailers pulled by semi-tractors
2
102
Windrow forming and consolidation
· Front-end loaders
Windrow turning
· Windrow turning machine
· Water truck (opt.)
Site Maintenance
· Front-end loaders
· Tandem end-dump trucks
· Grading equipment
III. Operations
This section pertains to site maintenance and methods used in the production of finished
compost, including hauling procedures, windrow formation, windrow turning, and
temperature and moisture monitoring. It should be noted that most operations are
conducted by private contractors under contract with Ramsey County.
Division staff will inspect the site at times when operations are taking place, taking note
of any issues and consulting with the contractor(s) on site to remedy any problems.
Operations will be documented in a manner that records the date, time, weather
conditions, special instruction to contractor(s), type(s) of ongoing operation(s),
complaints, and actions taken to resolve operational problems and/or complaints.
Documentation will be kept on file at the Division offices in Maplewood
1. Transportation
This site will serve as the location to compost spring and fall leaves received at
the Beam Avenue site. Leaves will be hauled from the Beam Avenue site
during the months of April, May, October, and November. Depending on
available capacity, leaves may be hauled to the site from additional yard waste
sites located in Saint Paul. Hauling times and days may vary depending on
weather and other factors.
Leaves will be hauled in 30-50 yd3 end-dump trailers by one or more contracted
vendors. Trucks will access the site offLower Alton Road near the southeast
comer of the site. Based on previous years' volumes, it is expected that
approximately 550 to 800 trucks will enter the site annually to deliver leaves.
Additional trucks for delivering equipment and hauling out finished compost
will also enter the site. Therefore, total number of trucks is expected to be
between 600 and 900 per year.
Contractor Information:
Hauling. front-end loader operation (existing contract)
Cappie 's Trucking
Contacts: Dale Capistrant, Larry Capistrant
phone:
2. Forming and consolidating windrows
A front-end loader will be used to create windrows of leaves and to consolidate
windrows following the natural reduction in the size of each windrow as the
composting process continues.
Windrows will be formed and/or consolidated in the following manner:
Windrow formation and/or consolidation will be scheduled only when
conditions are favorable. Division staff will record the date(s), time(s), and
weather conditions during this time period. Documentation will be kept on
file at the Division's offices in Maplewood.
Windrow size will range from 5 to 10 ft. high by 14 to 20 ft. wide depending
on the type of windrow turning machine used. The length will be
determined by site layout.
Windrows will be shaped to promote absorption of rain water to gain
adequate moisture for the composting process and prevent runoff.
Windrow formation and consolidation operations will comply with any local
permit conditions or other specific conditions added to this plan at a later
date.
Contractor Information:
Windrow forming (existing contract)
Cappie's Trucking
Contacts: Dale Capistrant, Larry Capistrant
phone:
3. Windrow turning
Windrows will be turned monthly to weekly, depending on the season and the
age of the windrows, with a windrow turning machine. This schedule could
vary depending on weather conditions. Windrows may be turned less frequently
during wirit~r months'because heat lost from the windrows as they are being
turned may slow the composting process during cold weather conditions.
4
104
Windrow turning will be scheduled only when conditions are favorable.
Division staff will record the date(s),time(s), and weather conditions during this
time period. Documentation will be kept on file at the Division's offices in
Maplewood.
The exact procedure used will var), depending on the type of windrow turning
machine used.
Additional turning may be scheduled when windrow temperatures fall below 68o
F (summertime) or exceed 140° F for more than a week to achieve the
following:'
To maintain the conditions necessary to promote the composting process:
sustain aeration and temperature needs of microorganisms, control excess
heat, and release metabolic wastes (CO2 and H:O), to enhance
decomposition
· To deter the growth of anaerobic microorganisms thereby reducing the risk
of offensive odors
· To ensure the destruction of plant pathogens by exposing all areas of the
windrow to high temperatures for an extended period of time
· To create a quality finished product of uniform consistency; to ensure that
all feedstock completes the composting process
Contractor Information:
Windrow Turning (existing contract)
Composting Concepts
Contacts: Richard Eisenger, Claire Eisenger
phone:
Water Truck (existing contract)
Paul Murphy Effects
Contact: Paul Murphy
770-2671
4. Maintenance
The site will be inspected on a routine basis by Division staff as a means to
identify any nuisances or factors that may lead to operations or public relations
problems.
a. Litter
5
105
The Ramsey County Community Corrections Department will be scheduled
to clean the site on a monthly basis during spring, summer, and fall operation
periods. Cleaning includes weed cutting, tree trimming, and picking litter
from the operations area and around the perimeter of the site.
Contact information:
Site Cleanup
Ramsey Cottnty Community Corrections Department
Adult Courts Division
Spruce Tree Centre - South
1500 University Avenue - Suite 213
St. Paul, MN 55104
contact: Bob Sierakowski, phone:
bo
Surface conditions
Low areas that may develop from settling, erosion, heavy equipment
operation or other factors causing water drainage and/or other operations
problems will be resurfaced in a manner that complies with the intent of the
original site construction plan.
If dust is generated during operations or is expected to be a problem during
dry weather conditions, a dust suppressant such as calcium chloride or an
emulsion type suppressant will be applied to the surface of the entrance road
and/or operations area.
Snow may need to be plowed or removed from the site to allow operations to
continue during late fall and through the winter months. The same contractor
listed on the existing contract for hauling, forming windrows, and site
maintenance (Cappie's Trucking), also performs snow removal.
Contractor Information:
Resurfacing. snow removal (existing contract)
Cappies Trucking
Contacts: Dale Capistrant, Larry Capistrant
phone:
Resurfacing {grader'}. millings, class 5.
Ramsey County Public Works
Contact: Jerry Auge
phone: .....
6
106
Co
Dust Control (existing contract)
Dustcoating, Inc.
