2015.02.17 PC Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Community Assets & Development Department MEMORANDUM DATE: February 11, 2015 TO: Planning Commission FROM: Janice Gundlach, Asst. Director of Community Assets & Development/Planning Director SUBJECT: Planning Agenda Item 6 (A) Staff and the applicant are once again requesting the Belair Excavating requests are tabled to the March 17, 2015 Planning Commission meeting. Public hearing notices were mailed to property owners on February 5th so there is a possibility interested parties could attend the hearing. Staff recommends taking public testimony from individuals who do not wish to return in Mach, then making a motion to table the request to the March 17th Planning Commission meeting. Staff does not intend to provide a presentation nor would staff advise discussion beyond taking public testimony. The applicant has provided written request to extend their review period to March 31, 2015. The main areas of concern include: 1. The applicant’s desire to construct a 1000’ rail siding on their expansion property, and 2. The applicant’s desire to commercially sell salt (which could be delivered to the site via rail). On January 16, 2015 the applicant submitted a letter from an attorney claiming the city cannot regulate rail operations, including the delivery of any commodity to Belair’s expansion property, because “the Interstate Commerce Commission Termination Act preempts almost all local attempts to regulate rail operation, including those on a shipper’s track”. The applicant, City staff, and our respective attorneys met on Monday, February 9th to discuss the applicant’s claim their expansion property falls under federal preemption that prohibits the City from restricting certain land uses related to rail operations. The applicant’s attorney is claiming the preemption is fairly broad and covers Belair’s 17 acre expansion property beyond the boundaries of the railroad’s easement. The City Attorney doesn’t necessarily believe the preemption to be this broad but, there are no cases in the 8th circuit court that give clarity to this issue and other circuit courts have differed in their interpretation of the scope of preemption. The Surface Transportation Board has also weighed in on the issue of preemption, further complicating matters. However, because the applicant has raised this preemption claim the City must seriously consider its impact on Belair’s 17 acre expansion property.