99-524V � �4,.�._.�,�. ��- a� ����,�
Council File # ��'S�
�������� � `l�� RESOLU ON �J �eenSheet# �o�b��
�
ITY OF SAINT PAUL, NIINNESOTA
� �, / �/
Presented By
I'.Z`-� -�flI1L7
Committee: Date
2 WFIEREAS, JLT Group, in Zoning File No. 99-038, applied on Februaiy 24, 1999 for a
3 site plan review pursuant to the provisions of Saint Paul Legislative Code § 62.108 in order to
4 establish a truck facility on the west side of Fairview Avenue, one-half block south of Minnehaha
5 Avenue, and legally described as Section 33, Township 29, Range 23, except avenues the North
6 561 33/100 ft of nortYteast 1/4 of northwest 1/4 of Section 33, Township 29, Range 23; and
7
8 WHEREAS, JLT Group and the Hamline Midway Coalition requested the Saint Paul
9 Planning Commission to hold a public hearing on the proposed site plan; and
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
WFIEREAS, the Saint Paul Pluuiiug Commission conducted a public hearing on the site
plan application on March 26, 1998 and referred the matter to the Commissions Neighborhood
Plamiing Committee; and
WHEREAS, the Neighborhood Planning Committee met and discussed the site plan on
March 13, 1999 and March 20, 1499 and recommended approval of the site plan with conditions;
and
WHEREAS, on Apri123, 1999, the Saint Paul Planing Commission, having received the
recommendation submitted by its Neighborhood Planning Committee, made the following
findings as set forth in its resolution number 99-27:
Dawes Trucking The truck transfer facility would be built by JLT and operated by
Dawes Trucking. Dawes would bring a variety of goods to the site from local businesses
using smaller city trucks. The goods would then be consolidated inside the building and
loaded onto semi-trailers and shipped out of state. Dawes currently operates out of a
building located in Roseviile. However, this building is too small and Dawes wants to
move to get more room
2. Proposed operation John McDaniels, the owner of Dawes Trucking, described the
proposed opexation to staff, including the hours of operation and the number of trucks:
Hours of operation
- The facility would be open Monday through Friday. It would normally be
closed on weekends although occasionaliy there would be an individual
huck on weekends.
Page 1 of 9
1 G S S Zt�
2 -
During the week the facility would open at 7AM. Tuesdays and Fridays
3 aze the busiest days and the facility would normally stay open until
4 midnight on those nights. On Monday, Wednesday and Thursday the
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
facility would close at 8 or 9 P.M..
Peak hours are late afternoon (3 to 6 P.M.)
Number and types of trucks
— There would be appro�mately 35 semi-trailer trucks a week taking freight
out and another 10 semi-trailer trucks bring freight in. (On Tuesday and
Friday when they aze busier, there would be 10 semi-trailer hucks a day.
On Monday, Wednesday and Thursday there would be fewer semi-trailer
trucks.
There would be 6 to 8 smaller local hucks a day Monday thru Friday.
These trucks would leave in the morning, pick up ar deliver goods locally,
and return in the afternoon.
The large trailers typically take 3 or 4 hours to load. However, a trailer
may site at the dock for a day or two until it is picked up. The truck
engines would be turned off and would not run while the hucks are
parked. Elechical hook-ups for engine heaters would be provided in the
winter. If trailers will be parked for more than a few hours, the tractor is
unhooked and leaues the site.
Some of the semi-trailers would have refrigerator units. However, Dawes
would not be handling perishable good such as produce and so trucks with
refrigerator units would not run them while they were at the site.
There would not be any fueling stations or maintenance shops on site.
3. Existing operation Staff visited Dawes current locafion in Roseville two times and
observed the following:
— On Thursday, March 11 at 4:00 PM there were 10 trailers pazked at dock doors
and additional trailers parked on the site away from the building. (These trailers
did not have any engines running.) There was one truck backing up to a dock and
in the next 15 minutes two more hucks arrived on site. (These trucks had their
engines rum�ing.)
— On Monday, March 25 at 8:00 the business was closed. There were
approximately 10 trailers parked at dock doors and other trailers parked on the site
away from the building. One parked truck was running and had its lights on.
4. The site plan The plan shows a 27,740 square foot building. It would be 294' long on
the side facing Fairview and 93' deep. It would be 28'-5" ta11. The building would have a
small office on the south end but most of the building would be for storing and handling
goods. The building would have 21 overhead doors for large trucks on the west side
(facing away from Fanview) and 5 doors for smaller, local trucks on the north side (these
would be visible from the street). Access would be provided using two existing
driveways on Fairview. The site also has access from an existing driveway on Prior.
Page 2 of 9
a��Z�
2 5. Required findings Section 62.108(c) of the Zoning Code says that in "order to
3 approve the site plan, the plauuing commission shall consider and fmd that the site plan is
4 consistent with" the following:
5
6 (a) 7'he ciiy's adopted comprehensive plan and development or project plans for sub-
7 areas of the ciry.
9 The 1980 Ciry Wide Land Use Plan that was in effect when ttus project was
10 submitted to the City for site plan review says:
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
�)
The City should Encourage conditions wiuch allow the mixing of
appropriate light indushy with housing and cozzuuercial activities.
In cases of incompatible land use, the City will use the techniques lasted
above wherever possible to create or nnprove exis6ng buffers between
land uses. [The techniques referred to include landscaping, bernung or
fencing perimeters and mainta.ining building exteriors to complement
adjacent land uses.)
The City will ensure through it site plan review requirements that all new
development provides adequate buffering as part of its design.
The 1980 District 11 Plan which is currently in effect lists the following goals:
— Maintain the present balance beriveen residential and commercial and
industrial use.
— Develop buffers to separate residential areas from commercial and
industrial areas.
— Confine through traffic to relatively few streets, treat others streets as
local, resident serving streets.
— When developing majar through streets, minnnize detriment to bordering
land uses.
— Fairview between Minnehaha and Pierce Butler should be de-emphasized
as a through street and access form Fairview to Pierce Butler closed. (This
pro}ect is south of the area referred to in this recommendation.)
The site plan is not consistent with this finding but can be modified so that it is
consistent:
The existing driveways on Fairview must be closed to ensure that trucks
use Prior Avenue to enter the site.
Adequate visual and sound buffers must be provided.
Applfcable ordinances ofthe City ofSaint Paul.
Although trucking facilities are a pernutted use in an I-1 zoning district, the site
plan is not consistent with this finding. However, it can be modified so that it is
consistent:
Page 3 of 9
1 �� ��-f
2 — The building setback on Fauview does not meet the min;mum required
3 setback and therefore must be increased from 6' at least 7'-5".
4 — The site plan shows two driveways to Fairview Avenue. Fauview is not a
5 truck route. The site has access to Prior Avenue, which is a designated
6 truck route. Therefore, the e�sting driveways on Fairview must be closed
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
to ensure that trucks use Prior Avenue.
(c)
— It is likely that without any noise mirigation, noise from trucks will exceed
the maximum levels permitted by the Saint Paul legislarive code.
Therefore, a noise study must be conducted to deternune whether
additional noise mitigation is needed to ensure that the facility will comply
with the noise ordinance and help determine the design and location of any
noise mitigation tUat is needed.
Preservation of unique geologic, geographic or historically sigrzificant
characteristics of the city and environmentally sensitive areas.
The site plan is consistent with this finding. The site is a paved pazking lot on
industrial property and the surrounding azea is a residential neighborhood.
(d) Protection of adjacent and neighboring properties through reasonable provision
for such matters as surface water drainage, sound and sight buffers, preservation
of views, Zight and air, and those aspects of design which may have substantial
effects on neighboring Zand uses.
The site plan is not consistent with this finding but can be modified so that it is
consistent:
The residents in the area have complained in the past about truck traffic on
Fairview. The site plan calls for using the existing driveways on Fairview.
This would increase the amount of truck traffic on Fairview. The
driveways on Fairview should be closed so that all trucks must use Prior
Avenue. There is enough room to the south of the exisring main building
for trucks to get from Prior to the new building and trucks should be
required to use this to minunize noise to the surrounding residential
neighborhood.
Noise from hucks on the site would have a substanfial effect on
neighboring residentialland uses on Fairview and Minnehaha. A noise
study by an acoustical engineer should be required to determine if noise
barriers are needed and if they aze, how big they need to be and where they
should go. JLT is talking about conshucting another building north of the
truck transfer facility and this could act as a noise barrier if it was large
enough and it was for a use that did not generate significant additional
noise.
(e)
The arrangement of buildings, uses and facilities of the proposed development in
order to assure abutting property and/or its occupants will not be unreasonably
affected.
Page 4 of 9
�� s
2
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
The site plan is not consistent with tlus fmding but can be modified so that it is
consistent:
— Traffic on Fairview Avenue is already heavy. Permitting the proposed
truck facility to use driveways on Fairview would increase the amount of
traffic and would unreasonably affect the residential neighborhood across
the street. Therefore, the e�sisting driveways on Fairview should be closed
so that trucks use Prior Avenue.
�fl
— The building is arranged so that most of the loading docks aze on the west
side of the building and the building will block most of the noise from
these docks from residents on Fairview. However, residents on
Minnehaha will be hear noise from these docks unless noise barriers aze
built. The building also has five docks on the north end of the building
close to Fairview and noise barriers are needed for these docks too.
Creation of energy-conserving design through landscaping and Zocation,
orientation and elevation ofstructures.
The site plan meets current standazds for energy conservation and is consistent
with this finding.
(g) Safety and convenience of both vehicular and pedestrian traff c both within the
site and in relation to access streets, including traffic circulation features, the
locations and design of entrances and exits and parking areas within the site.
�)
(i)
Public Works staff has reviewed the site plan and deternuned that the plan,
including use of existing the driveways on Fairview for the primary access to the
truck facility, is safe and consistent with this fmding.
The satisfactory availabiliry and capacity of storm and sanitary sewers, including
solutions to any drainage problems in the area of the development.
There is adequate sewer available. The applicant has not prepazed a detailed
storm water drainage plan yet. The site plan is consistent with this finding if a
condition is added that a drainage plan must be submitted to staff for approval.
Sufficient landscaping, fences, walls and parking necessary to meet the above
objectives.
The site plan is not consistent with this finding but can be modified so that it is
consistent:
- Additional fences or wa11s must be constructed, if a sound study shows
they are needed to block noise to neighboring houses.
— There is no landscaping on the site now. The landscaping shown on the
site plan should be increased by planting shrubs that grow at least 10' tall
along the west side of the building. Additionallandscaping should be
planted around the perimeter of the site where ever noise barriers are
Page 5 of 9
�� required. The noise barriers should be setback 10' from the property line
2
3
to provide adequate room forlandscaping.
4 (j) Site accessibility in accordance with the provisions of the Americans with
5 Disabilities Act (ADA), including parking spaces, passenger Zoading zones and
6 accessible routes.
8 The site plan is consistent with this finding if one additional handicapped
9 accessible pazking space is provided.
10
11 (k) Provision for erosion and sediment control as specified in the "Ramsey Erosion
12 Sediment and Control Handbook "
13
14 The site plan does not show erosion or sediment control measures. A condition
15 for approval of the site plan should be that an erosion and sediment control plan
16 must be submitted to staff for approval.
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
WHEI2EAS, based upon the fmdings noted above, the Commission approved the said
site plan subject to the following conditions:
2.
3.
�
Driveways. All truck traffic to this facility must use the south driveway on Prior Avenue
and proceed via the area south of the main existing building. Truck traffic may not use
Fairview Avenue. The two existing driveways on Fauview must be closed and replaced
with curb and boulevard. Curb and boulevazd work shall be by permit. If other uses are
proposed on the site that generate levels of traffic that will not negatively impact the
adjacent residential neighborhood, the City would consider permitting reopening
driveways to Fairview for these uses as long as the trucking facility did not have access to
Fairview. Reopening driveways shall be by pernut.
Hours. Hours of operation must be restricted to 7 A.M. to 10 P.M. Monday through
Friday to protect the adjacent residenrial neighborhood. The facility may not operate on
Saturdays or Sundays.
Truck idling. Truck engines must be tumed off whenever riucks aze patked at the dock
or on site waiting for more than 15 minutes to load or unload at the dock.
Truck parking. Trucks may not stop or pazk on Fairview, Minnehaha or other neazby
residential streets. (Public Warks says it can post signs where needed to help enforce
this.)
5. Noise analysis and noise mifigation. A noise analysis must be done by an acoustical
engineer. The acoustical engineer will be one agreed to by both the City and the
applicant. The analysis will deternune the level of noise that could be anticipated from
the facility. ff the noise analysis indicates that the faciliry without noise mitigation
measures will exceed levels pernvtted under City noise regulations, sound mitigation
measures must be constructed to ensure that the facility conforms to City noise
regulations. Such sound mitigation measures must be in place prior to operations. If
another building will serve as a sound barrier, the walls must be substantaally complete
prior to operations.
Page 6 of 9
1 �,��s z�{
2 6. Lighting. E�terior lighting for the facility must be auned and shielded to m;n;mi�e glare
3 light and light spill over on to adjacent residential property.
4
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
7. Setbacks and landscaping. The setback on Fauview must be increased to 10 feet to
permit enough room for landscaping to soften the appeazance of the building. The
setback shall be planted and maintaiued with plant material approved by site plan staff
and which will grow at least 10 feet tall when mature in order to form a continuous row
along the entire east side of the building.
�
r�
10.
Additional landscaping must be planted azound the perimeter of the site wherever noise
barriers or visual screens aze required. The noise barriers or visual screens must be
setback 10' from the property line to provide adequate room for landscaping. The
existing chain link fence in these azeas must be removed.
Storm water management. A storm water management plan must be submitted to staff
for approval.
Accessible parking. One addirional handicapped accessible parking space must be
provided.
Erosion control. An erosion and sediment control plan must be submitted to staff for
approval.
WHEREAS, pursuant to the provisions of Saint Paul Legislative Code § 64.206, JLT
duly filed an appeal of the site plan approval on Apri123, 1999 and requested a hearing before
the Saint Pau1 City Council for the purpose of considering the actions taken by the said
commission; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to the provisions of Saint Paul Legislative Code § 64.206 the
Aamline Midway Coalition duly filed an appeal of the site plan approval and condiUons on May
4, 1999 and requested a hearing before the Saint Paul City Council for the purpose of considering
the actions taken by the said commission; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to the provisions of Saint Paul Legislarive Code § 64.206 the
Northstar Chapter of the Sierra Club duly filed an appeal of the site plan approval and conditions
on May 7, 1999 and requested a hearing before the Saint Paul City Council for the purpose of
considering the actions taken by the said commission; and
�VHEREAS, acting pursuant to Saint Paul Legislative Code §§ 64.206 - 64.208 and upon
notice to affected parties, the Saint Paul CiTy Council d'ad on May 12, 1999, duly conduct a
public hearing on these three appeals where all anterested parties were given an opportunity to be
heard; and
WHEREAS, the Council of the City of Saint Paul, having heazd the statements made and
having considered the application, the report of staff, the record, minutes and resolution of the
Zoning Committee and of the Saint Paul Plauniug Commission, does hereby;
Page 7 of 9
i �l��Z�
2 RESOLYE, to affirni the decision of the Planning Commission in this matter in that
3 there has been no showing by any pariy appealing the decision of the Planning Commission that
4 it committed an error as to fact, finding or procedure; and be it further
6 RESOLVED, that the Council ofthe City of Saint Paul adopts as its own, the findings
7 and conditions in this matter as set forth in Planning Commission Resolution No. 99-27; and be
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
it further
RESOLVED, that the Council of the City of Saint Paul, having heazd the statements
made and having considered the application, the report of staff, the record, minutes and
resolution of the Zoning Committee and of the Saint Paul Plauning Commission and acting in the
capacity authorized in Saint Paul Legislative Code § 64.207, hereby modifies the decision of the
Saint Paul Plamiing Commission by amending condition number 5 by adding a new condition
number 5.1 (A - E) as well as adding additional conditions 11, 12, 13, 14 to conditions 1-10 as
approved by the Pla.nning Commission in its resolution 99-27 dated Apri123, 1999.
5.1 Noise mitigation. Braslau and Associates conducted a noise analysis. Based upon this
analysis, the noise analysis and noise mitigation conditions set forth under condition
number 5 aze amended to require:
(A) That construction of the "second building" contemplated by the applicant must be
undertaken and substanrially completed before truck terminal operafions may
begin. The second building is necessary to protect homes in the adjacent
residential neighborhood from nighttime noise from hucking operations and to
protect these residential azeas from direct and reflected noise from trucking
operations.
(B) That a second noise analysis conducted by an acousfical engineer agreed to by
both the City and appiicant shall be conducted after the substantial completion of
the second building and that before the truck terminal operations may begin, this
second noise analysis must be submitted to the City for review to detemune
whether any additional noise mitigation measures must be considered.
(C) That any public address systems aze constructed and configured to eliminate
public address noise from adjacent residential neighborhoods.
11
12.
(D) Than any mechanical equipment not specifically analyzed must be constructed
and configured to comply with the most restrictive applicable state or municipal
noise standard in order to protect adjacent residential areas.
(E) All other conditions imposed under condition nuxnber 5 shall remain in full force
and effect.
Mitigation on Minnehaha Sound mitigation will be incorporated into the site plan
along Minnehaha Avenue.
No entrance on Minnehaha Trucks using this facility must not enter or e�t the site
from Minnehaha Avenue.
Page 8 of 9
1 �'1 �l—�2�
2 13. Number of trucks The number of hucks entering the site must not exceed 45 per week.
4 14. Annual approval based upon site plan compliance. The site plan is approved for one
5 year. The site plan shall be renewable annually thereafter only after staff makes an
6 annual report on the operations at the facility to the plaiming commission and a finding
7 by the plauuing commission that the facility is being operated in compliance with the
8 conditions contained in the site plan.
10
11
12
13
14
15
FLTRTHER RESOLVED, that the appeals of JLT, Hamline-Midway Coatition and the
Northstar Chapter of the Sierra Club be and aze hereby denied; and be it
FINALLY RESOLVED, that the City Clerk shall mail a copy of this resolution to JLT,
the Hamline-Midway Coalition and the Northstar Chapter of the Sierra Club, the Zoning
Adtninistrator and the Saint Paul Planning Commission.