Contact: Stan
phone:
Temperature monitoring
As microbial activity begins in a newly formed windrow, the temperature of
the composting material typically follows a pattern of rapid increase to a
temperature of 120-140° F which, with regular turnings, is maintained for a
period of several months. Temperatures in excess of 140o F can be
detrimental to the microorganism population in the leaf pile, slowing down
the composting process. High temperatures usually occur following turning
operations as a result of increased available oxygen which increases
biological activity inherently releasing large amounts energy as heat.
Temperatures can rise above 140° F for a period of a few hours to a few days
after turning. During this time, piles should be monitored closely. If high
temperatures persist for a week or drop below 68°F (due to a large loss of
microorganisms), it may be necessary to turn the pile again. This will
reduce the risk of thermally killing beneficial microbes by dissipating some
of the heat. A low temperature reading may also indicate insufficient oxygen
in the windrow which can encourage growth of less desirable microbes.
These microbes can produce compounds including methane, organic acids,
hydrogen sulfide, and other substances, many of which have strong odors.
Studies show that oxygen levels rapidly decrease to their initial
concentration a few hours following turning of the piles, which indicates
that most of the oxygen utilized in the composting process enters the pile
through the spaces between the feed stock. This suggests that the main
purpose of turning is to "fluff" the pile to allow oxygen to enter by
convection through the loose material.
As the nutrient (nitrogen) source for the microorganisms is gradually
depleted, the temperature drops until reaching that of ambient air. indicating
that the composting process has reached completion. Using the above
management practices, finished compost is expected to be produced in 12
months following windrow formation.
Temperature measurement should be done as follows:
· Divide each windrow into three segments.
Using equipment designed to measure temperature in composting
windrows, take readings from each segment, inserting the probe
approximately three feet into the pile, and allowing enough time for the
deOice to give-an accurate reading.
7 107
· Calculate the average of the three readings.
· Record information by date, site, and windrow location.
d. Moisture monitoring
Moisture is necessary to support the metabolic processes of the microbes in
the composting process. Biological activity becomes inhibited as the
moisture content falls below 40% and ceases entirely below 15%. Above
65%, water displaces much of the air in the pore spaces of the composting
materials. This limits air movement and leads to anaerobic conditions.
Therefore, materials should be maintained within a moisture range between
40% and 65%. As a rule of thumb, composting materials are too wet if
water can be squeezed out and too dry if it does not feel moist to the touch.
Incoming leaves may have a moisture level of only 30-40%. However, rain
and snow may increase the moisture content of a pile to desired levels.
Also, once the composting process begins, water is made available through
decomposition. It is generally not necessary to add water to a compost pile
from an additional source unless the pile has experienced many months of
extremely dry weather. Larger windrows (height x width) retain water better
than smaller windrows during dry conditions. Therefore, this problem may
be avoided or resolved by consolidating some of the smaller windrows as
long as the height and width of the combined windrows can accommodate
the windrow turning machine. Turning during dry conditions is another way
to distribute water more evenly through the pile by mixing the wetter
material from the bottom of the pile with the dryer material on the sides and
top. A decrease in moisture content is to be expected during the later stages
of the composting process as more water generally evaporates than is added
to the piles from rain and snow.
Measurement of the moisture content of a composting windrow will be
done as follows:
Divide each windrow into three segments.
Calibrate the moisture meter and insert the probe deeply into each of the
three segments recording readings from each segment. The scale on the
moisture meter is 0-10, or 0-100%, so ideal moisture content will appear
as 4-6.5 on the scale.
· Calculate the average of the three readings.
· Record information by date, site, and windrow location.
o o
108
6. Finished compost hauling
Leaves are expected to turn into finished compost in approximately 12 months
at the site. Compost will be back-hauled off site whenever possible; as leaves
are being delivered to the site and formed into windrows, the front-end loader
will also be loading out-going trucks with finished compost destined for the
Maplewood site and other locations.
7. Screening
Screening of finished compost is not planned at this site at this time. In the
future, some quantities of finished compost may be screened to produce a high
quality product.
IV.
Security
Access to the site will be controlled by a gate at the entrance road just off Century
Ave.. Contractors will be instructed to lock the gate behind them when operations
have been completed for the day or they are working on site for an extended period
of time. The gate will remain locked between scheduled operations at the site. Gate
keys will be distributed to the local fire and police departments for use in the event
of an emergency.
Complaints
Division staff will respond immediately to any complaints concerning the site.
Division staff will immediately drive to the site and document the following:
Time, date, and location (where the complaint was perceived)
· The origin of the complaint
· Existing weather conditions
· Instruction given to contractors on site (if applicable)
· Conclusions or action taken to resolve any problems associated with the
complaint
9 109
Attachment #1
DIVISION STAFF CONTACT LIST
Name
Office Pager Cellular Phone
Home
John Springman 773-4448
Michael Reed 773-4443
Zack Hansen 773-4440
Larry Carlson 773-4441
Norm Schiferl 773-4450
Joe Wozniak 773-4442
10 110
Attachment #2
CONTRACTOR LIST
Contractor/Agency Contact Operation
Office#
Mobile[
Cappies Tracking Dale Capestrant Turning/Trans.
Composting Concepts Richard Eisenger Turning/Disposal
Corrections Dept. Bob Sierakowski Clean Sites
Dustcoating Stan Dust Control
R.C. Public Works Jerry Auge Site Maint.
Water Track Paul Murphy Turning
11 111
APPENDIX 4
REPORT BY JOHN GENEREUX:
PROPERTY VALUE IMPACTS OF COMPOST YARDS
112
Singer House, 192 Charles
St. Paul, Minnesota 55103
612-222-0206
Avenue
MEMORANDUM REPORT
Date: July 17, 1997
From: John Genereux
To: Zack Hansen
Subject: Property Value Impacts of Compost Yards.
I. Introduction
For most families, their home is their major capital asset. Understandably, they
are concerned about anything that might diminish its value. Neighborhood
reluctance to entertain new land uses has become infamous, giving rise to such
terms as NIMBY, LULU, the slightly more humorous NIMTOF (not in my term of
office), and BANANA (build absolutely nothing anywhere near anything).
