My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
2015.04.21 PC Minutes
NewBrighton
>
Commissions
>
Planning
>
Planning Commission Minutes
>
2015
>
2015.04.21 PC Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/26/2015 1:04:28 PM
Creation date
5/26/2015 1:02:56 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
12
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
• In August and September 2014: The applicant started to negotiate with Ramsey County Parks to use <br />their parcel for ponding so that MPI could maximize their expansion. This negotiation fell apart. <br />• September 16, 2014: The City Council approved a city- initiated Rezoning and Comprehensive Plan <br />amendment assigning certain zoning and guide plan designations to the expansion property and other <br />un -zoned property in the area. <br />• In November & December 2014: the applicant drafted an amended Site Plan and Grading & Drainage <br />Plan for the expansion, reducing the overall land area to 17 acres, and sought approval of that plan from <br />the Rice Creek Watershed District. The land use approvals were scheduled for Planning Commission <br />consideration on January 20, 2015. <br />• January 16, 2015: the applicant submitted information claiming federal preemption under the Interstate <br />Commerce Commission Termination Act of 1995 for the expansion property, halting Planning <br />Commission consideration of the land use requests for the proposed 17 acre expansion. <br />Planning Director Gundlach indicated since January, staff, the applicant, and our respective attorneys have met <br />several times to attempt to resolve the federal preemption claim the applicant has made regarding their 17 acre <br />expansion property. A letter drafted by James D. Helenhouse of the law firm Fletcher & Sippel LLC, dated <br />January 16, 2015 (attached), claims Murlowski's expansion property is exempted from land use controls by <br />federal preemptions that may fully and /or partially apply to it under the Interstate Commerce Commission <br />Termination Act of 1995. Simply put, railroad property is exempted from complying with underlying zoning <br />and land use processes that would apply absent the railroad. City staff felt this claim would have significant <br />impacts to the property in that if there are no zoning rules, an infinite number of land uses could be added to the <br />property, so long as commodities were delivered either to or from the site via rail. Further complicating the <br />matter is the applicant's desire to construct a 1000' rail siding. <br />Planning Director Gundlach stated following the applicant's claim of federal preemption, staff took the position <br />that an expansion of the applicant's current aggregate crushing /recycling operation would not be supported. <br />This position was based on the applicant's requested expansion of the aggregate crushing /recycling operation, <br />coupled with an infinite number of other land uses under the federal preemption, would amount to a level of <br />land use too intensive for the property given its underlying I -1, Light Industrial zoning, its proximity to Rush <br />Lake (a Natural Environment lake), and its proximity to Long Lake Regional Park (the largest regional park in <br />Ramsey County). Being the applicant is primarily interested in expanding their aggregate crushing and <br />recycling operation, and not rights subject to possible federal preemption, the applicant and staff agreed to enter <br />into a Land Use Agreement acknowledging the applicant will undergo the land use process and waive any right <br />to assert federal preemption under the Interstate Commerce Commission Termination Act or any similar laws as <br />a basis for undertaking uses that do not comply the underlying zoning. The applicant will be expected to sign <br />this agreement before City Council consideration of these land use requests. Failure of the applicant to sign the <br />agreement in advance of City Council consideration sends an alarming message of un- cooperation. <br />Planning Director Gundlach explained that since January, the following actionable items have occurred in <br />preparation for Planning Commission and City Council consideration: <br />• A Land Use Agreement resolving the federal preemption issue has been drafted. Both the applicant and <br />City would sign the agreement and it would be recorded against the title of the property. It would apply <br />to MPI's total 37 acres. This agreement is attached for review. <br />• Amendments have been drafted to the Environmental Constraint Overlay Area (ECOA) Ordinance, <br />which would provide the applicant the legislative means to seek approval of the 17 acre expansion of the <br />aggregate crushing /recycling and associated equipment storage use. The ordinance also includes <br />14 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.