� $�.`�
�,�.rr•t.� �
�
�
�
�� l� t���
f�r�-�`-�
\
OR1GiNAL
By:
Requested by Department of:
By:
Adopted by cil: ate
Adoption ertified by Cou
By: —
Approved by Mayor: Date
Form Ap ved by City Attorney
$Y: �ffC.�� G-B-��
Approved by Mayor for Submission to Council
By:
By. � , \
���-��_ �`t � �`�°�q
AdoptedbyCouncil: Date �
Adoptio eitiSed by Council � � e '
By: ., a._ �,,,.�,_—_
--�"
Approved by Mayor: Date
�t�t S?1-t
June 8
DAiE INITipTED
GREEN SHEET
� � � f , •
Ass�cx
TOTAL # OF SIGNATURE PAGES
oe.�n�r owECron
arvwuca
� ❑ anwnowar ❑ arcctcxK
❑ nuuxa�amneFSOai ❑ n�uxw.��rc
❑YYORryRIffi4lAIiI) ❑
(CLIP ALL LOCATIONS FOR SIGNATURE)
Memorializing the decision of the City Council on May 12, 1999, denying the appeal of JLT
6roup to a decision of the Planning Commission approving a site plan for a truck facility
at approximately 630 Prior Avenue North with conditions regulating access to the site,
noise, hours of operation and other issues.
PLANNING CAMMISSION
CIB COMM{TTEE
CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION
ISSUE,
OF TRANSAMION S
Why)
Has this persoNfi�m ever xroriced under a coMrzct for fhia depaAment?
YES NO
Hasthis ye�soNfirtn evet been a dty employeeT
YES NO
Does this personlfirm possess a sldl� not iwrmallYD� M' any wrtent city emPloyee?
YES NO
is Mis perso�rm a farpetetl vendorT
YES NO
�lain all ves answers on senarate sheet and attach to areen shcet
COST/REVENUE BUDGETED (CIRCLE ONE)
YES NO
SOURCE ACTIVITY NUMBER
3
�q -s�.�{
CI'I`Y �F SAIN'I` PALJj., 390 Ciry Halt Telephone: 612d66-8510
Norm Coleman, Mayor IS West Kellogg Boulevard Facsimile: 612-266-8513
Saint Paul, MN 55102
June 29, 1999
Council President Dan Bostrom
and Members of the City Council
310 and 320 City Hall
15 West Kellogg Boulevard
Saint Paul, Minnesota 55102
RE: Veto of Council File Number 99-52�: JLT Group
Dear Council President Bostrom and Members of the City Council:
I am returnin� to you, with my veto, Council File 99-524. This resolution unnecessarily
puts the city and its taxpayers at sianificant risk of le�al liability. Some of the conditions in
the resolution arguably go beyond the city's le�al authority in limiting JLT Group's right to
develop its property. This would leave our residents on the hook to pay the costs of a'
potential lawsuit and adverse verdict.
The proposal by the JLT Group to develop industrial property at Minnehaha and Fairview
in the Midway area has under�one a great deal of scrutiny by staff, residents, the Hamline-
Midway Coalition, the Planning Commission and its Nei�hborhoods subcommittee, the
Business Review Council, the City Council and especially Councilmember Benanav and his
staff. The process has presented a challenge in balancing the ri�hts of the JLT Group to
develop its property with the nei�hborhood residents' desire to be protected from noise
and disruption. The resolution presented by the City Council is close to being a fair
balance but severai modifications need to be made.
Of the fifteen site plan conditions approved by the City Council four unreasonably restrict
the JLT Group's ri�lit to develop its properiy. Specifically the restrictions on the hours of
operation (condition 2), the limits on the number of trucks entering the facility (condition
13), and the annual approvai provision (condition 14), are too restrictive and place
unreasonable hardships on the business. In addition, condition number three (3) control(ing
truck idlin�, is not presently warranted accordin� to the noise analysis prepared by the
acoustical en�ineer. I think these site plan conditions can be modified to all concerned and
thereby eliminate any need to resort to the courts to resolve this matter.
�
�(q-Say
Councii President Dan Bostrom and Members of the City Council
7une 29, 1999
Page Two
I urge the Council to pass an effective compromise that will allow this important
development to proceed while maintaining essential protections for the adjacent
neighborhood.
Sincerely,
�JA- ��II�U�
Norm Coleman
Mayor
NC:drm
c: Saint Paul Plannin� Commission Members
Business Review Council Members
Robert Kessler, Director, License, Inspection and Environmental Protection (LIEP)
Brian Sweeney, Director, Plannin� and Economic Development (PED)
OFFICE OF Tf� CITY ATTORNEY
Clayton M. Robinson, Jr., CiryAttorrsey
�R -Sa.�
CITY OF SAINT PAUL
Narm Coleman, Mayor
Civil Division
400 Ciry Hal(
I S West Ke[logg Blvd
Saint PauT, Minnesota 55702
Telephone: 651266�710
Facsimile: 657 298-5679
CiOEdPk.n �9."�,°: i��? t':�;'?or
June 8, 1999
Nancy Anderson
Council Secretary
310 City Hall
15 West Kellogg Blvd.
St. Paul, MN 55102
;,. + ..r.ar
Re: Appeals by JLT, Inc., Siena Club - Northstar Chapter, Hamline-Midway Coalition.
Zoning File No. 99-038
Council Action Date: May 12, 1999
Dear Nancy:
Attached please fmd the signed original of a resolution memorializing the decision of the Saint
Paul City Council to deny all the appeals in the above-entitled matter. Please place this mattei
on the Council's consent agenda at your earliest convenience.
If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to call.
Very ly yours,
� " ���'!✓��
Peter W. Warner
Assistant City Attomey
PWW/rmb
Enclosure
OFFICE OF LICENSE, TNSPECTTONS AND
ENVIItONMENTALPROTECTION
Robert Kets[er, Direc[or
q�, -s ay
CITY OF SAINT PAUL
Norm Coleman, Mayor
B UII DING INSPECI70N AND
DESIGN
350 St Peter Srreet
Suite 310
Saint Paut, Minnesota SSIO2-I510
Te[ephone: 612-266900]
Facsimile: 612-266-9099
Apri127, 1999
Ms. Nancy Anderson
City Council Reseazch Office
Room 310 City Hall
Saint Paul, MN 55102
Dear Ms. Anderson:
I would like to confirm that a public heazing before the City Council is scheduled for Wednesday, May
12, 1999 for the following zoning case:
Appellant: JLT Group
File Number: 99-101
Purpose: Appeal of a decision by the Planning Commission to approve a site pian for a
uucking faciliry with conditions regulating access to the site, noise, hours of
operation and other issues.
Location: Approxunately 630 Prior Avenue North
I have confirmed this date with the o�ce of Counciimember Benanav. My understanding is that this
public hearing request wili appeaz on the agenda of the City Council at your earliest convenience and
that you will publish notice of the hearing in the Saint Paul I.egal I,edger.
Please call me at 651-266-9086 if you have any questions.
Sincerely,
/ !�-�✓✓�
Tom Beach
Zoning Section
Vi':aiia:s � .. ^ -t
������'�
� FmsrRUn� •
MOTICEAF PUBLIC HEARIIVG
The Saint Paul City Counci] wi7l conduct
a public hearing on Wednesday, May 12,
"1999, at 5:30 p.m. in the City Council
Chambers, Third Floor, City Hall-
Courthouse, to consider the appea] of JLT
Group to a decision of the Planning
Commission approving a site plan for a
iruelflng facility at approximately 630 Prior
Avenue North with conditions regulating
�access to the site, noise, hourspf operaUon
and other issues.
Dated: Apri128, 1999
NANCYANDERSON '
Assistant City Council Secretary
, - (Apr.3a) �
s=====' ST. PAIIL LLGAL LEDGER'==s'==
OFFICE OF LICENSE, INSPECTIONS AND
FvWII20N�lEN'I'AL PROTECTiON
Rabert Kessler, Director
Qg -S a-�\
• � CITY OF SAINT PAUL
'�� Norm Caleman, Mayor
May 5, 1999
Ms. Nancy Anderson
Secretary to the City Council
Room 310 City Hall
Saint Paul, Minnesota 55102
ZAFRY PROFESSIONAL
BUIIDING
Suite 300
350 St. Peter Srreet
Sent Pau1, Minnesota SSIO2-I570
Telephone: 612-2669090
Facsr,ti[e: 672-266-9099
6I2-2669124
RE: Appeal of the Planning Commissions decision to approve with conditions a site plan review
for the JLT/Dawes Trucking facility proposed for the southwest corner of Minnehaha and
Fairview
Public hearing at City Council scheduled for Wednesday, May 12, 1999
Zoning Files #99-101 and 99-107
Deaz Ms. Anderson:
• PLANNING COMI'IISSION APPROVED THE STTE PLAN WITH CONDTTIONS
On Apri123 the Planning Commission approved the site plan for a trucking facility at the southwest
corner of Minnehaha and Fairview. The approval is subject to 10 conditions intended to minimize the
impact of truck noise and tr�c on the residential neighborhood located across the street, including
conditions that:
— Prohibit truck access from Fairview Avenue and require them to use Prior Avenue
— Limit hours of operation
�
— Limit truck idling
— Prohibit truck parking on neazby streets
— Require that the applicant pay for a noise study to help determine if noise barriers aze needed. (JLT
hopes to have the noise study completed before the City Council meets.)
The Neighborhood and Current Planning Commission and LIEP staff recommended approval with
conditions.
At the public hearing 17 people spoke in opposition and 10 letters in opposition were received.
APPEALS HAVE BEEN FILED BY THE APPLICANT AND T'HE DISTRICT COUNCIL
The applicant, JLT Group, has appealed rivo of the conditions attached by the Planning Commission.
One of these conditions limits the hours of operations to between 7 AM and 10 PM Monday through
Friday with no operations on Saturday or Sunday. The other condition requires that trucks must be
turned off when they aze parked at the dock or when they aze on site for more than 15 minutes waiting to
go to a dock to load or unload.. JLT says that trucking facilities aze a permitted use and that the nature of
the trucking industry make tltese conditions impractical.
The Hamline Midway Coalition has appealed the Plannina Commission's decision to approve the site
plan. They say tha[ even with all of the required conditions, a trucking faciliry at this location will have a •
negative impact on the residential property across Fairview and Minnehaha. They aze concemed about
noise and air pollution from the facility. They feel that the conditions limiting hours and truck idling aze
not enforceable. They are afraid that noise wilt be a problem even if the noise study being done says the
facility will not violate City noise standazds.
Please notify me if any member of the City Councit wishes to have slides of the site presented at the
public hearing.
Sincerely,
,
Tom Beach
ATTACHNIENTS
page 1 Appeals from JLT Group and Hamline Midway Coalition
page 4 Planning Commission resolution
page 10 Planning Commission minutes
page 28 Staff report and recommendations
page 33 Letters to the Planning Commission
page 61 Noise information
page 63 Truck route information
page 65 Location map and site plan
�
r �
L.J
_Apr-26-99 10:54A Constructors and Assoc. 651 848-0783
SAIKT
s�di
�
��AA
APPLICATION fOR APPEAL
Departmenl ujPlarsning a1�d Economic Develnpmertl
Zoxii�g Section
1100 Cily Ha11 AnxeY
ZS 6'es1 Fourdt Street
Saint Pau7,14f.�'SSIPZ
266-5589
APPELLANT ►Yame 3 '+-� G
Address `: Q V�--'�`'"" �'a ��' V�.�._.-�
CityS� 3�- �Q St.�Zip paytime phone
t�RQPERTY Zoning File Name_^�-� �� /�M'Rj � ""'� -
LOCAT{oN A���ess/LOCation �iwh�'.��s � �►SQr
TYPE OF APP�AL: Application is hereby made for an appeal to the:
CJ Board oS Zoning Appeals �City Caunci!
u�der the provisions of Chapter 64, Section ��. Paragraph of #he Zoning Code, to
appeal a decision made by the_ ��tM� '-��•��'��"`
+��27� q , 19 File number. � ��
on --
(dafe of dQCision)
GftOl]NDS FOft APPEAL: �xplain why you feel there ha5 been an error in any requirement,
pErmit, decision or refusaf made by an ad a o the Plan n Comm ssion fact, procedure of
finding made by the Board of Zoning App 9
�.�: � �-�� � �"�� �"�� �
c���
Attach additional sheet if
P_02
���'�
•
•
Applicani's signaturs� — Pate `E' City agent •
�
•
n
U
rwr. �.is��� ic�:�sar•i
HHIILIMEiMIDb1HY
�
���
t�'0.237 P.1
a��s��
q���d7
HA.MLINE 1V��DWAY CQA�,IT�QI�.�
Ham�utePazkPlaygroundBwldi¢g � 1564L�iondAcenue,SaintPaul,DiY551Q4 • -6?G-i9sG • -641-6t23
May?,1999 —� — — — �--- —
Councilmember Daniel Bosirom
St. Paul Ciry Covnci?
1� W, Kelloga Blvd.
St. Paul, Iv1�i 155102
Dear Councilmember Bos�rom:
On behalf of the neighbors Iiving in tlte area surroundina F.airview and �
iviinnehaha Avenues, the Hamline IvTidway Coalitiori Board of birectors wishes to
appeal the Planning Cominission's April 23, 1999 appro�al of the jI,T/T)awes
Truckinb faality siCe plan. The proposed truck transfer fariiity is an incompatible
land use with respect to the residential area direcfly east and north of the siEe.
In approvulg Ehe site plazt, tIze Planning Commission was mandated to follow St.
Paul Zoniag Code �62.103 (c) conceming Site Plan review and approval, Said Code
staee5: •
"In order to approve the site plan, Ehe Plazu Contu'ussion sltell consider
and fznd that the sit� plan is consiseent with... (4) Protection of adjacent and
neighbocing properties through reasonable provision for suclt maEters as
surface tivater drainage, sotuld and sight btiffezs, preservafion of views, light
ai�d air, and those aspec�.s of design which may have suUstan�ial effect on
nei�hboring land uses."
The Planning CommiSSion recoo ized rhe significant ad�erse impact of the
proposed truck transfer facility on tlie neighborhood and placed ten (10) candiEions
on its resolution of approval to easz these effects. However, it erred in approving
tfie plan because neighboring properties and residents wili not Ue protecEed and wiIl
be negaHvely impacted �vith regard to these important factors.
1) 'I'he area arowld Ivinlnehalla and �airvzew curren1y has an elevated air
pollurion index as a result of: a) uldustry to the immediaEe south, west, and
northwest; b) �eavy truck and other vehicular tra`8c bn several nearby major
streees and thoroujhfares; and, c) the Burlin,o-,ton Vorthem-Santa Fe Railroad
Intermodal facility, located five (5) b1oc1<s nortll of tne site. The proposed facility
will generate considerable smaIl truck and semi-tiuck traffic and idling. Both Ehe
gasoline and the diesel fuel will increase the air poIIu!ion index and,
consequently, presenE more of a healtlz hazard Htian the present air quaIity. In its
resolution, the Commission placed a 15-minute lir_ut on t�uck idling, but #his
condition is not consistently enforceaUle.
Dedicate�lla muwin� ll�e Nuntlane daidmc�y ne��hborbeoct a 6e.Ke�• plrrce to ln�e ancl wark,
�.�m
2
iHf. �.1:55 1���2EPM Hr+MLINEihIIuW�IY
No.237 P.2
•
Councii Pmsident Dan Bo<_hom
�1ay 4,1999
Pa�e 2
Fe: 2F �99a3S
2) Accordin� Ya the manager oF Dawes Tzucldng, semi-trucks from aut-of-state wili
arrice at all �nes oE day and ni;11e and be allowed to enter the sitz at anytime,
including night-time. The noise of trucks arriving a#ter the approved hours of
operation--between 7:00 a.m. and 1d:Od p.m.—and the possible running of their
motors, is certain to affect neighbors. xhe testimony of Dawes Trucking
representatives and the impossibility of canstanh enforcement defies the viability
of this condition.
3) Durino the approved hours of operaf�an (7:00 a,m. - lO:QQ p.m.), noise from truck
traffic, engine idling, back-up beepers and air brakes is of great concexn to fhe
neighborhood. The Plaruung Commission required the applicant to conduct a
noise study to deterr.une if JLT w-ill Ue requixed to build a sound barrier.
Residents are concerned fihaE if the sfudy does not proc� concl¢sivety that noise
miHgation measures must be tal<en, the noise will necerLheless be an on-going
nuisance to the nei�hbors. I�1 passing the site plan, the Plannin� Commission
failed to ensure compatibiliEy of this plan tivith neighboring residents.
For the above reasons, we ask that the City Council accept and hear our appeal. We
oppose the site plan because we Uelieve that the operation of the JLT/Dawes truck
h�ansfer facilifiy is incompatiUle with the residential neighborhood to the immediate
north and east of the siEe.
4�%e Iook forward to hearing from pou conceming our request. Please conEact me or
Cathy Lue, I�MC commtuuty organizer, at (651) 646-1986—phone; (651) 641-67.23—fa.�c.
Sincerely,
��� ��
Jod.i M. BanClep
Executice Director
/jmU
cc:
Councilmembet Jay Benanav
Councilmember Jerzy Blal<ey
Tom Beach, LIEP
Gladys Morton, Planninb Commission
��
u
3
�q ,sa�
�
city of saint paul
planning commission resolution
fite number 99-27
date Apri1 23, 199
�VF�REAS, JLT GROUP, file �99038, has submitted a Site Pian for review under the provisions of
Section 62.103 of the Saint Paul Le�islative Code, to allow a trucking facility on the west side of
Fairviecv Avenue, % block south of Ivfinnehaha Avenue, le�ally described as Section 33 To�vnship 29
Range 23 except avenues the norch 561 33/100 feet of northeast I!4 of northwest 1/4 of Section 33,
Township 29 Range 23; and
`VHEREAS, the Saint Paul Planning Commission, on 03/26/99, held a public hearing at �vhich all
persons present were given an oppoRunity to be heard pursuant to said application in accordance with the
requirements of Section 62.103 of the Saint Paul Legisfative Code; and
`VHEREAS, the Saint Paul Planning Commission, based on the evidence presznted at the public hearin�
as substantially reflected in the minutes, made the foltowin� findin�s of fact:
• l. Dawes Trucl:ina The truck transfec faciliry would be built by JLT and operated by Dawes
Tnickin�. Dawes would brin� a variety of goods to the site from local businesses using smaller city
trucks. The goods �vould then be consolidated inside the building and toadzd onto semi-trailers and
shipped out of state. Da�ves currently operates out of a buildin� located in Roseville. Ho�vever, this
building is too small and Da�ves �vants to move to get more room
2. Proposed operatio❑ John McDaniels, the owner of Dawes Trucking, described the proposed
operation to staff, includina the hours of operation and thz number of trucks:
Hours of operation
- The facility would be open Monday throueh Friday. It would normally be closed on
weekends although occasionally there would be an individual truck on weekends.