The loss of housing value stems from a fear that new buyers will not want to live
near the facility, or that current owners will move rather than continue to live
near these facilities. In either case, prices will be bid down, either because of a
true disamenity perceived by a majority of buyers or because of a temporary
o. versupply of housing.
Compost yard operators and regulators have urged us to advise development
managers to be aware of both space and time. Space is important because
distance from a disamenity diminishes its impact. This is simply a reinforcement
of the general theory of zoning.
Time is important, because just before and after construction is the time most
critical to the growth of negative perceptions. If negative perceptions on the part
of neighbors can be minimized then, they are unlikely at future dates.
This secondary data report on the possible impact of a compost yard on
property values rests on three sets of analyses:
· Conversations with informed sources, to uncover possible studies or
personal knowledge of problems;
· Review of property value studies from other types of facilities; and
· Review of any studies ranking types of land use.
Results from each of these will be reported in turn, followed by a conclusion and
recommendations section.
John and Michele Genereux
research consultants
in the social sciences
Compost Yard Property Value Study 7.17.97 Page 2
Hansen:
II. Conversations with Informed Sources
For the first part of this investigation, we contacted a set of individuals who have
experience running compost yards, or consulting to those who do. We used our
contacts in California, Minnesota, and the East Coast to gather names of
persons who might be familiar with compost operations and any studies of the
effect of compost yards on nearby residential property values.
None of the persons we contacted could identify any such study. Most,
however, had plenty to say about cases of yards which had odor problems, and
about neighbors who fear health effects from Aspergillus spores.
We looked at California with special interest. A 1989 law there requires a 50%
reduction of solid waste going to landfills by the year 2000. This has led to an
explosion of compost facility sitings. Most of these, according to local
enforcement officials, have had only limited regulatory control.
Since solid waste incinerators are extremely difficult to site in California at the
present time, local jurisdictions are likely to be more lenient with compost
operators. Many hope to get the green waste out of landfills and counted into
the 50% reduction figure.
Most respondents had a notorious nuisance story to report. While all involved
odors, these reports had some interesting twists:
1. Richard Archdeacon, head of Local Enforcement Agency in San Jose,
discussed the Guadalupe Compost Yard, which had a significant odor
problem associated with it. Residents of a nearby neighborhood, with
expensive homes, Almaden Valley, immediately put pressure on the
Mayor and City Council to stop the problem.
The compost yard shut down its compost operations, and operated only
as a chipping yard/transfer station for three years. It is now ready to
resume actual composting.
Richard Livincott, president of the local homeowners' association, said
that the odor question at Guadalupe had not caused any property value
concern, since it was so quickly handled. He does not expect a
recurrence of problems when composting starts again.
2. Gary Van Dorst, of the City of Sacramento, who operates a site in the
middle of a residential area, says the key to good relations is to limit the
amount of material coming in, and providing good information to
neighbors. His annual volume is limited to.15,000 tons on 10 acres. His
neighbors are very supportive, since they recognize the solid waste
abatement benefits of his operation.
114
Hansen: Compost Yard Property Value Study 7.17.97 Page 3
Dave Hardy, of California Biomass, a private operator in the Los Angeles
area, goes a step further. He says he was required to site in an area
zoned for heavy industry, but that even so he has one neighbor who has
a home within this zoning area and complains on a regular basis. To
prevent problems, he visits his neighbors, offers free drop-off service for
their yard waste and finished material, and even has his equipment
prepare garden soil for a few retired, limited-income neighbors.
Rod Taylor, of BFI, Cleveland, tells the interesting tale of a compost site
that was placed next to a sewage treatment plant. The plant changed
operating procedures, which caused an odor problem. The compost
yard was blamed for the odor, so it was moved. At the same time, the
sewage treatment plant odors were corrected, so everyone was happy.
Susan Young, of the City of Minneapolis, told a similar story of a compost
yard near Highway 280 in Minneapolis, in an industrial area. Northern
Star Potato Processing Company, a neighbor to the yard and an
important local employer, decided to initiate on-site wastewater treatment
at the same time. The treatment facility began to emit a sour smell, the
compost operations were stopped, and the yard now chips brush and
transfers out yard waste.
o
Mark Gould, E & A Environmental Consultants, Inc. Mr. Gould could not
recall any study that had been done on property value impacts of
compost yards. He did mention that this issue is being studied by a
property assessor for a site in Chicago on which they are doing design
work. However, that site is in an existing industrial area, and may not
provide a good land use comparison. A report should be ready
sometime this year.
Not surprisingly, land use separation is the key issue. Local zoning in
California frequently requires sites to be in industrial areas or in agricultural
areas. Michele Stress from the San Diego Local Enforcement Authority,
Richard Archdeacon from the San Jose Local Enforcement Authority, and Dave
Hardy from Los Angeles all emphasized this point.
A second is a well-defined good neighbor policy. Since, in Ramsey County,
yard waste is dropped for free and compost and brush chips given away, it may
be necessary to be a bit more creative.
More important than both of these is good site management, to prevent traffic or
odor nuisances in the first place.
115
Compost Yard Property Value Study 7.17.97 Page 4
Hansen:
III. Results from Property Value Studies.
Most studies of housing value impact use a hedonic model, which assumes that
buyers of homes are purchasing "bundles" of housing attributes, including size,
number of bathrooms, landscaping, proximity to wealthier people, etc. Some of
these attributes are the relative proximities to non single-family-housing land
uses, including positive (employment centers, churches, schools, and parks),
neutral (commercial) and negative (open-pit mines).
This report examines the impact of compost yards. Unfortunately, we found no
property value studies in our search of the secondary literature that directly
addressed the effect of compost yards on residential property values.
However, there are a wide variety of hedonic model studies of the effects of
various types of positive or negative nearby land uses on residential property
values. These studies provide us with some clues as to the probability that a
compost yard could have a negative effect on housing prices, and the probable
extent of any such effect.
