2015.04.21 PC Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

 January 16, 2015: the applicant submitted information claiming federal preemption under the Interstate Commerce Commission Termination Act of 1995 for the expansion property, halting Planning Commission consideration of the land use requests for the proposed 17 acre expansion. FEDERAL PREEMPTION PER INTERSTATE COMMERCE COMMISSION TERMINATION ACT OF 1995 Since January, staff, the applicant, and our respective attorneys have met several times to attempt to resolve the federal preemption claim the applicant has made regarding their 17 acre expansion property. A letter drafted by James D. Helenhouse of the law firm Fletcher & Sippel LLC, dated January 16, 2015 (attached), claims Murlowski’s expansion property is exempted from land use controls by federal preemptions that may fully and/or partially apply to it under the Interstate Commerce Commission Termination Act of 1995. Simply put, railroad property is exempted from complying with underlying zoning and land use processes that would apply absent the railroad. City staff felt this claim would have significant impacts to the property in that if there are no zoning rules, an infinite number of land uses could be added to the property, so long as commodities were delivered either to or from the site via rail. Further complicating the matter is the applicant’s desire to construct a 1000’ rail siding. Following the applicant’s claim of federal preemption, staff took the position that an expansion of the applicant’s current aggregate crushing/recycling operation would not be supported. This position was based on the applicant’s requested expansion of the aggregate crushing/recycling operation, coupled with an infinite number of other land uses under the federal preemption, would amount to a level of land use too intensive for the property given its underlying I-1, Light Industrial zoning, its proximity to Rush Lake (a Natural Environment lake), and its proximity to Long Lake Regional Park (the largest regional park in Ramsey County). Being the applicant is primarily interested in expanding their aggregate crushing and recycling operation, and not rights subject to possible federal preemption, the applicant and staff agreed to enter into a Land Use Agreement acknowledging the applicant will undergo the land use process and waive any right to assert federal preemption under the Interstate Commerce Commission Termination Act or any similar laws as a basis for undertaking uses that do not comply the underlying zoning. The applicant will be expected to sign this agreement before City Council consideration of these land use requests. Failure of the applicant to sign the agreement in advance of City Council consideration sends an alarming message of un-cooperation. MOVING FORWARD Since January, the following actionable items have occurred in preparation for Planning Commission and City Council consideration:  A Land Use Agreement resolving the federal preemption issue has been drafted. Both the applicant and City would sign the agreement and it would be recorded