- During the week the facility woufd open at 7A�1. Tuesdays and Fridays are the busiest days
and the facility would normally stay open until midni�ht on those niehts. On Monday,
Wednesday and Thursday the facility wou(d cfose at 8 or 9 P.M.. y
- Peak hours are late afternoon (3 to 6 P.MJ
•
moved bv Faricy
seconded bv
in favor 14 (2 abstentions
Dandrea, Donnelly-Cohen)
against
�
ZF �99038
Pa�e 2 of Resolution
Number and types of trucl:s
— There wou(d be approsimately 35 semi-trailer trucks a�veek takin� frei�ht out and another
10 semi-trailer trucks brin� frei�ht in. (On Tuesday and Friday when they are busier, there
«�oufd be 10 semi-trailer trucks a day. On bfonday, �Vednesday and Thursday there would
be fe�ver semi-trailer trucks.
— There would be 6 to 8 smaller local trucks a day Ivlonday thru Friday. These trucks would
[eave in the morning, pick up or de[iver goods [oca(ly, and retum in the afrernoon.
— The lar�e traifers rypically take 3 or 4 hours to toad. However, a traiter may site at the dock
for a day or tw�o until it is picked up. The truck engines would be tumed off and would not
run whi[e the trucks are parked. Electrica( hook-ups for engine heaters would be provided in
the winter. If trailers wi(I be parked for more than a few hours, the tractor is unhooked and
leaves the site.
— Some of the semi-trailers wouid have refri�erator units. However, Dawes wou[d not 6e
handlin� perishable good such as produce and so tucks with refri�erator units would not run
them while they were at the site.
— There would not be any fuelin� stations or main[znance shops on site.
•
Existing operation Staff visited Dawes current location in Roseville rivo times and observed the
FOI IOR7Ro:
— On Thursday, March 11 at 4:00 PM there �vere 10 trailers parked at dock doors and additional
trailers parked on the site away from the buildin�. (These trailers did not have any engines •
ranniag.) There was oae tr¢ck backina up to a dock and in the aext 15 minutes nvo more trucks
arrived on site. (These trucks had their en�ines runnin�.)
— On Monday, March 2� at 8:00 thz business �vas closed. There were approximately 10 trailers
parked at dock doors and other trailers parked oa the site away frorri ihe buildin�. One parked
truck was runnin� and had its li�hts on.
4. The site plan The plan shotivs a 27,740 square foot building. Ii tivould be 294' long oa the side
facin� Fairview and 93' deep. It woufd be 28'-5" talL The buitdin� would have a small ofFice on the
south end but most of the building �vould be for storin� and handling goods. The building would
have 21 overhead doors for laroe trucks on the west side (facin� ativay from Fairview) and 5 doors for
smalfer, local trucks on the north side (these woufd be visible from the street). Access would be
provided using rivo existin� driveways on Fairview. The site also has access from an existing
driveway on Prior.
Reqnired findinas Sec[ion 62.108(c) of the Zonin� Code says that in "order to approve the site
plan, the plannin� commission sltalf consider and find [hat the site plan is consistent with" the
fol(owin�:
(a) The city's aclopted comprehensive p1ar: and developmznt or project plans for sub-areas of the
city.
Thz 1930 Ciry' �Vide Land Use Plan that �vas in effec[ «hen this project was submitted to the
City for site plan revie�v says:
.
s
�� - s a'
ZF �99038
• Pa�e 3 of Resolution
- The City should Encoura�e conditions which allow the mixing of appropriate light industry
with housin� and commercial activities.
- In cases of incompatible land use, the City will use the techniques listed above wherever
possible to create or improve existin� buffers behveen land uses. [The techniques referred to
include landscapin�, berming or fencin� perimeters and maintainin� buildin� exteriors to
comp(ement adjacent land uses.)
— The City will ensure throu�h it site plan review requirements that all new development
provides adzquate bufferin� as part of its design.
The 1930 District 11 Plan which is currently in effect lists the followin� goats:
— bfaintain [he present balance beriveen residential and commerciaf and industrial use.
— Develop buffers to separate residential areas from commercia( and industrial areas.
— Confine through traffic to relativefy few streets, treat others streets as local, resident serving
streets.
— �Vhen developing major throu?h streets, minimize dztriment to borderin� land uses.
— Fairview behveen Minnehaha and Pierce Butler should be de-emphasized as a through street
and access form Fairvietiv to Pierce Butler c(osed. (This project is south of the area referred
to in this recommendation.)
The sire plan is not consistent with this findins but can be modified so that it is consistent:
• — The esisting driveways on Fairview must be ctosed to ensure that trucks use Prior Avenue to
en[er the site.
— Adequate visual and sound buffers must be provided.
(b) Applicable ardinances of the City of Saint Patrl.
Althou�h truckin� facilities are a permitted use in an I-I zoning district, the site plan is not
consistent with this findin�. However, it can be modified so that it is consistent:
— The building setback on Fairview does not meet the minimum required setback and therefore
must be increased from 6' at least 7'-5".
— The site plan shows hvo drive�vays to Fairview Avenue. Fairview is not a truck route. The
site has access to Prior Avenue, �vhich is a designated truck route. Therefore, the existing
driveways on Fairview must be closed to ensure that trucks use Prior Avenue.
— It is likely that without any noise miti�ation, noise from trucks �vill exceed the maximum
feve(s permitted by the Saint Paul Iegislative code. Therefore, a noise study must be
conducted to determine whether additional noise miti�ation is needed to ensure that the
faciliry will compfy �vith the noise ordinance and help detertnine the design and location of
any noise miti�ation that is needed.
(c) Preszrvation of unique geologiq geographic or historically signrftcant characteristics of the city
and environmentally sensitive areas.
The sitz plan is consistent with this findin�. The site is a paved parkin� tot on industrial
• ZF 99038
�
ZF #99033
Page 4 of Resolution
property and the surrounding area is a residen[ial neighborhood.
(d) Protectian of adjacent and neighboring properties through reasonable pravi,rion for such
matters as surface water drainage, soz�nd and sight buffers, preservation of views, light and air,
and thase aspects of clesign which may hme substantia! effects on neighbaring land uses.
The site plan is not consistent �vith thi; findin� but can be modified so that it is consistent:
— The residznts in the area have complained in the past about truck tra�c on Fairview. The
site plan calls for using the existiag driveways on Fairview. This uoald increase the amount
of truck traffic on Fairview. The driveways on Fairview should be closed so that all trucks
must use Prior Avenue. There is enou�h room to the south of the existin� main building for
trucks to get from Prior to the ne�v buifdin� and trucks should be required to use this to
minimize noise to the surroundin� residential neighborhood.
— Noise from trucks on the site �vould have a substantial effect on neighboring residential land
uses_on Fairview and Minnehaha. A noise study by an acoustical en�ineer should be
reqaired to determine if noise barriers are needed and if they are, hocv big they need to be
and where they should go. JLT is talking about constructing another building north of the
truck transfer facitity and this could act as a noise barrier if it �vas (arae enough and it was
for a use that did not generate significant additional noise. �
•
(e) The arrangement of bc�ildings, :�ses and facilities of the proposed development in order to assure �
nbutting property ancUor its occ:rpants tivi11 nat be zmrecr,ronably affected
The site plan is not consistent �vith this findina but can be modified so that it is consistent:
— Traffic on Fairview Avenue is already hear,y. Permittin� the proposed truck facility to use
driveways on Fairview would incrzase the amount of traffic and would unreasonably affect
tlie residential neighborhood across the street. Therefore, the existing driveways on Fairview
should be cfosed so that trucks use Prior Avenue.
— The buildins is arranged so that most of the loading docks are on the ��est side of the
baildin� and the buiidin� will block most of the noise from these docks from residents on
Fairview. However, residents on Minnehaha will be hear noise from these docks unless
noise barriers are built. The buildin� afso has fice docks on the north end of the building
close to Fairview and noise barriers are needed for these docks too.
(� Creation of energy-eonserving design through landscaping ancf location, orientation and
elevation ofstruch�res.
The site plan meets current standards for eneray conservation and is consisten[ with this finding.
(g) Safety nnd com�enience of both vehiczrlar and pedestrian traffic bath within the site and in
relntiof: to access streets, including traffic circulation features, the locations ancf design of
entrances and exits ar:d parkir:g areas within the site.
Public l�,'orks staff has revie�ved t(�e site plan and dztermined that the pfan, inc[uding use of
existing the driveways on Fairview for the primary access to the truck facility, is safe and •
consistent with ihis findin�.
7
q g�- sa�
ZF k99038
• Pa�e 5 of Resolution
(h) The satisfactory availability and capacity ofstorm and sanitary sewers, incZuding solutions to
any drainage problems in the area of the development.
There is adequaie sewer available. The applicant has not prepared a detailed storm water
draina�e plan yet. The site plan is consistent with this finding if a condition is added that a
draina�e plan must be submitted to staff for approval.
(i) Sz�cient landscaping, fences, walls and parking necessary to meet the above objectives.
The site plan is not consistent with this findin� but can be modified so that it is consistent:
- Additional fences or walls must be constructed, if a sound study shows they are needed to
block noise to neighboring houses.
— There is no landscaping on the site now. The landscaping shown on the site plan should be
increased by plantin� shrubs that grow at least 10' tall along the west side of the building.
Additional landscaping should be planted around the perimeter of the site where ever noise
barriers are required. The noise barriers should be setback 10' from the property line to
provide adequate room for landscaping.
Q) Site accessibility in accordance with the provisions of the Americans with Disabilities Act
(ADA), inclt�ding parking spaces, passenger loading zones and accessible rozrtes.
• The site plan is consistent �vith this finding if one additional handicapped accessible parking
space is provided.
(k) Provision for erosion and sediment control ns specified in the "Ramsey Erosion Sediment and
Control Handbook. "
The site plan does not show erosion or sediment control measures. A condition for approval of
the site plan should be that an erosion and sediment control pfan must be submitted to staff for
approval.
NOW, THEREFQRE, BE IT RESOLV ED, by the Saint Paul Planning Commission, that under the
authority of the City's Le�islative Code, the appfication for Site Pfan Review to establish a trucking
facility on the west side of Fairview Avenue,'/: block south of Minnehaha Avenue is hereby approved,
subject to the following conditions:
I. Ariveways All truck traffic to this facility must use the south driveway on Prior Avenue and
proceed via the area south of the main existing buildin�. Truck tra�c may not use Fairview Avenue.
The two esistin� driveways on Fairview must be closed and replaced with curb and boulevard. Curb
and boulevard work shall be by permit. If other uses are proposed on the site that generate levels of
traffic that will not ne�atively impact the adjacent residentia( neighborhood, the City would consider
pzrmittin� reopenin� driveways to Fairview for these uses as lon� as the trucking facility did not
• have access to Fairvietiv. Reopening driveways shall be by permit.
��
ZF #99038
Page 6 of Resolution
2. Hours Hours of operation must be restricted to 7 AM to 10 PM Monday through Friday to protect
the adjacent residential neighborhood. The facility may not operate on Saturdays or Sundays.
3. Truck idling Truck en�ines must be turned aff �vhenever trucks are parked at the dock or on site
waitina for more than 15 minutes to load or unload at the dock.
4. Truck parking Trucks may not stop or park on Fairview, Minnehaha or other nearby residential
streets. (Pubfic Works says it can post signs cvhere needed to help enforce this.)
5. Noise analysis and noise mitigation A noise analysis must be done by an acousticat engineer.
The acoustical engineer will be one agreed to by both the City and the applicant. The analysis will
determine the [evel of noise that could be anticipated from the facility. If The noise analysis indicates
that the facility without noise mitigation measures will exceed leve(s permitted under City noise
regulations, sound miti�ation measures must be constructed to ensure that the facility conforms to
City noise regulations. Such sound mitigation measures must be in place prior to operations
beginning at the facility. If walls or fences will act as sound barriers they must be in place prior to
operations. If another buildin� wilf serve as a sound barrier, the walls must be substantially complete
prior to operations.
•
6. Lighfina Exterior ti�htia� for the faciliry must be aimed and shielded to minimize glaze light and
li�ht spill over on to adjacent residential property.
7. Setbacl:s and landscaping The setback on Fairview must be increased to 10 feet to permit enou�h •
room for landscaping to soften the appearance of the buildin�. The setback shall be planted and
maintained with plant material approved by site plan staff and which will grow at least 10 feet tall
when mature in order to focm a continuous row alon� the entire east side of the building.
Addi[ional landscapiag must be planted around the perimeter of the site where ever noise barriers or
visual screens are required. The noise barriers or visual screens must be setback 10' from the
property line to provide adequate room for landscaping. The esisting chain link fence in these areas
must be removed.
8. Storm water management A storm water management plan must be submitted to staff for
approval..
9. Accessible parl:ing Oae additional handicapped accessible parking space must be provided.
10. Erosion control An erosion and sediment control plan must be su6mitted to staff for approval.
1\Pedlsys2\SHA RE DIBIRKHOLZ�PLANN ING\RES O LU"C�ILTResolution.wpd
�
0
�� -�a�
Saint Paul Planning Commission
Ciri' Hall Conference Center
15 Kellogg Boulevard West
A meeting of the Plannin� Commission of the City of Saint Paul was held Friday, Apri123, 1999, at 830
a.m, in the Conference Center of City Hall.
Commissionen
Present:
Commissioners
Absent:
Mmes. Donnelly-Cohen, Duarte, Engh, Faricy, Geisser, McCall, Morton, Nordin
and Messrs. Corbey, Dandrea, Field, Fotsch, Kramer, Mardell, Nowlin and Shakir.
Messrs. Gervais, *Gordon, *Johnson, Kon„ and *Margulies
*Excused
VI. Neighborhood and Current Plannine Committee
JLT Group Site Plan for a truckin� facility on the west side of Fairview Avenue, % block
south of Minnehaha Avenue -(Tom Beach, 2b6-9086, LIEP)
Commissioner Faricy reported that the committee met last Tuesday to review the site plan for
Dawes Trucking Company, located on JLT property in the Midway. The Committee came up
with a unanimous recommendation for the Planning Commission.
MOTION: Commissioner Faricy moved approval ojthe requesred sire plan, subject to the
fol[owing ten conditions:
Drivewavs Al! truck traffiC to this jacility must use the south driveway on Prior Avenue
and proceed via the area south of the main existing building. Truck traffic may not use
Fairview Avenue. The !wo existing driveways on Fairview must be closed and replaced
with curb and bou[evard Curb and boulevard work shall be by permit Ijother uses are
proposed on the site that generate leve[s of traJfic that wi11 not negatively impact the
adjacent residential neighborhood, the Ciry wou[d consider permitting reopening
driveways to Fairview jor these uses as long as the trucking facility did not have access to
Fairview. Reopening driveways shal! be by permit.
2. Hours Hours of operation must be restricted to 7A��1 to 10 PMMonday through
Friday to protect tlee adjacent residential neighbo�hood Thefacility may not operate on
Saturdays or Sundays.
3. Truck idling Truck engines must be turned off whenever trucks are parked at the dock
or on site waiting for more than 15 minutes to load or unload at rhe dock.
4. Truck parking Trucks may not stop or park on Fairview, Minnehaha or other nearby
�
7
•
•
�0
�
t
ct � - �S �-�i
. residential streets. (Public Works says it can post signs where needed to help enforce
this.)
5. Noise analysis and noise mitigation A noise analysis must be done by an acoustical
engineer. The acoustical engineer wi!! be one agreed to by both the City and the
applicant The anaZysis wi!! determine the level of noise that cou[d be anticipated from
the facility. If the noise analysis indicates that the facility without noise mitigation
measures will exceed levels permitted under City noise regulations, sound mitigation
measures must be consiructed to ensure that the faci[iry conforms to Ciry noise
regulations. Such sound mitigation measures must be in p[ace prior to operations
beginning at the facility. If walls or fences wi!! act ar sound barriers they must be in
place prior to operations. If another building wi[I serve as a sound barrier, the walls
must be substantially complete prior to operations.
6. Lighting Exterior lighting for the facility must be aimed and shie[ded to minimiZe glare
light and light spill over on to adjacent residenlial praperty.
7. Setbacks and landscaping The setback on Fairview must be increased to IO feet to
permit enough room for landscaping to soften the appearance of the building. The
setback shall be p[anted and maintained with plant material approved by site plan staff
and which wi!! grow at least IO feet tall when mature in order to jorm a continuous row
along the entire east side of the building.
• Additional landscaping must be planted around t/te perimeter ojthe site where ever noise
barriers ar visual screens are required The noise barriers or visual screens must be
setback 10'jrom the property line to provide adequate room for landscaping. The
existing chain link jence in these areas must be removed
8. Storm water management A storm water management plan must be submitted to staJf
for approval.
9. Accessible parking One additional handicapped accessible parking space must be
provided
10. Erosion control An erosion and sediment contral plan must be submitted to staffjor
approval.
Commissioner Nordin asked if the City would require JLT Group to come back for another site
plan review if they decide to build the other building somewhere else on the site. Mr. Beach
responded that they would. Commissioner Nordin commented that it is very difficult to control
where the trucks park when they arrive afrer the site closes at 10 p.m. She asked if it might be
possible to ask the truckers to park in a designated area in the rear of the site to idle their trucks.
Ivir. Beach stated that it is his understandin� that the applicant would be a�reeable to
desionatin� some spots down by Prior behind an existing buildin�.
NIOTIOti Commissioner Nordin moved to add under the 4"' condition that the owners
• establish an area of truck parking in the secluded southwest corner of the site jor early truck
�
I1
�
,ii
r%
;i
:�
arrival; Commissioner Geisser seconded the motion.
Commissioner Faricy informed the Commission that such a discussion took p(ace at the
committee meeting and it was her recollection that they decided to leave that issue to ttte
discretion of the Departmeat of License, Inspection and Environmental Protection and the
owner to figure out a legitimate, logical place for them to park.