While such an investigation is, by nature, somewhat speculative, it does help
set probable boundaries. The results are discussed below by type of land use.
Land Uses That Have Shown Negative Property Value Effect
1. Landfills
One can assume that landfills are the worst case scenario for a compost yard.
Not only do they suffer from the same kind of odor concerns, they also tend to
'attract much more traffic, are associated with dust and blowing debris, and are
feared to cause long-term groundwater contamination. Not surprisingly, they
have been the most frequently studied for property value effects, in many parts
of the country by many authors.
In studying the impact of landfills, some researchers have concluded there was
no effect, some that there is apparently some effect, but results are not
statistically significant, and some that the effect is measurable and replicable.
The most recent study in the published literature is by Nelson et al (1992) in
which the landfill at Ramsey, Minnesota is shown to have a negative impact of
12% on property values at its perimeter, with a linear decrease to 0% at about
2.5 miles. The research on which this study was based was from the Draft
Environmental Impact Statements for landfill sites in Hennepin, Anoka, and
Washington Counties in Minnesota.
Research for this ElS examined five other landfills as well: Eden Prairie,
Minnesota; Lake Elmo, Minnesota; Andover, Minnesota; Oak Grove, Minnesota;
and Bloomington Township, Illinois (Chicago). The property value impact
results were similar for all landfills studied. All results were likewise statistically
116
Hansen: Compost Yard Property Value Study 7.17.97 Page
significant, most to the 0.001 level, which is considered excellent. Adjusted R2
were between 0.41 (Bloomington Township) and 0.84 (Eden Prairie). This
means that between 41% and 84% of the total variation in price was explained
by the data in the formulas. (Genereux, 1985).
In this research, over 20 characteristics of each individual home, including
distance to the edge of the landfill, formed the data set used to develop
estimates of property value change.
One interesting result from the Andover, Minnesota case study showed that,
after the landfill closed, the negative property value impact was reversed.
Properties near the landfill were actually slightly more valuable than those
further away.
2. Power plants.
Power plants would also probably be rated as a greater natural problem than
compost yards. Unlike a compost yard, this facility is heavy industry, with clearly
visible buildings, smokestacks, and coal piles.
Most recent power plant sitings have been at some distance from residential
property. However, this was not the case with the Winnetka Power Plant in
Winnetka, Illinois, a prosperous middle class suburb of Chicago. A very early
study of property value impacts was done on this power plant in the early
1970's (Bloomquist, 1974).
Unlike the landfill property value studies noted above, this early study took
some short cuts that are not usually characteristic of later studies. First, it
employed few housing characteristics, except the number of rooms. It also used
the owners' estimate of value, rather than the sales price. Finally, it averaged
the price for each block, rather than use individual homes. The advantage of
this last procedure is to lower the inherent variability of the data.
BIoomquist found that the effective zone of impact of the power plant was about
2.2 miles. The maximum value change was 9%, compared to 12% as noted for
the landfill case above. The adjusted R2 for this equation was 0.56.
3. Manufacturing Facilities
Manufacturing facilities probably have more impact on property values than do
compost yards, since they generate more traffic and congestion, and may be
less well screened than a compost yard.
Manufacturing plants have been shown to have an ambigous relationship to
property values. On the one hand, increases in the percentage of industrial
land in a municipality tends to have an overall benefit to property values in that
m_ unicipality (Bur.ri.ell, 1985). On the other, adjacent properties tend to have
lower property values, all other things being equal.
117
Hansen: Compost Yard Property Value Study 7.17.97 Page
Li and Brown (1980) showed that prices for similar homes were decreased up
to 550 meters (about 1800 feet), with most of the change occurring in the first
400 meters (1300 feet, or about a quarter-mile). The loss of value at 300 feet
from the facility was about 13%.
Grether and Mieskowski (1980) found a similar, but somewhat lower effect.
They examined properties within 800 feet of industrial areas and found that, at
300 feet, the effect was about 6%, and that it ended at 800 feet.
Based on this research, the worst-case scenario is probably that the effect may
be measurable up to a distance of 0.25 miles.
4. Railroads
Railroads, which have a periodic noise effect on neighborhoods, as opposed to
a landfill, power plant, or even manufacturing facility, could be considered
another step down in impact.
A study of the effect of railroads going through urban neighborhoods was done
in 1978 in London, Ontario. This study found that there was an effect up to 850
feet (0.16 miles) from an urban railroad, and a loss of less than 10% of property
value for those properties nearest the line. Where the railroad was cut into a
ravine, essentially putting it out of sight, and reducing its noise, there was no
negative effect.
This study suffers from having few properties over 850 feet, making the edge of
'the impact somewhat doubtful. Based on our own review of landfill studies
' which found no significant imPact (Genereux, 1994), we would generally regard
this as a minor flaw.
In landfill studies, and in some studies of nuclear power plants, a failure to
correctly specify distance usually means there is a finding of "no effect." Since a
distance-specific effect was found in this case, the results for this railroad study
are at least somewhat realistic.
5. Rental Properties
Most studies have focused on the effect of different classes of land use on each
other. However, a recent study (Wang, 1991) looked at the effect of two types of
residential property: single family owned and single family rental properties.
Wang separated homes into those with no adjacent rental properties, and those
with 1-5 rental properties. He found that for each nearby rental house, the
owner-occupied house lost 0.7% of its value--and for each rental house in the
next ring of homes (8 in all), the house lost an additional 0.2%. An owner-
occupied house surrounded by 13 rental houses would thus lose about 5% of
its value. Moreover, as between neighborhoods, an increases of 1% of rental
properties lowers-prices by 0.6%.
118
Itansen: Compost Yard Property Value Study 7.17.97 Page 7
Land Uses Which Have Shown No Property Value Effect
6. prisons and Workhouses.
