Agenda - Council - 01/12/1993 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

CASE STATUS OF COMPLIANCE WITH TERMS OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT; CASE OF DANNY'S ALUMINUM PROCESSING, INC. By: Zoning Administrator Sylvia Frolik Background: Is'On November 24, 1992, ! was instructed by City Council to initiate the action nece~ssarv for City Council to consider revocation of the cc]ndit~onal use permit issued to Danny s Aluminum Processing, Inc. According to City Code, the permit holder is to be provided notice of violations and given 30 days to submit a written response to the notice and correct the violations prior to cheduling any public hearing. Observations: On December 1, 1992, I inspected Danny's Aluminum Processing, Inc. On December 3, 1992, I sent a written notice of the violations found on December 1 to Mr. Dan Karst and gave him until January 5, 1993 to make the corrections. I also sought the assistance of Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) and Anoka County Environmental Services to inspect the facility for compliance with those terms that I felt I was not qualified to address. On December 11, 1992, Fereshteh Rahimzadeh of MPCA inspected Danny's Aluminum Processing facility. Her verbal comments to me were that she observed the facility for a couple of hours prior to approaching Mr. Karst for an on-site inspection and that she had no violations to report. On December 21, 1992, Duwayne Konewko of Anoka County Environmental Services inspected Danny's Aluminum Processing, Inc. In summary, Mr. Konewko was impressed with the extent to which Danny's Aluminum Processing is in compliance with State and County environmental regulations. He also provided me with a copy of OSHA's inspection report dated October 28, 1992, The report indicates that there were some violations that were classified as non-serious that have' been corrected. The employees were also monitored for exposure to air and noise pollutants; .there were no violations. On December 30, 1992, at the request of Mr. Karst, I did a follow up inspection of the aluminum ~ processing operation. Again I documented my findings and a substantial amount of effort had .~.~-put forth my Mr. Karst to get into compliance with his conditional use permit. . . [ On January 6, 1993, I inspected Danny s Alumi,num Processing, Inc. as a finality to the 30 day k.~ime_ff~m,.e given to co~¢~t_gb__e._.yip~la_tio~~as_~in compI~ith his~on~us~ ~perm~!t.~ .W/th~'~-kB Lots 2, 3 an~]-21:, which are not subject to the conditional use permit, all 5rises had been removed, and most of the other debr/s had been removed or was in the process of being removed, These lots are now being used to store the building materials for Mr. Karst*s proposed building and off-street parking of sern/-rrailers. The following items are enclosed: a) b) c) Conditional Use Permit issued to Danny's Aluminum Processing, Inc. Inspection report dated December 1, 1992 by Sylvia Frolik Letter from Sylvia Frolik to Dan Karst dated December 3, 1992.