Commissioner Geisser encouraged other commissioners to add their ideas.
Commissioner Faricy added that some of these trucks will be coming in al( ni�ht long. Talking
with a trucker, she found out that truckers must keep a log. They can drive for 10 hours
strai�ht; then they have to be ofFthe road for 8 hours. If they drive 70 hours in seven days, they
have to take 24 hours off: There is no question that these trucks will come and go at different
hours. Many of these truckers are individual corporations. We will need to do something about
these trucks or they will be lined-up on Prior, idling. Perhaps, afrer the noise analysis,
something can be set up.
Commissioner Fotsch realizes that if these trucks come in at different times, they will need to
go somewhere. His concem is that if any of them aze allowed to come in, the hour requiremeni
is eliminated. Once they get to the site, iYs another intrusion into the neighborhood. There aze
many truck stops around the Interstate. He thinks they should be required to time their arrival
into the site when it's open. He does not support the amendment.
Commissioner Nordin stated that the reason why she is bringing pazking on-site to the table is
because of her experience of living in the city. In the Northwest Quadrant where she lives there
is a �Vards Distribution Center on the southwest comer of Snelling and Como. The owners of a
handful of houses near there have done everything possible to try to get the City to help them,
but there is no way to control the truckers. They come and go as they p]ease. The diesel's need
to run in our cold climate. All the streets around the Wazds azea aze signed for no pazking after
10 p.m. and before 6 a.m., but the residents are constantly calling the police tellin� them that
there are trucks pazked violating the law.
Commissioner Faricy asked if Commissioner Nordin would go along with aliowing LIEP to
make that decision with Dawes Trucking. Commissioner Nordin agreed to add that to the
amendment.
Commissioner Corbey asked Mr. Beach if the truckers will be empioyees of Dawes Trucking or
independent operators in order to establish responsibility. Mr. Beach believes the truckers aze
not employed by Dawes Truckin�. Commissioner Corbey thinks the Commission needs to
adopt some type of motion that will cover these truckers, because if they're not employees of
Dawes, they will be running wild.
Commissioner Kramer appreciated the intent of the motion, but he feels that the Committee has
put together a good resolution and he doesdt want to further complicate the issue. The
nei�hborhood hasn't talked about the issue of a designated place for the truckers to idIe and the
committee didn't address it. He said he was uncomfortable with trying to craft a statement
today, about where the trucks wiil be allowed to id(e on-site without havine the appropriate
�
•
•
•
)2
a�-Sa�t
discussions. He sTated he is a�ainst adopting this amendment. If that decision is delegated to
staff (LIEP), it eliminates any public involvement in that decision. Ma} be that's something the
Commission wants to do, but that issue has not been addressed, and Commissioner ICr
• not comfortable with inserting ii in as a condition.
amer is
Mr. Beach responded about the comment that if LIEP handled this issue, there would not be any
chance for neighborhood input. He suggested that the amendment could be
would detennine the truck idling area in consultation with the district co¢ncit. He added
LIEP did phrased that LIEP
make a decision about where the trucks could park and someone didn't ao �at if
the decision could be appealed.
o ree with it,
Commissioner Nordin suggested different Ianguage for the amendment: The owr�er shall
coordinate with LIEP and the district councii to establish a designated idfe area for afrer hour
truck parking. The idle area shall be marked with adequate signage. Commissioner Geisser
accepted the change in language.
Commissioner Now]in stated that he wil( go along with the Committee recommendation, but he
is still troubled by the bigger picture here. It is his understanding that the Commission is
looking only at the site plan review because the zoning authorizes this use. This property is
located on the edge of an industrial area that has had many trucking concems. It is a big chunk
of land, and this is a very Iow intensity use, in his opinion. It's obvious that this use could
create a problem. He wonders if the Committee got assurance that this use was " �� •
area or did they make the assumption that, based upon zoning, they had to 0o with it.
OK m this
Commissioner Faricy responded that the Committee did look at the situation and the did
the decision based upon the zoning because this site is zoned I-1.
Y make
• Commissioner Kramer asked for clarification on the amendment. Was it that there shall be this
facility for parking on the site or that it wili exist if they can work it out? Commissioner Nordin
replied that the amendment is intended to say that LIEP, the owner, and the district council shall
discuss and determi�e whether ihere would be a designated "idle" area. If they agree to put one
on-site, then the idle area shall be marked with adequate si�nage.
Mr. Warner stated that it's good to invo(ve the district planning counci! if this altows for closer
contact with the neighbors and their concerns. He asked Commissioner Nordin if, impl;c�t;n
her motion, she was g�ving the district counci! some sort of veto authori
Nordin replied that he is giving the neighborhood the option of having the trucks park
ty. Commissioner
anywhere they want on the street and having residents make phone calis to the police because
the truckers are not followin� the signage or settling for the trucks to park on a certain
of the site that would be the least disruptive to their residential neighborhood.
respoaded that, with respect to zoning, the authority to zone is vested in the City and the ortion
Planning Commission in their advisory capacity. It can't o an Mr� Warner
exclusively, has the authority to decide the conditions, etcg If the mot on s t make sur t at the
❑eighborhood district council is involved in the process, thars great. If it is anythin�
that, it would be an improper delegation of the City's zonin� authoritv.
o more than
CommissionerNordin asked ifthis issae coWd be delayed fortwo weeks, The Commission
b'
•
��
�
responded that it could not.
Commissioner En�h spoke against the motion because: 1) it undoes the conditions in #3, #4 and
#5; 2) there are a host of conditions already imposed; and 3) there's a dirth of knowiedge on •
what the noise mitigation is going to be. She appreciates the motion because it's seems to be
trying to contemplate some practical reality, but on the other hand, there's a gap of information
the Commission is not even going to know. She also feels the motion is micro mana�ing what
the staff is going to have to determine at a later date. Staff needs to have the leeway to
implement all of these conditions, which she thinks are fairly restrictive and should be,
considering where the property is.
Commissioner Faricy called the question.
Commissioner Nordin withdrew her motion to amend.
Commissioner Faricy withdrew calling the question.
Commissioner Field asked if the Commission acts today on the motion as it stands, can it come
back at a later time, if the problem exists, and modify the site plan to permit such an "idling"
area, if there's a human cry. Mr. Wamer replied that the Commission could do that. Certainly,
if it appears in the future that the conditions are not being abided with, the City has a number of
legal tools that it could take advantage of to bring a cause of action. Commissioner Field asked
if, afrer the City undertook some type of enforcement proceedin�, could the Planning
Commission modify the site plan to accomplish what Commissioner Nordin su��ested. Mr.
Wamer replied that it all depends on the outcome of the enforcement action that City brings.
Commissioner Field asked if the applicant, in this particulaz case, determined, that in light of
police calls, it would make more sense to estab(ish a parking spot on their property for truckers •
to park, could they then apply for a revision of their site pIan, which woald then be subject to
staff and eventually, Planning Commission review. Mr. Wamer replied thac they probably
could not. It is their property; it's a permitted use. If they wanted to establish a parking azea, it
probably wouldn't require any City review.
Commissioner Nordin asked if a legal recourse was the only recourse the neighborhood might
have if there is a probtem in the future. Mr. Wamer responded that the City has a variety of
tools that it could exercise, legaliy, to address the problem on-site, if there are problems and
complaints are made. The nei�hbors have the option of a number of legal theories they could
apply.
Commissioner Corbey, referrin� to the letter received from the JLT Group, stated that they
proudly say that they own approximately 2 squaze feet in the Midway area. He asked if
the Planning Commission could suggest that they allow the truck parking for Dawes on other
property owned by JLT, perhaps at 739 Vandalia Street, in order to sett(e this situation. Mr.
Warner replied that it could.
Commissioners Dandrea and Donnelly-Cohen abstained from the discussion and also from the
vote.
�
�
!'f
�g - s a`t
The motion on the floor to approve Ihe requested site plan with conditions carried on a roll
ca!! vote (Dand�ea ¢nd Donnelly-Cohen ¢bstaining),
• �• Communications Commitfee
Commissioner ICrar�er reported that the Committee is waiting for the first draft of
report from the City desi�er.
the annual
�- Task Force Repo�
Advertisina Si n Committee Prelimina
n' Re ort -(La�, Soderholm, 266-6575)
Commissioner Field reported that the task force held a
it was moved to lay the matter over in its entire
meeting one week ago, Thursday, where
known, regarding the use of amortization. � until the outco
me of pe�ding legislation is
Commissioner Engh, referr�ng
resolution to adopt the Saint to the following provision in the recentl
on it vis-a-vis state law that wou d�o err r e an ecial District Si y p�sed City Council
gn Plan, asked what is the timing
y sort of study on the use of amortization:
RESOLVED, that the Council requests that the Plannino
back to the City Council within six months as to the use of amortiz 4on for e
bi(Iboards in the Saint Anthon Park, and report
Specia( Sign Districts and as to the a Grand Avenue, Smith Avenue and mOVal of
ppropriate amortization eriod Hl°h�a�d Village
Mr. Ford res p for such uses;
• ponded that in the City Council's adoption of that the amorti2ation provision was
eliminated. Mr. Ford asked Mr. Soderholm if there was an
Mr. Soderholm replied that the Planning Commission's report wili consist of hvo sentences if
the law is y��er clarification on the study.
with regards to nd make rts ci�ement for the Plannin�
Counci( approved the resolution to have a s o Commissio to finish its work
ty-wide rec ommendations. He added that the City
following up with an ordinance amendmentth k,;i�n district for District 12, M W
the four readings, and also requires a public hearin go before the Ci rner is
already says the g but it will do exactly�vhatithe�re ol � nugh
y are on record as S�pporting. Mr, W�er believes that ordinance
next Wednesday's agenda for third reading,
wi11 be on
Commissioner Field elaborated that there is a petition circulating involvin
nuisance as reflects bi(Iboards to go onto the ballet. He added that his understandino
that special sig� districts were to g some theory of
voted in opposition to the Saint Antho y gpe�a�ls� 9°ality ofa a h� been
of the Saint Anthon area. p� area. He noted that he
the use of a special sign district on an entire area � on District because it was all enco
if it were possible, that the Advertising Task Force ook at
special area, e.g., Grand Avenue. In the case of Saint Anthon o res ect ce
tooi to accomplish an objective that Saint Anthon p � 4ua(ities of a
with the intent of the s ecial si� Y he found it was used more as a
Y Pazk wanted, but he didn't see it in keeping
districts in eve P an district. He thinks the Commission wi(! be seeine
ry planning district of the city, and he doesn't think that w
legislation. o Special sign
as the intent of the
•
�
��
Saint Paul Planning Commission
City Hall Conference Center
15 Kellogg Boulevard West
A meeting of the Planning Commission of the City of Saint Paul was held Friday, March 26, 1999, at
8:30 a.m. in the Conference Center of City Hall.
Commissioners
Present:
Commissioners
Absent:
Mmes. Duarte, Engh, Geisser, McCall, MoROn, and Messrs. Corbey, Dandrea, Field,
Fotsch, Gervais, Gordon, Johnson, Kramer, Mardell, Margulies, and Shakir.
Mmes. *Donnelly-Cohen, *Faricy *Nordin and Messrs. Kong and *Nowlin
*Excused
Also Preseat: Ken Ford, Planning Administrator, Jean Birkholz, Martha Faust, Tom Harren, Nancy
Homans, Larry Soderholm, Jim Zdon, Department of Planning and Economic
Development staff; Tom Beach and Bob Kessler from the Department of License,
Inspection and Environmental Protection.
IV. PUBLIC HEARING: Site Plan Review for a trucl:ing facility on the west side of Fairview
Avenue,'/z block south of Aiinnehaha Avenue, JLT Group (Tom Beach, 266,9086, LIEP).
Chair Morcon read the rules and procedures for pubiic hearin�.
Mr. Tom Beach eave a short presentation before testimony w�as taken. JLT Group submitted a
site plan in February for a new truck transfer faciiity. Eazlier this month the Hamline-Midway
Coalition asked the Plannine Commission to hold a public heazing. Mr. Beach noted that since
the staff report was written, there have been more discussions with JLT. There are some
chanees to the written staff report; a sheet has been passed out reflecting those changes.
The properry at 625 Fairview Avenue is owned by JLT Group; the wcking facility will go on a
eastern portion of the property, next to Fairview Avenue. JLT will build the building and the
facility wilf be operated by Da�ves Trucking. Most of their business involves bringing in a
variety of goods from local businesses using smaller city trucks. Those goods aze brought inio
the building, consotidated into packa�es by location and loaded onto semi-trucks that make the
deliveries. Dawes Truckine is currently located in Roseville. They are relocating because they
need more room.
Mr. Beach show�ed stides of the site.
�
\J
�
u
��
� � -S �-�
John MacDaniels, owner of Dawes Truckin�, informed Mc Beach about their operation. 11te
• facility will be open Monday through Friday; it's normally closed on weekends, but an
occasional truck will come in. Durin� the week, they open about 7 a.m. Tuesdays and Fridays
are generally the busiest days and they stay open unti] midnight. On Mondays, Wednesdays
and Thursdays, the facility is open until 8 or 9 p.m. The peak hours are in the late aftemoon
from 3 to 6 p.m. Right now they have 35 semi-trailers a week taking freight out; and about 10
semi-trailers a week bringing frei�ht in. They also have from six to ei�ht local trucks coming
and going each day, Monday throu�h Friday. Typically, the semi-trailers take three or four
hours to load or unload. Sometimes trucks leave their engines on while they are loading or
unloadin�, but they don't leave them on overnieht. There will be electrical heaters provided in
the winter so that they won't need to run their heaters all night. Some of the trucks will have
refrigerator uniu, but they will not need to be running. There will be no fuelin� stations or
maintenance facilities on the site.
The Board of Directors of the Hamline-Midway Coalition voted unanimously to oppose this
project. Two letters were received from the neighborhood; one was in opposition; the other was
in support.
Next, Mr. Beach went through the required findings. The first one states that the Planning
Commission shall consider and find that the site plan is consistent with the city's adopted
comprehensive plan and development or project plans for sub-areas of the ciry. Since the City's
recently adopted comprehensive plan was not in effect when this application came in, the
fortner plan must be used. The plan says that in cases of incompatible land uses, the City wi(I
use techniques such as landscaping, berming, or fencing site perimeters in maintaining building
• exteriors to create buffers bern-een ]and uses. The District 1 I Plan also talks about creating
buffers to separate residentia! areas from commercial and industrial areas. It also talks about
traffic concems. Staff thinks that the site plan can be consistent with these policies if noise
barriers are erected. The exact design of these noise barriers hasn't been worked out yet. 3LT
Group is talking about putting another buifdins alon� Minnehaha for something like mini-
storage that wouldn't create much noise, which might act like a noise barrier, if it is built. If the
building is not built, perhaps some walled fences will need to be built along Fairview.
The earlier staff report also recommended closing all the driveways on Fairview so that trucks
would need to come in off Prior. Afrer talking with JLT, staff has modified its recommendation
on this. JLT says they need access on Fairview because they glan to su6divide the property.
Now, staff recommends that the northem most driveway is closed and JLT has agreed.
The next finding is that the site plan must be consistent with the applicable ordinances of the
City of Saint Paul. Trucking facilities are a permitted use on this property since it is zoned I-1.
A question that came up here is whether or not Fairview is a truck route. The City Attorney
said that Fairview is not a truck route, however, the regulations say that trucks can use a non-
truck route "when necessary in entering or leaving a truck terminal" and then they must use the
shoRest route to get to a truck route. JLT says they won't have access to Prior Avenue (a truck
route), so staff is recommending they have at least one driveway out to Fairview. Staff
originally recommended that there be a sound study done to see if the City's noise ordinance
would be exceeded, but since has decided that would not be necessary. A reasonable solution
might be attained if they decide to erect the other building. There's a small discrepancy as faz
as the setback from Fairview Avenue. It needs to be a little bigger than shown. StafF is
• recommendin� that the setback be increased.
�
��
The next finding has to do with preservation of unique geological, geographic or historically
significant characteristics of the city and environmentally sensitive areas. The site doesn't fall
into those categories. The were some concems raised by the neighborhood concerning .
environmental issues, particularly, air quality. Mr. Beach said he called the Minnesota
Pollution Control Agency and the Environment Quality Board about the issues. Both said that
this faciliry was quite a bit smaller Than anything that would trigger any formai environmental
review. Both also said that a situation may cause irritable odors without violating any
ordinance. Perhaps, there may be a restriction on when wcks tum off their engines.
The next f nding deals with protection of adjacent and neighboring properties. Staff is now
recommending that it will meet that finding if they close one driveway on Fairview Avenue and
put up the noise barriers.
The next finding has to do with the arrangement of building and uses. Staff is recommending
that the plan is consistent with that finding, if the changes are made.
Re�arding energy conservation, the plan is consistent with the current practices.
Regardino safety and convenience of both vehicular and pedestrian traffic, Public Works
reviewed this site plan and determined that the plan, induding the use of the existing driveways
on Fairview for the primary access to the truck faciliry, is safe and consistent with this fmding.
Drainaae. The site plan doesn't deal with that yet, but can be added on if these other things aze
approved.
Landscaping, fencing, wails, and parking. There witl be some kind of requirement for either •
walls or buildin�s to block sound. Staff recommends that there be at least 10 feet between the
building and the sidewalk to plant vegetation.
Site accessibility. They need to provide one more handicapped parking spot.
Erosion and sediment control. They don't yet have a plan.
Staff recommends approva( of the site plan subject to the following conditions:
1. Driveways. The north driveway on Fairview must be c[osed and the south driveway must
be widened as determined by Public Works to handle lazge trucks.
2. Souad barriers. Sound mitigation measures must be designed and constructed to ensure
that the development conforms to City noise regulations. If walls are required for sound
barriers, they must be in place before the building is occupied. If another new buiIding will
act as a sound banier, work must begin on that building before the trucking building is
occupied.
3. Truck idling. Truck engines must be tumed offwhenever trucks are at the docks or aze
standing on the site waiting to get to a dock. More discussion on that this moming leaves
this up to staff, the neighborhood and JLT to work out.
4. Parking on adjacent streets. Trucks using this site may not pazk on Fairview or
Minnehaha.
5. Hours of operation. Hours of operation must be timited to between 6 a.m. and 12
midni�ht. .