Since the proposed Ramsey County Yard Waste facility is to be located next to
the Ramsey County Workhouse, a Iow to medium security detention facility, it is
helpful to know if there is an already existing effect of the workhouse.
A very large number of studies have been done on this subject, reflecting the
increase in prisons which have been built around the country in the past two
decades. These studies were summarized by Katherine Carlson (1990) and
Larry Fehr (1995).
Three studies done in Wisconsin have done actual hedonic models of
properties near prisons. In the cases of both Waupun and AIIouez, Wisconsin,
proximity to the prison was actually slightly positive. A similar result was found
in a comparative study of the Oshkosh Correctional Facility, where test and
control neighborhoods were studied.
The studies are quite unanimous in their finding that no significant property
value changes have occurred. These were variously based on realtor surveys,
assessed values, and sale prices of homes both before and after construction of
prisons.
7. Group Homes for the Handicapped.
,Switching from types of places to types of people, several researchers have
, examined the effect of group homes for handicapped or mentally disabled
persons or Iow income housing projects on nearby residential property values.
Interest in these studies followed the pattern of deinstitutionalization that has
occurred in the past two decades.
Generally, none of them has found any significant negative or positive effect,
whether the study was done in Minnesota, New York, Toronto, or Lansing,
Michigan. (Farber, 1986). Farber found that putting a group home for
handicapped persons in a poor neighborhood in Oakland was actually
associated with increased property values of nearby homes.
Land Uses Which Have Shown Positive Property Value Effects
8. Parks and Schools
In the study of landfill sites for Anoka County (1990), Genereux found that
proximity to the Bunker Hills Regional Park was positively correlated to property
value price, as was proximity to the local elementary school. These results
were quite large: up to $10,000 for the park and $8,000 for the school.
These results rrii~ror previous research by Weicher et al (1973) and Correll et al
(1978) on the positive effects of neighborhood parks and greenbelts.
-.
Hansen: Compost Yard Property Value Study 7.17.97 Page $
9. Public Housinc~
Similarly, William Rabiega (1984) found that dispersed public housing projects
near Portland, Oregon, had a positive effect on single family housing. He
reasoned that the presence of additional homes strengthened the infrastructure,
especially public transportation, in the areas near the homes.
IV. Ratings of the Acceptability of Land Uses.
Many investigators have used survey data to ascertain whether certain land
uses are acceptable to nearby residents, either before or after the land use
occurred.
Carlson (1990) notes that people who have negative attitudes towards prisons
before they are built will continue to see the dark side afterwards, although
negative perceptions tend to fade. This is especially true of prisons built in
small communities, where the social consequences of prisoner families moving
to the community or of released felons in the community have led to problems
and the perception of problems.
Gordon (1990) found that familiarity breeds comfort. Respondents were given
the following list of facilities and asked to rank them as to acceptabitity:
1. Private mental hospital
2. Alcohol/drug treatment center
3. Sewage treatment plant
4. Library
5. Juvenile halfway home
6. General hospital
7. Elementary school
8. Shopping center
9. Nursing home
10. Fire station
This study focused on two neighborhoods: One which hosted a private mental
hospital, one which hosted a fire station. The one hosting a private mental
hospital ranked it as the most desirable facility. The one hosting a fire station
ranked the fire station as the most desirable.
In Carver County, Minnesota, in 1984, six possible landfill sites were identified:
four for MSW, one for sludge ash, and one for hazardous'waste. This created a
need for a county-wide waste plan to deal with this new challenge. The County
Board commissioned a study (Genereux, 1984), of county residents. In one
question, they were asked if they would "approve" of an idea to put a waste-to-
energy plant in a nearby industrial park. Sixty-five percent approved, and an
additional 18% had no opinion.
120
Hansen: Compost Yard Property Value Study
7.17.97 Page 9
In the same survey, landfills were generally seen as out-of-date planning
options. The public regarded them as essentially unsafe, and were not inclined
to accept them as a price for modern living. In terms of impact, a compost yard
should be significantly less than either a landfill or a waste-to-energy plant. It
may not be loved; but it suffer less disapproval when compared with the others.
This finding reinforces the discussion by informed sources above. The reports
by Archdeacon, Van Dorst, and Hardy may well be typical--facilities that are well
run, or are made to run well, should not cause significant long term problems for
their neighbors.
V. Conclusions
Based on this evidence, it seems that compost yards might occupy a spot on the
land use attractiveness list between a manufacturing plant or a railroad and a
well-maintained group home. In that case, the worst case scenario would be
that any effects would be limited to a quarter-mile or so. It is unlikely that it
would engender the kind of wide-ranging impact associated with a power plant
or landfill.
However, only a well-designed hedonic model of existing or recent compost
yards can provide a truly reliable answer.
If a situation arises where a study of the impacts at the planned location is
necessary, effects should be estimated both before the site was announced and
at least a year after it is in place. In this way, any effects of the workhouse can
be estimated before any effect of the compost yard is estimated.
Four other technical issues will also be important.
a. Only sales prices should be used, not assessor values;
b. A sample size of 200 is minimal; optimum is 500;
c. The distance studied should be to at least 2.5 miles; and
d. Quality measures such as assessor scores of quality, or tree cover, or a
standardized aesthetic judgement, should be made.
Otherwise, good public relations and good management should facilitate the
acceptance of the yard over time. Good management should also reduce the
probability of any loss of property value, even in an isolated case.
121
Hansen: Compost Yard Property Value Study 7.17.97 Page 10
Personal Contacts
Archdeacon, Richard. Local Enforcement Agency, San Jose, for the State
Integrated Waste Management Board. 777 No. 1st Street, Room 700, San
Jose, CA 95112
Cotton, Matthew. Integrated Waste Management Consulting. San Francisco.
Hardy, Dave. California Biomass. (909) 875-6441. Owns and operates facility
in Southern California.
Krivit, Dan. Supercycle of St. Paul. 224-5081
Lainen, John. EKO Compost, Missoula Montana 1-406-721-1423.
