Memorandum

City of Lawrence

PLANNING DEPARTMNET

TO:	David L. Corliss
FROM:	Planning Staff
DATE:	April 23, 2015
RE:	SUP-15-00019.

Background

This memo is provided in response to a communication received from the Brook Creek Neighborhood Association.  A copy of the letter is attached to this memo.

Neighborhood comment	Staff response
1. Existing gravel surface in all exterior processing areas will simply let pollution drain through it into the soil as was the case at 12& Haskell. All exterior processing area pavement should be concrete. Past events let us to expect pollution will be a problem.	Exterior Storage is a permitted activity (use) in the IG District.  Understands that the operator employs best management practices related to handling vehicles – draining fluids, tire storage, etc. and so pollution should not be an issue. Exterior storage areas may be located on compacted gravel surfaces in the IG district.
	Conclusion: compacted gravel is an acceptable surface for exterior storage with proper pollution controls in place.
2. Advantage Metals Recycling at 1545 N. 3^rd Street was required to pave their entire processing area (not entire site) with concrete. Standards should be consistently applied.	Advantage Metals, as part of their business model, requested a paved processing area and indoor building. This was not a required element per the Code.
	Conclusion: Advantage Metals was no required to provide a paved site.
3. The site plan attached to this SUP says in the General Notes (#5) proposed concrete pavement is to be 6” reinforced concrete on a 4” granular base. This note applies only to eleven parking stalls. The applicant should be required to pave all exterior processing areas with concrete. Until complete, his occupancy permit should be placed on hold.	The design of this project was to separate customer parking area and the storage/processing area and limit passenger vehicle access to the interior of the site. Pavement for the parking area outside of the fenced area provides an accessible route to the building and a designated parking area for customers.
	Conclusion: This site is compliant with the design intent for this site.  Paving the processing areas is not necessary for this applicant’s operational requirements.
4. The majority of the property is in the Regulatory Floodplain according to the soon to be released FEMA DFIRM flood maps. The applicant should be required to comply with a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) document-plan, as part of a federal program to reduce chemical runoff from impermeable surfaces.	Comment: Above comment # 1 from neighborhood is that gravel surface will “simply let pollution drain though it into the soil” while comment #4 allegation is focused on runoff.
	Staff following up with KDHE and will provide a response as soon as one is available. There are no active KDHE violations that staff has been able to determine for the current location.
5. Advantage Metals Recycling was required to conduct all recycling operations (not salvage) in an entirely enclosed building. The applicant should be required to conduct all recycling operation sin entirely enclosed buildings, not in “as is” pole barns at(s) stated in staff report.	Advantage Metals, as part of their business model, requested an enclosed building for operations. This was not a required element per the Code.
	The advantage metal’s site is located along a major corridor. Staff viewed the building as appropriate and aiding in screening operations along the N. 3^rd Street Corridor.
	11^th & Haskell Site is entirely surrounded by rail road right of way and has been a historically industrially used property.
	Conclusion: There is no compliance issue.
6. The site plan attached to the SUP says in General Notes (#17) that the owner is responsible for maintaining the site, especially the perimeter fencing, in a litter-free manner. This was in the original 2012 SUP, but he has not complied.	As part of the review of this application or any SUP, staff consults with the Code Enforcement Division to determine if there is any known violation or complaint on this property. Since operation the City has not received a complaint for operation under the current SUP.
	Upon receiving the Brook Creek Neighborhood letter, staff requested that Code Enforcement contact the owner for a specific site visit to evaluate the fence line to determine compliance with this condition.
	Conclusion: Staff met with the applicant on April 15^th and April 20^th. Site photos are attached. Staff found the applicant to be compliant with existing conditions of approval.
7. A one year time limit for review and renewal should be placed on this SUP, given the tendency for the applicant to skirt around requirements.	An SUP may be revoked by the City Commission at any time per section 20-1306 (l).
	Conclusion: This site has operated since 2013 without incident. The addition of a condition to limit the operation for one year and require a new approval is unnecessary in staff’s opinion. The applicant has been open and direct with City Staff through the initial approval process and during the scope of the review of the current SUP. Staff has not found the applicant to be evasive, but to be very forthright in responding to questions regarding operations of the site and future plans.  This is noted in the staff report that while the current business focuses on metals other recyclable materials may be identified in the future and become a part of this current business operation. The design of the exterior area was revised to accommodate future changes in recycling trends.
8. Assertions about operations from 2005 to 2013 at former location.	Conclusion: These assertions are not germane to the current application.
9. Residents were denied peaceful enjoyment of their homes because of heavy truck, traffic, trash and mud on streets, and noise.	This business has been relocated away from residential uses and is completely surrounded by industrial zoning and uses.
	Conclusion: These assertions are not germane to the current application.
10. Failure to drain automotive fluids and fires on site causing noxious smoke.	Following KDHE notices of violation the applicant changed their operating practices. These practices have been implemented on the new site. This site has operated in the new location without incident and with no known violations per KDHE.
11. The operation on the current site deserves careful scrutiny and monitoring due to the failure of the operator to follow basic safety and environmental and procedures, repeatedly, at the former location. To assure that he does not revert to illegal and environmentally damaging methods, the applicant should be required to operate by more stringent protocols than currently written in the proposed SUP-15-00019.	SUP has existing reasonable protections. No comment from neighborhood during review process.