6. Setbacks and lattdscaping. The setback on Fairview must be increased to 10 feet to permit
�
��
�g-S�y
enou�h room for landscaping to soften the appearance of the buildina. The setback must be
• planted with shrubs that will get at least ] 0 feet tall when mature to form a continuous row
alon� the entire east side ofthe building.
Additional ]andscaping must be planted around the perimeter of the site wherever noise
barriers are required. Noise barriers or other new buildings must be setback 10' from the
property line to provide adequate room for landscaping.
7. Storm water plan. A storm water management plan must be submitted to staff for
approval.
8. Accessible parlting. One additional handicapped accessible parkin� space must be
provided.
9. Erosion and sediment control. An erosion and sediment control plan must be submitted
to staff for approval.
Commissioner Field sfiated he is distressed by Mr. Beach's comment that we just pass over the
issue of truck idlin�. He noted he would be interested in the discussions that took place this
mornin� and how it's possible to come up with a recommendation like that. Mr. Beach replied
that the discussion was with the o�vmer who said that there are times, especiafly during the
winter, when truckers don't want to shut off their engines. Commissioner Field asked if the
nei�hborhood was involved. Mr. Beach responded it was not.
Commissioner Gordon asked what noise mitigation efforts Mr. Beach recommend. Mr. Beach
noted that they would depend on whether the other building goes up. If the building is e�ected
and if it's a use that doesn't generate additional traffic, it should take care of much of the
• problem witli noise bouncin� up to Ivfinnehaha. In addition, he thinks there should be a wal( or
fence along Fairview Avenue. If the buildin� doesn't get built, then the City would require
more noise barriers. Commissioner Gordon asked how high those would be. Mr. Beach replied
that hasn't been worked out yet. It would be a solid barrier. Commissioner Gordon asked if
JLT just needs to begin work on the other building in order for Dawes to occupy the truck
building. Mr. Beach stated that was reasonable. Commissioner Gordon asked if Mr. Beach is
satisfied that the other building or solid barriers will adequately mitigate the noise emanating
from this operation. Mr. Beach replied that he was because the people who wouid be affected
most are those east along Fairview, they are dosest to the trucks. He is confident they will not
hear anything because the docks are on the opposite side of the buildin=. A wall can be placed
north alon� Fairview to help on that side, and if the building is erected, it should take care of the
noise problem. If the building is not built, then perhaps a wing wall coming out of the north
end of the building may need to be built. Commissioner Gordon asked about the noise from the
trucks ingressing and egressing from the building. Mr. Beach stated there witl be noise from
trucks. Commissioner Gordon asked how Mr. Beach knew that the noise from the lrucks
entering and exiting wouldn't be excessive. Mr. Beach stated that he knew for sure that the
noise would not violate the City's noise ordinance based on past experience with other cases.
Mr. Beach added that there was no formal testing done in this case, but the architect did check
w ith a noise meter. Commissioner Gordon stated that he is concemed about the fact that the
initial recommendation included a noise study and the revised recommendation does not. He
asked why that requirement was dropped; it would indicate, with an acceptable level of
confidence, whether the noise is going to be unacceptable or not. Mr. Beach replied that staff is
confident they will be able to evaluate whether the proposal will meet the standard or not.
� Commissioner Gordon asked who would select the company or individual to perform the noise
study. Mr. Beach said that in the past, the applicant has selected the person and the City has
`��
)9
either accepted the person or su�gested ano[her. Commissioner Gordon asked if there was a
down side for requirin� the noise study before approvins an application. Mr. Beach responded
it is primarily the cost to the developer and about a two week delay of the project. •
Commissioner Geisser asked Mr. Beach what the decision was on how these added trucks
would affect the level of air quality of the neighborhood. Mr. Beach replied that staff at the
Minnesota Pollution Control Agency and the Environmental Quality Board indicated that this
would not require an environmentai assessment worksheet (EAW) or an indirect source permit.
Their professional judgment was that in terms of air quality tha[ can be measured, this would
not violate standards that they have; there might, however, be a problem w�ith odor.
Commissioner Geisser was concerned about their making these judgtnents without doing any
type of study. Mr. Beach stated that this is a case that is far below what they would normally be
concerned with. He asked the Environmental Quality Boazd what their threshold was and they
answered that with a trucking facility, it needs to be 600,000 squaze feet; this is 25,000 squaze
feet. Commissioner Geisser asked if the City has any ordinances that are separate from these in
terms of level of noise or air quality, where abutting a residential neighborhood. Mr. Beach
replied that the City has a noise ordinance, but not an air quatity ordinance.
h1r. Bob Kessler, Director for the Department ofLicense, Inspection and Environmentai
Protection addressed the Commission. He stated that the reason he did not feel that a noise
study was necessary because there are often noise studies done where they rarely show that the
new use will be in violation of the City's noise ordinance. Sometimes ho�vever, there aze
complaints about noise whether or not the facility meets the threshold in the ordinance. Then
the department needs to do whatever it can to mitigate the noise even thou�h it doesn't violate
the ordinance.
Commissioner Corbey asked how many decibels is estimated a truck emit; entering and leaving •
the premises, and what does the ordinance call for. Mr. Beach rep[ied that he doesn't have a
figure on decibels when a truck enters or leaves a facilit} or drivin� by. The ordinance deals
with a more lon�-term noise, e.g., a truck idling. Accordina to the ordinance, the noise has to
be present more than 10% of the time in a given hour. In this case, you can't exceed 75
decibels during the day (measured at the residential zoning line) and from 11 p.m. to 7 a.m.,
that drops down to 5� decibels. There is a graph on page 16 of the staff repoR that helps to
define those levels. The level that you'd find in a private office is 55 decibels; 75 decibels is a
large gathering of people or downtown Saint Paul.
Commissioner Mardell asked where other truck terminals are located in the City of Saint Paul,
and if there are any other truck terminals that are located in close proximity to residential
neighborhoods. Mr. Beach listed: 1) the Burlington-Northern facility on Pierce-Butler (noise
within the site); 2) a trucking facility on West Minnehaha near Dale (some problems); 3) a
trucking facility on Petham Avenue, soaYh of University Avenue thaY are similar types of
facilities in the City. There are complaints from time to time.
Commissioner Corbey asked if it woutd make a difference if the docks on the north end of the
building were moved to the south side of the building so the noise and pollution wouldn't spill
into the neighborhood on Minnehaha. Mr. Beach repiied that if the docks were on the south
side, they would interfere with the Fairview driveway. Commissioner Corbey asked why the
entrance to the facility could not be along Prior Avenue, a truck route. He noted that the
buildings along there are old and di(apidated and wondered if there would be a comprehensive •
plan in the future to redevelop that wfiole iayout of buildines. Mr. Beach responded that the
�'
0
aq -�S ��I
drive�vays alona Fairview have been there for years, and the applicant has objections to closing
• those driveways because of possible fumre plans for the property.
Commissioner Gordon asked if the noise study would be of help in determinina what the noise
miti�ation efforts should be. Mr. Kessler replied that Mr. Beach is the expert on that and coutd
provide advise on what types of walls or barriers or miti�ation measures might be employed.
He has done that in many cases in the pazt, so the City would not necessazily need a consuitant
for that. When there is noise disturbing a neighborhood and it doesn't violate the City's
ordinance, which is usually the case, it is di�cult to come up with measures to do what is
necessary to help eliminate the noise. Commissioner Gordon asked if the noise study would be
of help in deciding issues like whether an operation should not run until midniaht, but only until
10 p.m. Mr. Kessler replied that it is possible that a professionally done study could provide
information that staff could not gathec. In this case, Mr. Kessler didn't think it was a likely
possibility and he didn't think that there was enough unknown information to require a study to
be done. Because this facility has not been fully used for a long time, it is naturally going to be
disruptive to the neighborhood.
Mr. KuR Williams, JLT Group, gave a short presentation. This formerNavy and Unysis
facility was purchased by JLT Group three years ago. A substantial amount of that property has
already been re-developed. They hope to build four more buildings on this site. Under this
proposal there are two buildings (the second one will take 60 days to confirm). The site is
zoned industrial and JLT knows that this is a good project. Dawes Transport has a July move-in
timetable.
• Commissioner Field asked what types of use the additiona( buildings at this site will be. Mr.
Williams replied that as a developer, he doesn't kno�v the answer to that question. The second
building on this site wif] be a mini-gara�e. The other buildings probably wil] be office
buildin�s.
Commissioner Gordon asked if working out the noise issue might include doin� a noise study.
Mr. Wifliams replied that he is not sure how to do a noise study. Commissioner Gordon asked
if he had a problem with hiring a consultant who knows how to do noise studies. Mr. Williams
responded that a noise study is a matter of timing and cost. Commissioner Gordon asked what
it would cost to have a noise study done. Mr. Williams answered that he did not know.
Public testimony began.
John Van De Weghe, 1807 Blair Avenue, addressed the Commission in opposition. He was
the lead speaker for the neighborhood delegation who a�e opposed to the facility altogether.
His concerns are noise, air qua(ity, safety, etc. On Tuesday, he sat in his car from 4:55-5:10
p.m. on Minnehaha and Fairview. He counted 200 cars or vehicles that came through the
intersection in fifreen minutes. Mr. Van De Weghe also submitted written testimony from a
neighbor.
2. Thomas Minder, 764 Tatum Street, addressed the Commission in opposition. He stated that
his community is a socioeconomic diverse neighborhood and a benefit to Saint Paul.
Already existing in the neighborhood is an industrial corridor (Pierce Butler Route),
carrying a lot of truck traffic. It is four-five blocks from his house, yet they heaz the traffic
• on it all day long. Burlington-Northen, to the north is the same situation. To the west is the
Amtrak Station, with trains arriving at midnight and at 7 a.m. To the east, they have the
x
21
hiehest pollution area in the Twin Cities, the Snelling-University intersection. Further to
the north is the Saint Paul Stadium, a great benefit to the city, and in the summer months •
the neighborhood listens to the crowd cheering. To the south is University Avenue and all
summer long, hot rods travel up and down University oa Friday and Saturday nights, which
makes a lot of racket. The neighborhood is overtvn with noise and air pollution. His
children are awakened every moming now at 7 a.m. without the truck transfer facility. He
feels this truck facility will break the community, an asset, a model of community activiry.
The community has worked with landowners in the past to resolve problems. Economic
development is obviously, a very important issue in the community. It's important to the
Ciry of Saint Paut; iYs important for JLT to make a profit and the community invites them
into the community to do so. Clearly, JLT has not invited the neighborhood to the table to
discuss iT. He inveTed JLT to come up wiYh a business plan that makes the money, provides
jobs for the neighborhood and the Ciry of Saint Paul, and becomes a partner with the
community, not a detriment to it.
Commissioner Gordon asked if there have been no meetings between JLT and the community.
Mc Minder replied there have been two meetings; he was unable to be present at the meetings.
3. Michael Samuelson, 17�8 Hewitt Avenue, addressed the Commission in opposition. He
referred to finding 62.108 of the Zonin� Code in regard to the site plan. This type of firm, a
trucking firm, is not appropriate under the Comprehensive Plan: The Land Use Chapter.
These types (truckins facility) of uses should be considered to be restricted. There is an
issue of concern hare about the best use of this land. The neighborhood appreciates the
oppoRUnity for JLT to move into the neighborhood and provide for appropriate job
producing businesses. Under the Port Authority's rule of assistance programs is "per 1,000 •
square feet of building space there is a minimum of one job on a site coverage of 30% per
site." This plan does not even come close to this. This will not provide livin� wage jobs
for the community. Fifteen years ago, this site was projected as an opportuniTy to provide
living wage jobs in light industrial work that would employ the residents of our community.
That �vould be welcomed, but a trucking ftrm that brings noise, disturbance, complaints,
pollution, etc., is not appropriate under the Saint Paul Comprehensive Plan: the Land Use
Chapter, and specifically, in the goals and objectives of the City to bring firms that provide
jobs. This will not provide jobs for Saint Paul. In addition, he echoed the concems of the
previous speaker, Thomas Minder, by sayin� that this use will force people out of the
neighborhood, the community they have chosen to live in. The community already lives
with noise on all four sides. This use will bring trucks up and dowm Fairview Avenue (not a
truck route) because JLT wants tfie entrances there. They shouldn't be allowed to do that.
If you allow them to do that, how and where does the community go to respond? Mr.
Samuelson noted that if he were to add a third story to his home, which is not allowed, he
would be in trouble. This is an incompatible use with the Land Use Plan and with the long
range vision of this community. He asked the Commission to oppose this site plan and
recommend that JLT work with the community to find a compatible use. The community
woutd be willing to a(so work with the Port Authority and the Plannina and Economic
Development staff to come with a re-development plan. He asked that the Commission put
a moratorium on this site altogether in order to work on a coraprehensive pian for this siYe.
Chair Morton asked Mr. Beach to clarify whether this site plan complies with the
Comprehensive Plan. He stated that a new Land Use Plan was just adopted and he originally •
cited that in the staff report. The City Attomey advised, however, that the o]d Land Use Plan be
referred to because the new one w�as not in effect when this plan was submitted. This use is in
A'
qt
a�-sa�
conformance with the earlier Land Use Plan.
• 4. Joe Potraski, 1636 Minnehaha Avenue West, addressed the Commission in opposition. He
stated that he is very disappointed with Mr. Beach's stance because he is basically, asking
the snake not to eat the mouse and then lea�ing it up to the snake to make sure he doesn't
eat the mouse. There are too many questions about the noise and pollution that he is
leaving up to JLT. The proposed semi-truck transfer station is not a proper use for this site
in this neighborhood. The zoning of this lot allows for many uses, but the proposed use is
not a proper use in the community now. Semi-trucks aze already illegally using the
community's side streets. JLT has already admitted, previously, that it can have no
influence or control over the semi-truck drivers once they leave their property. The City of
Saint Paul cannot now protect the community from the illegal use of iu sides streets by the
j semi-truck drivers. Everyone existing in the community has a responsibility to not cause
� damage to the community, which the semi-truck uansfer station certainly would. The very
loud beep, beep, beep that is required by law when the trucks back up can be heazd from
Burlington Northem on a day when the wind is not blowing in the opposite direction, one-
half mile from his house, as the crow flies. With the transfer station just right across the
street from many homes, the loud beep, beep, beep will be a constant disturbance. The
level of the beep cannot be lowered because of OCHA's standards. T'he pollution caused by
semi's running, not only in the winter, but also in the summer for the air conditioning, will
be a problem. There are many decisions which Mr. Beach has lefr the community out of.
He has bowed to JLT and JLT's architect. He is glad that the Commission has noticed these
failures and encouraged the Commission to tum dow�n this project. He noted that he has
worked with the MPCA for 2%z years to try to get them just to notice the smell coming
from the factory on Minnehaha and Fairview and Minnehaha and Fryer. lfiey have failed
• to find it. They have failed to stand up for the community. He stated that he is very
uncomfortable in leaving anything to JLT because once they are there, iYs going to be ev8n
harder to enforce. He added that he is happy with what he has experienced here today. He
thought he would come here and experience peopte who really didn't have much interest or
questions, but he was pleased to hear the wise questions that were asked by the
Commission.
5. Ron Williams, 779 Clayland Street, three blocks from Minnehaha and Fairview, addressed
the Commission in opposition. Three years ago he and his wife bought their house with 0
dollars down in an area with busing and one they could afford. They aze very concemed
that the JLT proposal could mean that they will be stuck in a deteriorating neighborhood.
Mr. Williams is representing the Sierra Club this morning whose goals include "to protect
the quality of the namral and human environment." The focus of his concem today is the
protection of kids. In a couple of days, the Sierra Club intends to submit an Environmental
Assessment Worksheet petition. This petition stresses that there are certain envuonmental
problems that need to be addressed by the City conceming the JLT proposal: 1) safety; 2)
noise; 3) air quality; 4) visual quality; 5) light pollution; and 6) water. The JLT proposal
brings a very serious safety concern to the children of the community, especially to
Fairview Avenue children. For this reason, it is imperative that the JLT be prohibited from
using Fairview Avenue for their trucks. Twenty trucks per day running until midnight will
bring a serious noise issue. It dcesn't have to be this way. There is no reason why a facility
that is compatible with the residential neighborhood cannot be placed on this property. An
additional twenty trucks per day will have a serious air poilution impact on an azea that is
• now only 12 blocks away from Snel(ing and University, the most air polluted point in the
State of Minnesota. He encouraged the Planning Commission to recommend doing and
�
2Z
EAW for this proposal. He noted that the developer is threatening the City with deadlines,
hopin� that the City will rubber-stamp their request. This is very inappropriate; the City •
must reasonably consider the developer's request.
6. Ken Schuba, 179� Blair, addressed the Commission in opposition. He asked the
Commission to wnsider what impact this facifity will have on some of the community's
sources of income. His wife is a licensed day-care provider, located less than'/z block from
Fairview Avenue. Some of her clients have aiready expressed a concern about the idea of a
warehouse being so close to the day-care. Their concems are the same as he and his wife:
1) heavy traffic; 2) noise; 3) lazge trucks; 4) unsafe driving habits; etc. Ifthese clients aze
lost, it will be increasingly more di�cult to find new clients with these less than appealing
aspects in the neighborhood. There are several home day-cares in the neighborhood. One
is located directly across the street from the proposed site. This will definitely affect their
ability to find and keep clients. The facility will not only affect the community's quality of
life, but it will also affect its sources of income. If their income suffers, it has a ripple
affect that affects more than just his family. They will not have the financial resources to
maintain their property, their house value will fall, their neighbors' house value will fall,
they may wind up on public assistance, and the pressures of financial instability affect ali
members of a household. This financia( impact is of great concern to Mr. Schuba and his
family. This neighborhood is on the up-swing. House values are going up. People aze
takinL pride in their homes, doing work to update and remodel, all in an efFort to raise the
qualit}• of living for everyone in the neighborhood. This nei�borhood has a home gazden
show; a neighborhood that fights to have gun shops removed for safety's sake; a
nei�hborhood that is concemed about the trucking facility that will decrease the aesthetics,
increase the pollution, increase the noise, increase the crime, and in rurn, decrease the •
values of their homes. The people who own this land do not need to worry about the issues
that the neighborhood has. They will never be confronted with the likes of a trucking
warehouse being built across the street from their homes. They will never need to worry
about semi-trucks cruising down the streets that their kids will be riding their bikes on,
diesel engines starting up at 5 a.m., or trucks runnin� all night long so that the drivers can
sleep in their cabs. We do, and we are concemed; and we do not think that we should be
affected by a big company getting big�er, especiatly at the expense of people trying to
improve a wonderful part of our city. Obviously, this company is not trying to be a good
nei�hbor. They, obviously, have no regard for the people who live here. How can we allow
someone with so little concern for the community to start a business that will only cause
more and more problems down the road.