Livincott, Richard. Vice President, Almaden Valley Homeowner's Association,
San Jose. 1-415-961-9000, Ext 227; 1-409-997-3942.
Roe, Rebecca. Compost Council. 1-703-739-2401
Stress, Michele. Department of Environmental Health, San Diego, CA.
338-2209
1-619-
Taylor, Rod. 4424 Collingville Road, Medina, CA 44256.
Van Dorst, Gary. City of Sacramento. 1-916-264-7561.
Young, Susan. City of Minneapolis Public Works 673-2433
Zaban, Mark. Hennepin County Solid Waste.
122
Hansen: Compost Yard Property Value Study
7.17.97 Page 11
Bibliography
Blomquist, Glenn. "The Effect of Electric Utility Power Plant Location on Area
Property Value." Land Economics. Vol. 50, No. 1 1974.
Boydell, Katherine, Anne-Maria Pierri and John Trainor. "The Effect of Locating
a Group Home for the Mentally III on Neighborhood Property Markets: A
Case Study Approach." Queen Street Mental Health Clinic. Toronto. 1986.
Burnell, James D. "Industrial Land Use, Externalities, and Residential
Location." Journal of Urban Studies. Vol 22: 399-408. 1985.
Carlson, Katherine A. "Prison Impacts: A Review of the Research." Peninsula
Praxis. Port Angeles, Washington. 1990.
Correll, Mark R., Jane H. Lillydahl and Larry D. Singell. "The Effects of
Greenbelts on Residential Property Values: Some Findings on the Political
Economy of Open Space." Land Economics. Vol 54, No. 2, May 1978.
Farber, Stephen. "Market Segmentation an the Effects on GrouP Homes for the
Handicapped on Residential Property Values." Urban Studies. Vol 23.
1986.
Fehr, Larry M. "Literature Review of Impacts to Communities in Siting
Correctional Facilities." Washington Council on Crime and Deliquency.
Seattle, Washington. 1995
.'Galster, George and Yolonda Williams. "Dwellings for the Severely Mentally
Disabled and Neighborhood Property Values: The Details Matter." Land
Economics. Vol 70, No. 4, November 1994.
Galster, George. "Nuclear Power Plants and Residential Property Viaues: A
Comment on Short-run vs Long-run Considerations." Journal of Regional
Science. Vol 26, No. 4, 1986.
Gamble, Hays B., Roger H. Downing, James S. Shortle, and Donald J. Epp.
"Effects of Solid Waste Disposal Sites on Community Development and
Residential Property Values." Institute for Research on Land and Water
Resources. Pennsylvania State University. 1982.
Gamble, Hays B., Roger H. Downing. "Effects of Nuclear Power Plants on
Residential Property Values." Journal of Regional Science. Vol 22, No. 4,
1982.
Genereux, John and Michele. "A County-wide Survey on Landfill Siting Issues."
Carver County Public Health. 1984.
i3enereux, John'and Michele. "Anoka. County Landfill Site Selection ElS:
123
Hansen: Compost Yard Property Value Study 7.17.97 Page 12
Technical Appendix on Property Values." St. Paul, Minnesota. 1990.
Gordon, Rena J and Leonard. "Neighborhood Responses to Stigmatized Urban
Facilities: A Private Mental Hospital and Other Facilities in Phoenix,
Arizona." Journal of Urban Affairs. Vol 12, No 4. 1990.
Grether, D. M. and P. Mieskowski. "The Effects of Nonresidential Land Uses on
the Prices of Adjacent Housing: Some Estimates of Proximity Effects.
Journal of Urban Economics. Vol 8: 1-15. 1980.
Ince, Martin. "The Impact of a Correctional Facility on the Surronunding
Community." American Planning Association. Chicago, Illinois. 1988
Li, Mingche M. and H. James Brown. "Micro-Neighborhood Exernalities and
Hedonic Housing Prices." Land Economics. Vol 56, No. 2. 1980.
Nelson, Arthur C. and John and Michele Genereux. "Price Effects of Landfills
on House Values." Land Economics. Vol. 68, No. 4. 1992.
Pick, Charlie. "Bouncing Back from a Public Nuisance Setback." BioCycle.
September, 1996.
Poon, Larry C. L. "Railway Exernalities and Residential Property Prices." Land
Economics. Vol 54, No. 2. May, 1978.
Rabiega, William A., Ta-Win Lin and Linda M. Robinson. "The Property Value
Impacts of Public Housing Projects in Low and Moderate Density Residential
Neighborhoods." Land Economics. Vol 60, No. 2. May, 1984.
Stanley, Craig E. "The impact of Prison Proximity on Property Values in Green
Bay and Waupun, Wisconsin." Bureau of Corrections, State of Wisconsin.
1978.
Wang, Ko, Terry V. Grissom, James R. Webb, and Lewis Spellman. "The Impact
of Rental Properties on the Value of Single Family Residences." The
Journal of Urban Economics. Vol 30. P. 152-166. 1991.
Weicher, John C. and Robert H. Zerbst. 1973. The externalities of
neighborhood parks: an empirical investigation. Land Economics, Vol 49:
Feb, 99-105.
124
APPENDIX 5
LETTER FROM RAMSEY COI/NTY SOIL AND WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT
125
Ramsey Soil and Water Conservation District
21)15 Rice Street
R,~scville, bin 55113
Fax fil 2/488-3478
Telcl)l.mc 612/488-1476
Jul), 17, 1997
Mr. Norm Schiferl
Ramsey County Department of Public Health
Division of Solid Waste
1670 Beam Ave., Suite B
Maplewood, MN 55109-1129
Dear Mr. Schiferl:
The Ramsey Soil and Water Conservation District (RSWCD) has reviewed the information you
provided about the.proposed compost site near the County Wor 'khouse in Maplexvood. Based on
this reviexv and review of the Ramsey County Geologic Atlas, the RSWCD has the following
comments.
Whether or not the proposed compost site will impact groundwater will largely depend on the
ab6ve ground management teclmiques implemented. The RSWCD understands that the
proposed compost site will consist of two compost pads (used for composting leaves) and a
stockpile area, and access road, all of which will have a hard surface. In addition, two ponds for
treating runoff will be constructed. Any runoff (direct or treated) should go into a wetland area
or seep into the ground. The RSWCD understands that a 1994 study by Terry Noonan indicated
the amount of leachate produced by a pile of yard waste is small. Based on this information, the
probability of the proposed compost pile impacting groundwater in this area may be low.
Based on our review of the information contained in the Ramsey County Geologic Atlas,'
vroundxvater flows toward the Mississippi River (southwest) in both the glacial unconsolidated
~eposits and bedrock. If groundwater flow is indeed toward the southwest, wells located on
Century Avenue in the vicinity of the proposed compost site would be upgradient. Under these
hydrogeologic conditions, the probability of the wells on Century Avenue being impacted by the
proposed compost site may be low.
The RSWCD is in the process of developing the Ramsey County Multi-Aquifer Grom~dwater
Flow Model. When the flow model is completed (approximately 6 months) we xvill have a very
powerful tool for predicting groundwater movement. Our level of confidence in accurately
predicting groundwater'rhoveme~t-at and near sites such as this proposed compost site will be
much higher.
An Equal Opportunity Employer
The RSWCD is pleased to assist you with this evaluation. Please call either Pete DuBois or Tom
Petersen if you additional questions.
Sincerely,
Peter D. DuBois
District Groundwater Specialist
Tom Petersen
District Manager
127
APPENDIX 6
LETTER FROM RAMSEY/WASHINGTON METRO WATERSHED DISTRICT
128
· arnsey-Washington Metro
July 21, 1997
1902 East County Road B
Maplewood, MN 55109
(612) 777-3665
fax (612) 777-63C, 7
e-mail: rwmwd@mtn.o:c_;
Norm Schiferl
Ramsey County Department of Public Health
Division of Solid Waste
1670 Beam Ave., Suite B
Maplewood, MN 55109-1129
Re: County Workhouse Yard Waste Composting Site.
Dear Norm:
The Watershed District staff have reviewed the proposed site and site plan for the
proposed Yard Waste Composting operation. The District would require a site grading
permit prior to the grading and site preparation.
We also reviewed the proposal for it's potential impact on surface waters in the area. The
site is in the upper reaches of the Battle Creek drainage area. The site drains to the
Ramsey County Open Space land between Upper and Lower Afton Roads. The proposed
treatment ponds to be provided as part of the new site are designed to provide adequate
treatment of site runoff prior to dischargi.ng into the Open Space wetland system. It is our
,opinion that the wetlands in this area will not be impacted by the location of the Yard
Waste Composting operation at this site.
If you require and additional information or have any questions regarding our review,
please feel free to call.
Sincerely,
Clifton J. Aich, i~lger,
Administrator'"
129
Attachment 10
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RESOLUTION
WHEREAS, Ramsey County department of Public Health, Division of Solid Waste, has requested
a conditional use permit to construct a compost on the county correctional facility property.
WHEREAS, this permit applies to the county-owned property north of Lower Afton Road,
between Century Avenue and McKnight Road. The legal description is:
IN SECTION 1, TOWNSHIP 28, RANGE 22, IN MAPLEWOOD, THE NORTHWEST
QUARTER OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER.
WHEREAS, the history of this conditional use permit is as follows:
On September 2, 1997, the planning commission recommended that the city council
approve this permit.
On September 22, 1997, the city council held a public hearing. The city staff published a
notice in the paper and sent notices to the surrounding property owners. The council gave
everyone at the hearing a chance to speak and present wdtten statements. The council
also considered reports and recommendations of the city staff and planning commission.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the city council approve the above-described
conditional use permit based on the building and site plans. The city approves this permit
because:
The use would be located, designed, maintained, constructed and operated to be in
conformity with the city's comprehensive plan and code of ordinances.
2. The use would not change the existing or planned character of the surrounding area.
3. The use would not depreciate property values.
The use would not involve any activity, process, materials, equipment or methods of
operation that would be dangerous, hazardous, detrimental, disturbing or cause a nuisance
to any person or property because of excessive noise, glare, smoke, dust, odor, fumes,
water or air pollution, drainage, water run-off, vibration, general unsightliness, electrical
interference or other nuisances.
5. The use would generate only minimal vehicular traffic on local streets and would not
create traffic congestion or unsafe access on existing or proposed streets.
The use would be served by adequate public facilities and services, including streets, police
and fire protection, drainage structures, water and sewer systems, schools and parks.
7. The use would not create excessive additional costs for public facilities or services.
8. The use would maximize the preservation of and incorporate the site's natural and scenic
features into the development design.
9. The use would cause minimal adverse environmental effects.
130
Approval is subject to the following conditions:
All construction shall follow the site plan approved by the city. The director of community
development may approve minor changes.
2. The proposed site work and use must be started within one year of council approval or the
permit shall become null and void. The council may extend this deadline for one year.
3. The site shall not be open to the public for delivery or pickup. It shall only be for the
composting of yard waste materials brought in by contractors from other Ramsey County
yard waste sites.
The site may be open and operational between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m.
The site shall accept only the following materials: garden waste, weeds, prunings of soft-
bodied plants, leaves along with materials like pine cones, fruit and small twigs that people
pick up with their yard waste. Ramsey County shall monitor and remove any unacceptable
materials brought to the site.
6. The City prohibits the dumping or storing of the following materials: brush, branches, grass,
garbage or refuse.
7. The County shall monitor and remove unapproved items (including garbage) and debris
from the site.
8. The City Council shall review this permit in June 1998.
9. The County shall manage the compost site to control odors. Management procedures shall
include the following:
Procure, maintain and use wind direction and speed monitoring equipment. The County
shall provide this equipment so it is accessible to the City staff.
Record wind speed and direction during pile tuming.