Last week the Roseville City Council, in their wisdom, stopped Cub Foods plans because
"they fear the store will disrupt their ►ives around the clock with noise, fumes, trucks,
loadin„ lights, and all the extra traffic." Mayor pon Wall stated, "My concern is that this a
shopping center next to a residential area; it involves the wider community."
Francine Panioa, 1800 Blair, addressed the Commission in opposition. She and her family
also run the comer grocery store of the community at Minnehaha and Fairview. They
purchased the building, approximately one year aso, to renovate it and bring it back to its
old quality, its old look, and to keep the neighborhood a neighborhood, a store for people to
go with their children and to send their children to. She is concemed for the safety of these
children and their parents with their strollers. Another issue is the invasion of the lights this •
company already has on the people who live on Minnehaha. The three tenants who live in
her business buildin� have had the same privacy complaints. In the evening, the lights are
�
2 '1
� a -sa �{
so imasive that they cannot just close their shades and be alone. The neighborhood expects
� that this +nvasion will be mukiplied by a great amount. Already, they have had io invest in
new shades and draperies in order to keep both the noise and lighu out of their own living
rooms. There are some seventy plus children running around the blocks in a six block
radius. More trucks travelin� in this community will make it even more dangerous than it
already is with trucks using the side streets. The community would like to keep it a nice
nei�hborhood for famities to feel safe.
8. Jim Twembold, 1762 Blair, addressed the Commission in opposition. He tives one block
from the proposed site. He is concemed about security and safety issues. Within four
blocks of this siie, there are two schools, several churches, several family services, and four
parks. The buildings are primarily family-owned and occupied buildin�s. The
neighborhood is full of kids. When the truckers deliver late at night, they will run their
trucks all night. Just as one's house is maintained at a 70 degree temperature, they will
maintain their truck at a 70 degree temperature so they can relax and sleep. There's also the
issue of them spending the night there with no bathrooms; the issue of them storing empty
trailers which can invite others to spend the night out of the rain or kids Iooking for a piace
to cause trouble. There is no way of policing that. Locks only keep honest people honest.
Any given day, you can see trucks going up and down the side streets. It was said that
Fairview is not a designated truck route, but to the truckers, their time is money and they're
going to take the shortest route from A to B. We don't need any more trucks going up and
down the side streets. This company's busiest time is from 3- 6 p.m.; thaYs when the
schools are getting out; that's when parents are either dropping off or picking up their kids
from the local day cares.
• The first tape ended here; the second tape was blank.
9. Maz�orie Schma]z, 1829 West Minnehaha, addressed the Commission in opposition. Ms.
Schmalz lives right across the street from this proposal and is emotionally affected by
blankness, e.g., the view of a close blank neighbor's house from their dining room window
was remedied by the addition of a deck. Now, this proposal talks about putting up a long,
high barrier along Fairview. She is also concerned about the air quality and odors the new
use will cause.
]0. Bob Molden, 1817 Van Buren, addressed the Commission in opposition. Mr. Molden lives
right across the street from the north gate on the proposed site. During the State Fair one
year, there were 200 school buses that used this site to park. The noise and the stench were
nearly unbearable, and that was just an indication to him of what they will face with this
facility. He expects that twenty trucks is not the actual figure; there will be more and more.
Eventually, the facility will turn into a monster. He feels that JLT needs help to find an
alternative use and the community is willing to help him. Since Govemor Ventura is
courting the movie industry, perhaps this facility could be used for that.
I 1. Cheryf Hammerlindl, 672 NoRh Fairview, addressed the Commission in opposition. She
and her husband live directly across the street from this proposed facility. Her fust concern
is the safety of the children of the community. There have been six serious accidents at the
gates on Fairview involving trucks. There are forty-two children on the block they live and
• thirty-five children on the next block. The peak hours for Dawes is from 3- 6 p.m.; those
are also the peak hours for children being outside. Another concem is that her husband
works at night, so he sleeps during the day. With all the extra noise created by the trucks,
fi�
2S
he will have more difficulty sleepin�.
12. Steven Wilson, 680 Fairview Avenue North, addressed the Commission in opposition. He
thinks that to keep the ingress and egress of this facility along Fairview is a very poorly
thought-out decision. The added truck traffic will further endanger the children, shake
houses, decrease air quality, and increase noise and light pollution. There aze other uses
that woutd be rrtore appropriate for this site.
13. Roberta Mach, 1804 Englewood Avenue, addressed the Commission in opposition. Ms.
Mach lives one block north of Fairview and Minnehaha and is concerned about home
values goinL down and Fairview Avenue becoming a truck route.
I4. Sara Oxten, 1798 Blair Avenue, addressed the Commission in opposition. Ms. Oxten has
been impressed with the neighborhood, but is dismayed by the odors already there
emanating from businesses. She was surprised to hear that Fairview was not a truck route.
She thought it was because of all the truck tra�c. She thinks that JLT should be able to
make money, but not at her and the neighborhood's expense.
I5. Carol Minogue, 1846 Englewood, addressed the Commission in opposition. Ms. Minogue
expressed concem about the property values of the community's homes going down if this
faciliry is al(owed to locate on Fairview. She also submitted a letter from a neighbor.
16. Paul LaBelle, 1895 Tatum, addressed the Commission in opposition. His home is a day
care and he is concerned, primarily, about safety.
17. K. Nighten�ale, ] 689 Van Buren Avenue, addressed the Commission in opposition. She
mentioned that there are 54 block clubs in the neighborhood; there is great community
involvement. If this proposed facility moves in, her family is moving out.
Mr. Brian Houmann, JLT Group's architect, addressed the Commission, commenting that the
Planning Commission should be concerning itse(f with site plan issues. The proposed facility is
within its rights to be there. He explained that they will be taking down the pole lights and
putting up building lights that shine into the site.
Commissioner Geisser stated that the Planning Commission has a Comprehensive Plan that
they expect people to respect. They also expect people to respect the health and safety issues of
the community, a community that pays taxes. It is the intention of the Land Use Chapter to
place more intense uses outward; less intense uses towazd residentiat neighborhoods. She noted
that is apparent from the testimony that there is not a good understanding between the
neighborhood and JLT. There aze other issues beside zoning that should be taken into
consideration regarding this decision.
Mr. Houmann stated that 7LT is bringing this use before the CiTy because this is what they have.
Commissioner Geisser pointed out that discussions with the neighborhood are very important.
Mr. Houmann said that JLT had two meetings with the neighborhood.
Commissioner Kramer asked what specific changes resulted from the meetings with the
community. Mr. Houmann noted the possibie erection of noise barriers.
Commissioner Corbey asked if any consideration was given to locate this facility on the
r1
LJ
•
•
�
2L
�a-��.y
northwest comer of the site, and asked why they chose this section of the site. Mr. Houmann
. answered that this facility would not fit as well on the northwest corner. Commissioner Mazdell
added that the northwest site probably would not be as eas}' to access with the trucks.
bIOTION: Commissioner Gordon moved to close the public hearing and refer the matter to
the Neighborhood and Current Planning Committee; the motion was seconded by
Commissioner Geisser and carried unanimously on a voice vnte.
Commissioner Gordon urged the applicant to meet with the local community.
V. Zonine Committee
#99-030 Jonathan E. Waaner - Rezone from RT-1 to B2-C to allow for a therapeutic massage,
rehabilitation and chronic pain center at 366 West King, between Smith and Manomin (Martha
Faust, 266-6572).
Commissioner Gervais reported that this case was laid over until the next Zoning Committee
meeting, Tuesday, March 30.
#99-031 Tena Lv - Special condition use permit to allow for on-site auto zepair at 1047
University Avenue, beriveen Oxford and Lesington Parkway, in conjunction with the vehicle
warranties the applicant offers customers (Nancy Homans, 266-6557).
bIOTION: Commissioner Gervais maved approval ojthe requested specia! cnndition use
permit to a!!ow jor on-site auto repair at 1047 University Avenue, befween Oxford and
• Lexington Parkway, in conjunction with the vehicle wurtanties fhe applicani offers
custamers.
Commissioner Geisser noted that this applicant came before the Commission in the past and the
Commission allowed no repairs to be done on-site. The Commission recently had an extensive
discussion about whether the proposed Ryder Truck rental facility was an appropriate use on the
site directly to the west, given current plans calling for higher density uses on University
Avenue. Why should University Avenue be allowed to have all these "interim" uses.
Commissioner Gervais replied that all ofthose things were discussed at the Zoning Committee
meeting, but fett Mr. Ly should be allowed to fulfil warranties he offers on used cazs.
Commissioner Gordon added that Mr. Ly has just one bay for repair. He doesn't think this will
afFect too much.
Commissioner Shakir asked if the resolution will meet the district council's concerns. Ms.
Homans replied that District 7 has raised issues related both to the previous prohibition of
repairs on-site and to the large signs that were erected for a previous car dealer. She said that
the district council is likely to be disappointed in the Zoning Committee's recommendation.
Commissioner Kramer noted that there is no condition that limits repair work. He reported that
the SCUP permitted for Ryder has been appealed to the Ciry Council. He asked if there was
any prudence in waiting to hear what the City Council does in that case.
• Mr. Ford stated that he thought each case should be considered on its own merits and this
applicant should not have to wait for Ciry Council action on someone else's case.
�
i7
PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
1. APPLICANT: JLT Group
2. CLASSIFICATION: Site Plan Review
3. LOCATION: 625 Fairview Avenue ('/: block souih of Minnehaha)
4. PLANNING DISTRICT: Hamline Midway Coalition (District 11)
5. LEGAL DESCRIPTION: See file
6. PRESENTZONING: I-1
7. STAFF INVESTIGATION AND REPORT:
DATE OF HEARING: 3/26198
ZONING CODE REFERENCE: 62.708(c)
DATE: 3/19/99 BY: Tom Beach
8. DATE RECEIVED: 2/23l99 DEADLINE FOR ACTION: 4/25/99
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A. PURPOSE: Site plan review for a new truck transfer facility.
B. PARCEL SIZE: The proposed building and the paved area around it for trucks would be cover 2.5
acres. It wouid be located at the east end of a larger piece of industrial property that runs from
Fairview to Prior on the south side of Minnehaha and covers 14.5 acres
C. EXISTING LAND USE: The area where the truck Vansfer facility would be built is currently a parking
lot. There are two driveways on Fairview Avenue. (These driveways have gates which are currently
locked and have snow in front of them indicating that they have not been used recently).
The rest of the property has a variety of offices and industrial uses and more parking. The main
building on the site has approximately 15 loading docks on the south (back) side.
D. SURROUNDING LAND USE:
The area to the east (across Fairview) and to the north (across Minnehaha) is residential. (Zoned
R-4, RT-1 and RM-2)
The area to the west and south is industrial. (Zoned I-1)
E. ZONING CODE CITATION: Section 62.108(c) lists a number of findings that the Planning
Commission must make in order to approve a site plan. These are listed and discussed in Section H
below.
F. HISTORY: The site has been had industrial uses for over 60 years. At one time Controi Data was a
major tenant. JLT bought the property about 3 years ago and has been renovating the existing
buildings.
� DISTRICT COUNCIL RECOMMENDATION: The Hamfine Midway Coalifion requested a public
hearing on this site plan. They have concems about truck traffic, noise and air pollution. Their Board
of Directors voted unanimously to oppose the project. (See attached letters.)
•
•
H. FINDINGS:
1. Dawes Trucking The truck transfer facility would be built by JLT and operated by Dawes
Trucking. Dawes would bring a variety of goods to the site from local businesses using smaller �
city trucks. The goods would then be consolidated inside the building and loaded onto semi-
trailers and shipped out of state. Dawes currently operates out of a building located in Roseville.
However, this buiiding is too small and Dawes wants to move to get more room
��
�a-sa�{
2. Proposed operation John McDaniels, the owner of Dawes Trucking, described the proposed
operation to staff, including the hours of operation and the number ot trucks:
Hours of operation
• - The facility would be open Monday through Friday. It would normally be closed on
weekends although occasionally there would be an individual truck on weekends.
- During the week the facility would open at 7AM. Tuesdays and Fridays are the busiest
days and the facility would normally stay open until midnight on those nights. On
Monday, Wednesday and Thursdey the facifity would ciose at 8 or 9 P.M..
- Peak hours are late afternoon (3 to 6 P.M.)
Number and types of trucks
— There would be approximately 35 semi-trailer trucks a week taking freight out and another
10 semi-trailer trucks bring freight in. (On Tuesday and Friday when they are busier,
there would be 10 semi-trailer trucks a day. On Monday, Wednesday and Thursday
there wouid be fewer semi-trailer trucks.
— There would be 6 to 8 smailer local trucks a day Monday thru Friday. These trucks would
leave in the morning, pick up or deliver goods locally, and return in the afternoon.
— The large trailers typically take 3 or 4 hours to load. However, a trailer may site at the
dock for a day or two until it is picked up. The truck engines would be turned off and
would not run while the trucks are parked. Electrical hook-ups for engine heaters would
be provided in the winter. If traiters will be parked for more than a few hours, the tractor
is unhooked and leaves the site.
— Some of the semi-trailers would have refrigerator units. However, Dawes wouid not be
handling perishable good such as produce and so tucks with refrigerator units would not
run them while they were at the site.
— There would not be any fueling stations or maintenance shops on site.
3. Existing operation Staff visited Dawes current location in Roseville two times and observed
the following:
• — On Thursday, March 11 at 4:00 PM there were 10 trailers parked at dock doors and additional
trailers parked on the site away from the building. (These trailers did not have any engines
running.) There was one truck backing up to a dock and in the next 15 minutes two more
trucks arrived on site. (These trucks had their engines running.)
— On Monday, March 25 at 8:00 the business was closed. There were approximately 10 trailers
parked at dock doors and other trailers parked on the site away from the building. One
parked truck was running and had its lights on.
4. The site plan The pian shows a 27,740 square foot buiiding. It would be 294' long on the side
facing Fairview and 93' deep. It wouid be 28'-5" tall. The building would have a small office on
the south end but most of the building would be for storing and handling goods. The building
would have 21 overhead doors for large trucks on the west side (facing away from Fairview) and 5
doors for smaller, local trucks on the north side (these wouid be visible from the street). Access
would be provided using rivo existing driveways on Fairview. The site also has access from an
existing driveway on Prior.
5. Required findings Section 62.108(c) of the Zoning Code says that in "order to approve the
site plan, the planning commission shall consider and find that the site plan is consistent with" the
following:
(a) The city's adopted comprehensive plan and development or project plans for sub-areas of the
city.
The City's recently adopted Land Use Plan supports "compatible mixed use". The site plan is
not compatible with the adjacent residential neighborhood. The plan could be made more
• compatible by closing the existing driveways on Fairview so that trucks must use Prior and
installing sound barriers.
The Land Use Plan also says the City should "consider alternatives such as special
restrictions on large trucking firms."
� G
The draft District 11 Plan supports steps to mitigate the impact of the Burlington NoRhen
intermodal freight yard which is located '/z mile to the north. Taking steps to mitigate the
impact of this site would be consistent with that.
(b) Applicable ordinances of the City of Saint Paul. •
The site plan does not meet the minimum required setback along Fairview: the required
setback for the buiiding is 7'-5" and the proposed site plan shows a setback of 6'.
There is a question about whether Fairview Avenue can be used as a truck route. Staff is
reviewing this with Public Works and the City Attorney's office and will have more information
at the public hearing.
There is a question about whether the noise from trucks wouid exceed the maximum levels
established in the City's noise ordinance. Staff is recommending that a noise study be done
to determine if mitigation, such as noise barriers, is needed to meet these noise limits.
"fruckirtg facilities are a permitted use in an I-1 zoning district and the site plan meets all other
applicable ordinances.
(c) Preservation of unique geologic, geographic or historically sign�cant cha�acterisfics of the city
and environmentally sensitive areas.
The site plan is consistent with this finding. The site is a paved parking lot on industrial
property and the surrounding area is a residentiai neighborhood.
The neighborhood has environmental concerns about air pollution from existing truck traffic
on the site and the additional fra�c that this facifify woufd generate. Staff is not aware that the
site is in violation of any air quality regulations but is contacting the MPCA to confirm this.
(d) Protection of adjacent and neighboring properties through reasonable provision for such •
matters as surface water drainage, sound and sighf buffers, preservation of views, light and
air, and those aspects of design which may have substanfial effecfs on neighboring land uses.
The site pian is not consistent with this finding but can be modified so that it is consistent
— The residents in the area have complained in the past about truck traffic on Fairview. The
site plan calis for using the exisUng driveways on Fairview. This would increase the
amount of truck traffic on Fairview. The driveways on Fairview should be closed so tfiat
all trucks must use Prior Avenue. There is enough room behind the existing main building
for Wcks to get from Prior to the new building.
— Noise from trucks on the site would have a substantial effect on neighboring residential
land uses on Fairview and Minnehaha. A noise study by an acoustical engineer should
be required to determine if noise barriers are needed and if they are, how big they need to
be and where they should go. JLT is taiking about constructing another buiiding north ot
the truck transfer facility and this could act as a noise barrier if it was large enough and it
was for a use that did not generate a lot of additional noise.
(e) The arrangement of buildings, uses and facilities of the proposed development in order to
assure abutting property and/or its occupants will not be unreasonably affected.
The site plan is not consistent with this finding but can be modified so that it is consistent
— The arrangement of the driveways wiU increase traffic on Fairview Avenue. The existing
driveways shouid be closed so that trucks use Prior Avenue.
— The building is arranged so that most of the loading docks are on the west side of the
building and the building wili biock most of the noise from these docks from residents on •
Fairview. However, residents on Minnehaha will be hear noise from these docks unless
noise barriers are built. The building also has five docks on the north end of the building
close to Fairview and noise barriers are needed for these docks too.
30
(� Creation of energy-conserving design through landscaping and location, orientation and aq 'S a �
elevation of structures.
• The site plan meets current standards for energy conservation and is consistent with this
finding.
(g) Safefy and convenience of both vehicular and pedesfian traffic both within the site and in
relation to access streets, including tra�c circulafion features, the locations and design of
entrances and exits and parking areas within the site.
Public Works staff has reviewed the site plan and determined that the plan, including use of
existing the driveways on Fairview for the primary access to the truck facility, is safe and
consistent with this finding.
(h) The satisfactory availability and capacity of siorm and sanitary sewers, including soiutions to
any drainage problems in fhe area of the development.
There is adequate sewer available. The applicant has not prepared a detailed storm water
drainage plan yet. The site plan is consistent with this finding if a condition is added that a
drainage plan must be submitted to staff for approval.
(i) Suffcient landscaping, fences, walls and parking necessary to meet the above objectives.
The site plan is not consistent with this finding but can be modified so that it is consistent:
— Additional fences or walls should be constructed, if needed, to block noise to neighboring
houses.
— There is no iandscaping on the site now. The landscaping shown on the site plan should
• be increased by planting shrubs that grow at least 10' tali along the west side of the
building. Additional landscaping should be planted around the perimeter of the site where
ever noise barriers are required. The noise barriers should be setback 10' from the
property line to provide adequate room for landscaping.
Q) Site accessibi�ity in accordance with the provisions of the Americans with Disabilities Act
(ADA), including parking spaces, passenger loading zones and accessible routes.
The site plan is consistent with this finding if one additional handicapped accessible parking
space is provided.
(k) Provision for erosion and sediment control as specified in the "Ramsey Erosion Sediment
and Control Handbook."
The site pian does not show erosion or sediment control measures. A condition for approvai
of the site pian should be that an erosion and sediment control pian must be submitted to staff
forapprovai
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Based on findings 1-5, staff recommends that the site plan be
approved subject to the following conditions:
1. The property owner must close the two existing driveways on Fairview at his expense and
repiace with them with curb and boulevard so that all trucks coming to the trucking facility wouid
have to use Prior Avenue. in the future, if other uses are proposed on the site that would
generate Ievels of traffic consistent with the adjacent neighborhood, the City would consider
• permitting driveways on Fairview for these uses as long as the trucking facility did not have
access to Fairview.
2. The property owner must pay an acoustical engineer to do a noise study. The purpose of this
study would be to determine the ievels of noise that could be anticipated from the truck transfer
� �)
facility and to propose options for mitigating the noise.
3. Based ort ihe resulis ot the noise sur*rey, sound mitigation measures must be designed and
—constructed to ensure that the development conforms to City noise regulatio�s. .
4. The setback on Fairview must be increased to 10 feet to permit enough room for landscaping to
soften the appearance of the building. The setback must be pianted with shrubs that wiil get at
least 10 feet tall when mature to form a continuous row along the entire east side of the building.
5. Additional landscaping must be planted around the perimeter of the site where ever noise barriers
are required. The noise barriers must be setback 10' from the property line to provide adequate
room for landscaping.
6. A storm water management plan must be submitted to staff tor approval.
7. One additional handicapped accessibie parking space must be provided.
8. An erosion and sediment control plan must be submitted to staff for approval.
! '
•
r1
U
�1C
J'� i M r. wu��- re t e,., � J � k �c
'�Gsc re�ee� r eesvr"r`'`' ` h..�,�4 2�
PLfMN�� Ct71MlKtttiG�'� cr�'
STAFF RECOMMENDATION FOR JLT/DAWES TRUCK FACILITY �� P «'� t�
Revised 3/26/99 j-{ cs�� ��] c+ - S�
• `l
Staf� r2commends that the site plan be approv=d subject to th� foilowing condiYions:
1. Driveways The nortn drivewa/ on Fairview must be clos°d and the south drive�aay must be
wid=ned as d2termined by Public Works to handle large trucks.
2. Sound barriers Sound mitigation measures must be designzd and construct2d to ensure that-the
dev=lopment conforms to City noise regulations. If wails ara rzquired for sound barriers, they must be
in place before the building is occupied. If another new building wilt act as a sound barrier, work mus!
begin on that buiiding beforz the trucking building is occuoied.
3. Truck idling Truck engines must be turned ofi wfienever trucks are at the docks or on standing on
the site waiting to get to a dock.
4. Parking on adjacent streets Trucks using this site may not park on Fairvew or Minnehaha.
5. Hours of operetion Hours of operation must be limited to between 6 AM and 12 midnight.
6. Setbacks and landscaping The setback on Fairview must be increased to 10 feet to permit
enough room for landscaping to soften the appearance of the building. The setback must be planted
with shrubs that wiil get at least 10 feet tail when mature to form a continuous row along the entire
east side of the building.
Additional landscaping must be planted around the perimeter of the site where ever noise barriers are
required. Noise barriers or other new bui4dings must be setback 10' from the property line fo provide
• adequate room for landscaping.
7. Storm water plan A storm wat2r management plan must b2 submitted to staff for approval.
8. Accessible park+ng One additiona4 handicapped accessib(e parking space must be provided.
9. Erosion and sediment control An erosion and sediment control pian must be submitted to staff for
approval.
\ J
33
�LTGROUP INC.
739 Vandalia Street • St. Paui, MN 55114 (651) 641-1111 •(651) 641-1244 Fa•
����
April 19, 1999
Peter W. Wazner
Assistant City Attorney
City of Saint Paul
400 City Hall & Court House
15 W. Ketlogg Boulevard
St. Paul, MN 55102
RE: Project: Dawes Trucking @ Minnehaha and Fairview Avenues
Dear Mr. Warner:
After the last committee meeting of the Plannin� Commission I thou�ht it advisable to •
share our thoughts with you in re�ard to the issues that have arisen.
It must be noted again that our plan certainly conforms with both the letter and the
spirit of the zoning of the property. We are not askin� for variance; but instead others
seem to be requesting a chan�e in the types of uses allowed on this site and in the
area.
As owner of approximately 2,000,000 sq. ft. of industrial property in the Midway, we
certainly are familiar with the kinds of activities that occur here on a daily basis.
While this particular tenant is a"trucking company", it must be noted that
distribution companies in the area often have more truck traffic than might be seen
from Dawes Truckin�.
In regard to Fairview Avenue being a truck route or not, we find it almost amusing to
observe that this particular debate can only be described as what it must have been
like to watch medieval theolo�ians arguin� about how many an�els could dance on
the head of a pin. Or, perhaps, Bill Clinton explainin� the meanin� of "it."
The fact is tnxcks drive regularly on Fairview Avenue. There are si�ns that clearly
mark it as a truck route. (We will provide the pictures if someone cares.) City of St.
Paul attorney, Mr. Matt Pfhol, has told us it is a truck route. To our knowled�e the •
City has never attempted to re�ulate the trucks on Fairview Avenue goin� north from
� �Y
c�,�,
• University Avenue. Perhaps someone can show us that attempt? Candidly, we find it
duplicitous to su�gest we cannot use Fairview Avenue for trucks. What will the plan
be for our immediate nei�hborin� businesses that re�ularly use trucks today on
Fairview Avenue?
But, someone minht say this new use will create an undesirable amount of new truck
traffic on Fairview Avenue. The truth is that with a smaller buildin� like this there is
no way an inordinate amount of new traffic could be created. There has also been a
down ri�ht misrepresentin� implication that trucks wil] be "weavin�" and "windin�°
their way through nei�hborhood streets. There is as much chance of that as there is of
having truck traffic on Summit Avenue.
As is so often the case, perhaps some people should pause, catch their breath and
rethink what their real problems are. In our view, trucks backing in perpendicular to
Fairview Avenue (as is the case on Fairview Avenue) poses a much bigger safety
hazard. In addition, a few weeks a�o we cooperated with authorities who used a
second story location in one of our buildin�s to observe and arrest suspects due to a
significant dru� violation across the street on Minnehaha. While not having heard
from the neighborhood on that score, we will say "you're welcome" in advance.
• Sound Abatement — we find it interestin� that select commission members have found
• the project Q,�v_ of violatin� sound ordinances prior to the buildin� and business
havin� yet to be open. Where is the fairness in that position? If the tenant should be
in violation of noise ordinance, they shouid be treated as any other business in St. Paul
and appropriate measures should be taken. Where does this guilty before openin�
come from? In point of fact, this business does not test jackhammers. They have a
small fleet of modern equipment and have been a law-abiding business.
• Subdivision of Parcel — we were astounded by the suggestion from one member who
said that trucks should only enter from Prior because we were out of line
(paraphrasing) in our concern over future marketing to other tenants and our ability to
spiit the parcel if need be for financin� purposes, etc.
I would ask that member if he owned a I S-acre parcel in the middle of the Twin Cities
would he want that risht taken away from him? I could believe this suggestion
coming from someone with a partisan point of view. From an appointed position of
responsibility in seein� that property rights are upheld as part of a commissioner's
duty it is astonishin�.
We have been a slight bit surprised that there has been less than full support for our
continuin� improvements to the parcel. We have spent millions and millions of dollars on
this parcel and this new buildin� follows that course. When Bob Kessler came out to
discuss the project, he did so in a professionai and rational manner. I did not say he is
• squishy cheesecake. Rather he displayed savvy and poise. I have since leazned from a
respected peer, Scott Tankenhoff of Hillcrest Development (whose company has made
sizable contributions to the improvement of St. Paul) that he also felt Mr. Kessler did a
3� �
good job on his most recent project. We were willin� to listen to Mr. Kessler's .
suggestions in order to meet time requirements of the tenant. Those timings are now in
jeopardy. We understand we had staffs' recommendation and now we are unclear as to
where we stand. We would be willing to meet one last time to brin� needed clarity if
anyone desires. This includes the issue of a sound barrier.
We stand ready to discuss these matters with any and all participants.
Thank you for your attention.
Sincerely,
Jerr�� y "Ffoo�
cc: Commission Members
Council Member Benanav
City Staff
Mayor's Office
District 11
•
u
,z�r_iur �aro��ttv
3�
RPR-13-1999 12�18 FIRST RSSET MRNRGEMENT
612 973 1061 P.02i08
/�� �� `
- t
SIERRA CLUB
North Star Chapcec
779 Clayland Street
St. Paul, MN 55109
612-973-1145 (daytime/messages)
651-69?-9303 (home/messages)
Apri1 13, 1999
Mayor Notmari COleman
City of St. Paul
15 west Kellogg Boulevard
St. Paul, MN 55101
RE: RequAat to MaYOr'� Office for Environmental Assessment
JL'f Truck Trans£er Site Proposal (Minnehaha e Faizview
Av¢niles )
Dear Mayor Coleman:
ihe JT.2 Truck i:ansfer Site Proposal fails four of your most important and often-
stated development tests:
• 11 job creation
2) tax base
3) affordable housing
4) neighboshood preservation
•
and rejuvenation.
The Eocus of the Sierra Club's concern, o£ couzse, is #9--the neighborhood
environmental and a.uality-of-life issues.
In an eEfott to ensure thac the City cbtains sufficient information to make an
appropriate decision on the truck t=ansfer site proposal, the Sie=ra Club recently
sponsozed a neighbozhood-based petition effo=t. The petition (co v attached)
requested the Minnesota Environmental Quality Board (EQS) to initiate an Environment
Assessment Wozksheee (EAw) with tegard to the proposed site.
The EQB rejected the EAw petition on the basis of the exemption for structures
measuzing less than 100,000 square feet of intezioz sguare Eootage. The pzoposed
£acility consists of outdoor loading platforms and paved truck bays in conjunction
with intetior temporary scoraqe spaee. Most of the environmental and neighborkood
issues, however, revolve around the proposed facility's outdoor activities_ Since
this project falls outside the Minnesota EQB's jurisdiction, we are bringing this
maCter to the City's attention-
The 393 petition siGnatures, obtained by neighborhood volunteers, cleaxly indicate
the neighborhood's overwhelming endorsement of the need for such an environmental
assessment addressing the following issue�:
a1 Safety concerns because the truck entrance and exit driveways on Faizview vill
cau5e a significantly increasad traffic hazard £or neigkborhood childzen and
Fairview auto traffic;
b) Ext=eme noise pollution caused by truck engines and backup signals dusing the
"anticipated" operating hours of 'I a.m. to midnight two weeknights and 7 a.m. to 9
p.m• three weeknights, plus some weekend hours;
c) ziaht eollution due to powerful bzight lights shining f=om the site into Faizvie*.r
a.venue bedrooms at night;
d) Pollution of the visual environment in this residential neiqhborhood;
e) Water pollution Prom runo££ of hydrocarbons and detergents used to clean
pavements;
� 37
APR-13-1999 12�19 FIRST ASSET MRNAGEMENT 612 973 1061 P.93i08
f) Increased air pollutioa caused by additional tzuck tra£Eic to a site wichin 12
blocks of Snelling � University, the most polluted site in Minnesota, and running of
diesel tzuck eagines while parked at the sice_
The petition siynatuses also teetify to the signezs' belief that the City wi11 be
responsive to their concerns. In fact, many of the 343 adult siqners also siqned
sepatate, unofficial petition sheets liscing their minor children! It is czitieally
important to the future of this unique neighborhood, and 'to ouz childzen, that the
City be provided with the requested envizonmencal data.
We are therefore now askina that Your of£iee perform an environmental aa3essment
of the p=oposed truck tsansfer site develonmene pro�ect• Specifically, we are
asking the City to perEoxm an envizonmencal assasssene, to inc2ude the in£ormation
speei£ied on the attached YROPOSED ENVIIiONb�L7Tl�L ASSESSMENT.
The Twin Cizies Gioup of the Sierra Club also understands "the bigqer pictuse"--the
economic and political and economic context Within which developmenL issaes must be
decided. we wou2d therefo:e also like to present our views regarding the £irst
three -- eeonomic -- issues in the lisc at the beginning of thi� letter: 1) job
creation; 2) cax base; and 3) afforflable housing.
We be2ieve the proposed truck trans£er sice has litcle economic vaS.ue for St. Paul
in tezms of eichet tas base enhancement o= job ereation, and threatens both public
safety and the survival of this valuable affordable-houeinq neiqhk�orhood.
Although chis Rropezty is not wzder port Authority jurisdiction and is not
requesting Cicy Pundinq, nonetheless ue would like Lo compare the Authority's
Sxownfields Neiqhborhood Redevelopment Criteria'S economic quidelines. FirSt,
add=essing enhancement of the tax base, the Port Authozity iequires that the
facility constitute a•'value-added liyhz mznufacturing" use. TI:is truck ZransEer
site is a freiqhti transportation faeility to be used Dy independenc truckers, aot a
manufacturing facilicy. Second, the pozt Authority's guideline for iob creaiion ie
"at leasc one job per 1,000 squa=e feec of buildirg spaee," with "wage rates ac
least S9 pe: hour," With 7D5 of nev hires consiszing of St. Paul residents.
Although loadir.g and unloading freighc is labor intenszve, such work is mose likely
to be hired on a casual basis through "tmmp" ager.cies. Tke proposed truck freight
trans£er site wi11 not gene:ate anywhere near the 27 new, full-time, living-crage
sta£f jobs chat the Port Authority would require iP this pzopezty were a zeclaimed
brownfield.
The legally apalicable City developmenc critezia, of course, are set fozth in the
St. Paul Comprehensive Land Use P2an. both the new city plan (approved by the Cicy
Council and pending approval by the Mecropolican council), and the preceding plan
c,hich is still in effect, requite developm.ent to be compatible witk the euiroundinq
neighborhood. The new city Land Use Y1an prohibics che constnzction of any new
truck traasfer sites anywhere in St. Paul. It is thu3 obvious that City land use
policy t:nequivocallY requires compacibilitV with the existinq nei4�orhood.
ih¢ Sierra Club has a sincere concern £os preeesvinq the quality of life in this
extraordinary urban residentia2 neiqhborhood. This established residential
neighborhood, in the Neue21 Park area o£ Hamline-Miduay, is a striking exam�le of a
safe, stable, multizacial neighbozhood with a mix of economi-c level3 and housing
types, plus many of the resources and amenities that urban planz:ers vould plan in an
urban neighborhood iE they Were p2anning a neighbozhood zoday: _public and private
elementary 9CI100�9� churches, parks, playgrounds, zecreation centers, bus routes,
and locally-owned teLail stores and eatinq establishments, plus a public 2ibraty and
nationally known university, 2nd czicically scazce af£ordable housinq.
Two days before the Planninq Cemmission hearinq, we were excited and encouzaqed by
your public statemenc emphasizing that maYntaining and expanding the supply of
affordable housing in St. Paul is a top iiayoral priority. The vast 7najo=ity of
homes are owner-occupied, and the vasc majority are we11 saintained. We know the
r;r..t,�� t,;nr .an�rA fnr nvr nr;nfihorh�nd. 'oeeause it Lewazds us Lesidents each year
estate ta:c¢s, howevet, many smalle.c ot olfler homes s:ill fall into the "a£fo=dable
categoty for blue-collar wotkers, veterans, younq families, and empty nestess who
appzeciace che many advantaqes of living in Sc. Paul.
i
•
•
�
� IQ
APR-13-1999 12�19 FIRST ASSET MANRGEMENT
612 973 1061 P.04i08
�q -S2 `-�
The �roposed tzuck transEer sice, bordered by £a:rviem ar.d Minnehaha Avenues--CWo
• o1d resicential streets--is inLrinsically not r.eiqh'corhood-friendly. Noise, air
pollution, and pu'alic sa£ety issues together eoastitute a serious, i�i.nent threac
to the health of neighbors and the ecoaomic h¢alth of the neighborhood.
Noise: The "anticipated" houzs of operation aL :he proposed site estend £roia 7 a.m.
till 9 p.m. on so:,�e weeknights and ti12 :cidr.ig�t on oeh¢rs, plus some weekead hours,
raith no scaced closing or "quiet hour�." Neighbors on Fair+iew, Minaehaha, and
nearby streets will have at most 7 hours o: res�ice on seleetez weel:nights from the
zepeated high-decibel backuo signals; those who vork gsaveyard shift xill have
little if any rest. Many homes lack air co.^.ditioaing ar.d must leave vindovs open
durinq warm weathe=.
Accordinq to the National Instituces of Health, lack of adequace sleec can cause oz
aggravate ocher health problems. ic also causee children and adults to experience
difficulties in memory and concencration, thus zdr•ersely affecting learninq, job
performance, and safecy. The addition o£ lancseaping and some noise-baxziet walls,
as recommended in the Planning cecsnis>ion's Staf` tteport, would have no ePfect on
noise £rom the trucks coming and going on the street; they would also do little to
eff2ctively reduce the impact of hiq%�-decibel backup signal noise during the
facility's long and lace hours of operation.