Turn the piles of materials only when the wind is blowing at least five miles per hour.
The contractor or operator shall only turn the piles between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and
5:00 p.m. Monday through Friday.
d. Keep a written record of:
10.
(1) The times of pile turning and the haul-out of materials
(2) Compost pile temperatures
(3) A description of the compost quality
(4) The initial date and aging of the compost piles
The Community Development Department shall handle odor complaints dudng regular
business hours and the police department shall handle odor complaints after regular hours.
The inspector shall verify and measure whether there is an odor that violates the odor
standards of this permit. To determine if there is a violation of this permit, the inspector
131
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
shall follow the procedures in Attachment A of this permit. A violation of this permit shall
occur when the inspector has recorded ten sniffings of the ambient air over a period of thirty
minutes with a geometric average OIRS of (a) 3.0 or greater if the property at which the
testing is being conducted contains a permanent residence or (b) 4.0 or greater if the
property at which the testing is being conducted does not contain a permanent residence.
(See Attachment B of this permit for a description of the odor scale.) If there is a violation,
the inspector shall investigate to establish the source of the odor. The City shall notify the
County of the violation. The County shall advise the City of the reason for the problem and
correct it to meet the standards of this permit. The County or site operator shall cooperate
with the City or its representative regarding such investigations.
The County shall deposit with the City an escrow deposit of $2,000 for 1998. After that, on
or before January 1 of each year, the County shall deposit with the City an escrow deposit of
an amount to bring the balance up to $2,000. The City shall use this deposit to:
Pay for City staff time or the costs to hire a third party to verify and measure odors,
following complaints received by the City
b. Train City staff persons and others for wind and odor monitoring
Co
Pay for an odor consultant to help in preparing this permit or future revisions to this
permit.
If needed, the County shall pay for any consulting costs above the escrow deposit that the
City needs to reevaluate this permit.
The site operator shall use water or other means to suppress dust and odors from the
compost piles, as necessary.
The County is requested by the City to continue to look for an alternate yard waste site in
,the northeast part of the County that would be used to reduce the traffic at the Beam
Avenue site.
The yard waste composting site on County property west of the Workhouse, north of Lower
Alton Road may be up to 6 acres in size, and shall not be open for residents to drop off or
pick up materials. The county and the contractors shall follow the county's operation plan
for the site, as may be amended by the city council.
The County shall make improvements to the site, including: paving the entrance road
installing a gate, installing the berming and plantings for screening and installing traffic
control signs before using the compost site.
The Maplewood City Council approved this resolution on
,1997.
132
Attachment A to the Lower Afton Road Compost Site Conditional Use Permit
Performance standards for odorous emissions from the compost site
Ao
Definitions
The following definitions shall apply to this conditional use permit.
"Ambient air" shall mean that portion of the atmosphere external to buildings upon the
property owned by the complainant.
"Perceived (sensory) odor intensity" shall mean the intensity of an odor sensation which is
independent of the knowledge of the odorant concentration.
"Odor Intensity Referencing Scale (OIRS)" shall mean a series of concentration of butanol
odorant in water, made to specific reference dilutions, which serve as the reference scale.
The OIRS is used to establish which concentration (of butanol in water) exhibits an odor
intensity matching that of the ambient air. Referenced Document: ASTM E 544-75, 88,
Standard Practice for Referencing Suprathreshold Odor Intensity.
"Odor Source" shall mean the compost site.
"Inspector" shall mean the individuals who compare the odor intensity of the ambient air to
the reference scale. The inspectors for this permit shall be the City employees or their
representatives that are trained in accordance with ASTM STP (Special Technical
Publications) 758, Guidelines for the Selection and Training of Sensory Panel Members.
B. Odor Testing
This odor testing practice is designed to reference the odor intensity of the ambient air
on an OIRS. This is done by a comparison of the odor intensity of the ambient air to the
OIRS.
The odor of the ambient air is matched (ignoring differences in odor quality) against the
OIRS by trained inspectors. The inspector reports that point, or in between points, on
the reference scale which, in his or her opinion, matches the odor intensity of the
ambient air.
The procedure followed for this testing shall be in accordance with Procedure B--
Static-Scale Method of the Referenced Document ASTM E 544 except for the following
adaptations for field odor evaluation.
3.1 The geomet'dc progression scale shall have a ratio of 3.
3.2 The containers holding the reference concentrations of butanol in water shall have
screw cap closures.
3.3 The inspectors may memodze the OIRS.
133
3.4 The inspectors may use a charcoal filter breathing mask to avoid olfactory
adaption (fatigue) in the ambient air.
3.5 The inspectors shall smell the ambient air and match the ambient air intensity to
the reference scale.
3.6
3.7
The inspectors shall rest (breathe charcoal filtered air) for a period of three
minutes in between sniffings of the ambient air.
The odorous sampling shall be performed upon the complainant's property. The
inspector shall not be accompanied by the complainant and the results shall not
be released until a written report has been filed. The inspector shall not
commence or conduct the odorous sampling if the complainant is present.
3.8
The inspector shall also sample the ambient air immediately upwind from the
compost site to determine the presence and level of any odors entering the site
from other sources. These records and observations shall be a part of the written
report.
The OIRS shall have the categories of Numbers and Descriptions listed in Attachment
B.
A violation of the conditional use permit shall occur when the inspectors have recorded
ten (10) sniffings of the ambient air over a period of 30 minutes with a geometric
average OIRS value of (a) 3.0 or greater if there is a permanent residence upon the
property, or (b) 4.0 or greater if the property does not contain a permanent residence.
134
Attachment B to the Lower Alton Road Compost Site Conditional Use Permit
Odor Intensity Referencing Scale Categories
No. Cate,qory
.N-Butanol (PPM)
in air/in water
O No Odor
1 Very Faint
2 Faint
3 Distinct, Noticeable
4 Strong
5 Very Strong
25/250
75/750
225/2250
675/6750
2025/20250
135