Air Pollution: The sice will also brinq increased air pollucion, in an area that
already has the highesti level of air pollution in the 'hrin Cities. Othe=
environmental concerns include runo£f and visual pollucion, which are both cized in
the Planning Conmiseion Scaff Feport. The '•big picture" also includes add.itional,
unspecified facilities that zhe ownEr has planned for other porcior.s of this site,
entailing siill more traffic and pollution.
Safetv, however, is our primary concern. It is one thing to say "Not in my
backyard," and quite another to say "DOn'i zun over our chiLdren!"
•
•
As many residents reminded the Plannir.g Commission ac itis Mazch 26 public hearing,
the proposed truck freight trans£er site is directly onposite 2 overwhelminqly
T-nT'
worse,
The safety issue is paramountl Peak hours of ooeration--in the a£ternoon--eoincide
danqerously wish after-school child pedestrian traffic to and £rom zhe neighborhood
grocery store at Minnehaha and Fairview, homes and in-home daycare centers in
adjacent and nearby blocks, Newe11 Park Recreation Center at Fairview and HewiCt,
the public playqround ac Clayland and Chelton Streets, and the public library at
Minnehaha and 5nelling Avenues. Even if the child's route does not cross Fairview,
we all know that chi.ldren may unexpectedly rur:, skate, skateboard or zide bicycles
or tricycles into the street.
Neighboss voiced concezns chae the pro�osed sem:.tzailes truck entxazce and exit
driveways on Fairview would soon necessitate the widening of Fairview Avenue and
consewent loss of the boulevazd ("ttee-lawn"), making such danqer to children even
more likely. Residents also testifiec' that evea nov, many trucks are illegaily
using Fairview Avenue north o£ Minnehaha--past Nevell Park, going into Pierce-Butler
Route--and residential sice-streets as tzuck through xoutes. 2his illegal practice
can only be expected co increase if a czuck fze;.qhc cransfer facility is built at
Fairview and Minnehaha Avenues.
Tn conclusion, neighborhood residents and the 1oca1 5ierra Club believe that the
planned cruck transfer site will not confer ar.y signifieant economic oz fiscal
benefits on St. Paul, and that 7.ts a�proval vould spe11 danger and neighborhood
detezioration, cempromising Hamline-A?idway as a i:nique, sa£e, af£ordable,
multiculLUra1 urban neiqhborhood. Even under optimal conditions, with the Planning
Cemmission Staf£ Report's recommended mzti.gat:r.g improvements, che approval of this
particularly unsuitable project by the City vould threaten public safety and
�
� 35
qPR-13-1999 12�20 FIRST RSSET MRNRGEMENT
PROPOSED ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESMENT
JLT Truck Transfer Si�e
Minnehaha and FairvieW Avenues
1. Description:
Give a complete description of the proposed
ancillarv facilities.
Emphasize construction and operation methods
that wi11 cause physical manipulation of the
produce wastes.
612 973 1061
project and
P.05i08
and features
environment or
Indicate the timing and duration of construction activities,
2. Permits and Approvals Required_
List all known local, state, and federal permits, approvals,
and funding required.
3. Land Use:
Describe current and recent past land use and development on
the site and on adjacent laads.
Discuss the compatibility of the project with adjacent and
nearby land uses; indicate whether any potential conflicts
involve envirorunental natters.
Identify any potential environmental hazard due to past land
uses, such as soil contamination or abaadoned storage tanks.
4. Water Quality - Surface Water Runof£:
Compare the quantity and quality of the site runoff before
and after the project.
Describe methods to be used Lo manage and/or treat runoff.
Identify the route(s) and receiving water bodies for runoff
from the site; estimate the impact of the runofz on the
quality of the receiving waters.
5. Tra£fic and Public Sa£ety:
Estimated total Average Dai1y Traffic (ADT) qenerated:
Hours oP operation: w2ekdays
Weekend
Estimated maximun peak hour traffic:
Timing/Hours of peak hour operation:
For each affected road, indicate the ADT and the
directional distribution of traffic with and without the
project.
Provide an estimate of the imgact on traffic congestion on
the affected roads and describe any traffic improvements
which wi11 be necessary.
?�ddress any traffic-related public safety concerns.
Existing parking spaces:
Nuinber of parking spaces added:
Identify any possible toxic or other hazardous materials to
be transfered or stored.
r 1
L J
•
•
� •
APR-13-1999 12�21 FIRST ASSET MRNAGEMENT
7. Dust, Odors, and Noise:
Wi11 the project generate dust, odors, or noise during
construction and/or operation?
If yes, describe the sources, characteristics, duration/time
of day, quantities, intensitv, and any proposed mitigative
measures. Also identify the locations of sensitive
receptors (inclvding hvmen popvlations) in the vicinity and
estimate the impacts on these receptors.
°lq -S 3L1
Describe safety measures and procedures be taken to avoid or
• minir.:i2e hazards with regard to such materials.
Describe measures to ensure site security.
6. Vehicle-relat2d Air Emissions
Provide an estimate of the project's traffic generation on
air quality, including carbon monoxide levels, including
peak hour and seasonal levels.
Discuss the effect of traffic improvements or other
mitigation measures on air quality impacts.
•
�
�
8. Parks, Recreation Areas, and Playgrou,
Identify any designated parks, recrea
playgrounds on or in psoxi,mity to the
Describe the resource(s) and identify
impacts on the resource{s>.
612 973 1061 P.66i08
as:
ion areas, or
site.
any anticipated
Describe any measures to be taken to minimize or avoid
adverse impacts.
9_ visual Impact
will the project create adverse visual impacts?
(Exa�-nples include glare from intense lights and large
visible plumes from cooling towers or exhaust stacks.)
Describe any measures to be taken to minimize or avoid
adverse impacts.
10_ Compatibilitv With Plans:
Is the project subject to an adopted local comprehensive
land use plan or any other applicable land use, traffic,
water, or resource managemant plan of any local, regional,
state, or federal aqency?
If ves, identify the applicable plan(s), discuss the
compatibility of the project with the provisioris of the
plan(s), and explain how any conflicts between the project
and the plan(s) will be resolved.
If no, explain.
il. Impact on Infrastructure and Public Services:
wi1Z new or expanded utilities, roads, other infzastructure,
or public services be required to serve the project or
provide for public health or safety?
x
� ��
qPR-13-1999 12�21 FIRST RSSET MRNAGEMENT 612 973 1061 P.07/68
If yes, describe the new or additional
infrastructure/services needed, including any infrastructure •
that is a"connected action" with respect to the project.
12. Related Developments; Cumulative Impacts:
Are future stages of this development planned or likelv?
If yes, briefly describe future stages, their timing,
and plans for environmental review.
Ts this project a subsequent stage of an earlier project?
Zf yes, briefZy describe the past development, its
timing, and past environmental review.
Is other development anticipated on adjacent lands or
outlots? If yes, briefly describe the development and
its reZationship to the present project.
If any of the above are marked Yes, discuss any cumulative
environmental impacts resulting from this pro7ect and the
other development.
13. Other Potential Environmental Impacts:
If the project may cause any adverse environmental impacts
which were not addressed by items (1} �hrouqh (12), identify
and discuss them here, alonq with any proposed mitigation.
14. Summary of Issues:
List any impacts and issues identified above that may
require further investigation before the project is •
commenced. Discuss any alternatives or mitigative measures
that have been or may be considered for these impacts and
issues, including those that have been or may be ordered as
permit conditions.
# #
r 1
U
��$' y2.
RPR-13-1999 12�21 FIRST ASSET MRNAGEMENT
612 973 1061 P.08i08
�a -s a-y
•
\ J
•
constituce 2 taking, dimi.nishing both che peaceable enjoyment o£ our homes azd our
propercy values.
we implore the Cicy co exercise a11 cue care to see that this r.eighborhood and its
quality of life are preserved. Tne first step, we believe is for the City to
conduct a thorouqn, eomprehensive environmental/saPety assassment including a1I
cancerns a�+dressed in L'ne attached "Proposed Enviromaental Assessment.° we are
askinq that this environmental study be compleced and reviewed, includinq a public
commer.t period, before any approval is qiven or permi.ts gzanted for the develop�ent
of the proposed sice.
Please send us a copy of this report {oz any ocher envisonmental, economic, or
neighborhood impact studies) immediately upon ics release to the publie. We aze
specifically requesting also that the Cicy provide a public coa¢aent period oE at
least 30 days following p�blication of the report.
Thank you foz your atcention_
Sincerely, �
"V' � `
Ronald G. Willia s
r�d� �
Amelia Ruth xummel
Twin Cities �roup sierra Club
Attachments
1. Yroposed JL2 Tzucking Transfer Site EAW Petition
2. Proposed Environmenta2 Assessm¢nt
ec: councilmember Jzy Benanav
Couneil President Dan Sostrem
councilmember Jezry Slakey
Councilmember Chsistopher Coleman
couneilmembez Mike Harris
Councilmember Jim Reiter
Councilmember Hachy Lantry
Gladys Morton, Chair, St. Paul Planning Commission
Kathy Loue, Hamline Midway Coalition
Pastor Greg Renstrem, Hamline United Methodist Church
Pastor Tsu Ker Yang, Y.amline United Methodist church
Ginny Yingling, North Star Chapcer Sierra club
Bi11 Clap, Esq.
� y3
rnTOi a aa
�� � �5�. ��.,��
1Vorth Scar Chapcer
779 Clayland Street
Sc. Pau1, MN 55104
/�Pril I.Z 1999
Gladys Motton
Ptanning Commission
City of Sc. Paul
City Hall
St. Paut, MN SS10i
Dear Ms. Morton:
RPR-12-1999 16�24 FIRST ASSET MRNRGEMENT
612 973 1061 P.02i09
Our peciuon to thc Environmental Quality Board (EQB} regarding rhe JLT Tiucking Transfez Faciliry has
been denied by the EQB, as explained in thc auached letter to Mayor Coleman.
In its stcad, we are ccquestiag that the Ciry Planning Commission recommend that the Ciry perform thc
attached "Proposed Envtzonmental Assessment " Please advise your Neighbnrhood Commiace of this
maaer before iu'Iliesday momi�,e meeting. Alw, please send copies of this conespondence and
attachmenrs to all of your Commission members.
Thank you for your attention to tlus mattrr.
SincerclY. � .
``61,�,o.SLa.` � . C..l ,� �-�-,.�..z
Ronaid G. Williatns
Twin Ciues Group Siccra Club
cc: Mayor Narmaa Coleman
Council Presidcnt Dan Bosnom
Caunalmember Jay Benanev
Counciimember 7erry Blakey
Councilmember Christopher Coleman
Councilmemba Mike Harris
Councilmembcr Jim Reiter
COUncilRlCi6j7ei K3Lhy Tan�'S'
Kathy Loue, Hamline Midway Coalition
Pastor Crreg Rensiro� �1ine United Methodist Church
Fasror Tsu Ker Yang. Hamline United Methodist Church
Bill Klap. Esq.
•
•
•
�' Y h
MRR-3a-15.� _��57 WILDe.4 RESE�RCH oti_ �G% 4523 P.01i2:
R9 -s a`1
�
Mazch 30, 1999
Gladys Morton, Chair
Saint Paul Planning Commission
15 West Kellogg Boulevard
Saint Pau(, Minnesota 55102
Dear Ms. Morton_
I am wTiting as a concemed neighbor about the proposed truck transfer facility that 3LT would
like to build on Fairview Avenue just south of Minnehaha Avenue.
I oppose this use of the property for three main reasons: traffic, air quality and noise.
These are not new concems for our neighborhood. We aze ciose to Snelling Avenue, University
Avenue, the Burlington Northem Santa Fe �uck-�ain operation, the fairgrounds, the classic caz
gatherings on weekends. We already absorb more than our shaze of Saint Pau1's tr�c
congestion, exhaust and noise. The cumulative effect leaves us especially vulnerable to negative
effects from a siguficant increase in uvcks entering and leaving our neighborhood every day.
I understand and respect the owner's interest in getting a good value for his investment in this
properiy. The stakes aze very high far me and my neighbors as we11. Por us, this is not just a
question of increasing the retum on one profit center in a large real estate holding. We have
� poured our savings and our time and caze and pride into our homes. We work hazd to keep up
and improve our houses, yards and streetscapes.
I am just one of ihe many paople who thought our neighborhood was worth investing many,
many hours of personal time into a neighborhood planning process so that we could preserve and
improve our quality of life, making our own local contribution to the future vitality of Saint Paul.
We did this because we believed the city would support and value our neighborhood voice.
We aze not a vrealihy neighborhood but we woik hazd to be a good, strong neighborhaod. We
support local businesses, keep up our homes and yards and live respectfully alongside neighbors
who aze different from us. But these accomplishmenu aze fragile and aze under increasing
pressure.
I believe that in the long term, Saint Paul would reap greater benefits and prevent more problems
by showing support for our neighborhood on this issue, rather than by allowing this resident-
unfriendly use of an industrial property that is located where people live.
Sinc�ely, . ' ( n
C i, _.�.r�
�, �,�__.
Ginger Hop �
•
1728 Blair Avenue
Saint Paul, Minnesota 55104
REGEIVED
MAR 3 0 1999
ELANNING & ECONOMIC DEVEIAPMENT
ibiy L TOTRL P.01
TS- "I
03/29/1959 23'°0 6127211649 K�NNE�Y TR?ti5 La{E PA6c 02
t�1�R 3 0 1�99
RECE��ED
Mazch 29, 1999
�
Ms. Gladys Morton
Chsir, St. Paul Planning Commission
15 West Kellogg Blvd
$t. Paut, MTv� 55102
Dear Ms. Morcon,
��jy�i&ECONOM�C DEYELO�ti1�
It was with regret and constemation that I heard that JLT, owners of the property
at Fairview and Minnehahe Avenues are planning to lease it out as a trucking hub.
Futther, access and egress to the property is to be on Fairview Avenue due to the wishes
of the owner. although there aze residences directly aczoss the street.
I have been a resident of this neighborhood since I moved to St. Paul six years
ago. I came to this neighborhood because my son and his family ]ive here. I have
become active in local affairs and recently bought a house here. When I first moved in,
the neighborhood was not rated very well compared to other areas. I have watched it
change; people here care Many btock clubs have been formed in recent yeazs, most
people care about their property and, importandy, property prices have risen 15 percent in
the last year. 'fhic does not occcu ifthe area is not perceived as viabie.
i was unable to attend the heazing last week, but know you heard many residents
cite their concerns about the use of this property, so I'll not repeat them. I DO caze about
the quality of life here, especially as my gandchildren, and a lot of other children, live
here. t atso understand that the Pozt Authority has set certain criteria for the use of
property; which does not include tcuck uansfer areas.
Usin¢ this property for truck transfer will not add value to the neighborhood, will
not creaze many jobs, does not help the tax base, and certainly wiil creaie many problems
for the neighborhood. It is also not the hzghest and best use of the property. I am certain
that the owner can find better use for it, if he tries. Housing units for the e(derly who
wish to stay here aze certainly an option and much needed.
I do hope chat the Planning Commission arrives at a solution that is win-win, and
that the neighborhood does not lose out due to the des'ues of a single person.
i
��S'n elyc�
Iiamet J. �ednick
1783 W. Thomas Avenue
St. Paul, MN 55104 •
� Yt
From: iom M�nn^r Fw (fi51j659-91q Voica �651)fi59-911) To� Connniss�oner G�aAys Motlon at rJO Mr Tcm E¢ac� CM�e 1 oR Suntlay. Marc� 29. 1999 I:0) i9 F.0
�� -S 2-�j
•
Swida��, �farch 23. 1999
Commissioner Glad��s \forton
St. Paul Plaivun� Conuuission
1? F�'est I�ello�e Boule�'ard
St. Paul. \I\ ?�102
F_�Z: Go Tom Bzacli. 266-9099
Dear Coitunissioner \torton:
Thatilc }�uu for tha opporhmitt to spaak to flia Plamiins Connnissiou durine �•our puUlic
hearin� last Frida}�. I am sure it �ti'as oU�'iuus that I am nut accustomed to speaking Uefore
committaas such as this. I appraciata }�our patiauca as I shuubkd to m� puint.
I am ��'ritiu� to } ou to remind of the tremendotts uuportanez ti� e placa on tlia issue of the
proposed JLT dz��alopment at 625 Fain•ia�v A�e. I faal our commm�ih is 1 modal for tUe
cih of St. Paul. Tlia prassuras oY da�'elopmant in our araa ara da�radine our community to
the point �vhere ��'e arz a(1 considering li��iu� altemnti� es outside the Cih� Of St. Paul. I
aut surz t�oti t� ill agrae that tliis �4'ould Ue a loss to the cirv as a ��'(iola. \�"e solicit }'our
support attd t11z support of tl�a Pla�witlg Committaa in ancoura�ine JLT to radirzct this sitz
uito a partnersl�ip �cith our neighUorliood that w•ill beuefit SLT uid our neigiiborhuod.
Our ueiohborhood is a di� arse ueiohborhood. h1y� strzat nlona iucludas fmnilias of sevaral
• afluiic backeirounds, Eldarl�� parsons. �"atarans, a collasa professor. a Ia�F}�ar, a fork lift
operator, tnick dri�'er, euginears, tnanaeers, tneat pacl:er etc... R'e all ��ork toaather to
impru��e Uie ueiohborhood utd participlta in n�iol�borhood watch prosrlms pl:mrino
flo« ars aud maintauiiug cotmnon araas. Tha sa��ing "it takas a couuuu»ih� to rnisa a
child" is nut lost to fear iu our neiahUorhovd. �'e are a"couuuuuih'� in tlie h�aditional
sansa, ,y�at fouiid a Ualluce with modem d1y proUlzms that pl�gua uiam� cih• couunuiuties
toda�•. Cla1r1�� our communih� neads to ba nurhirad 1nd dacaloped by tha cit�.• of St. Paul.
•
Our naiol�Uarhood has ahcaJ•s eneouragad busivass dacefopment. Eaeh y�aar ��e hava a
picnic. �Va al�ca}s im'ita businassas in tl�a <uea to attaud. Thosz tliat cntutot ara trelted to
UarUecue at ���ork. In man�• cases t�'a lia��e resolved mnn} disputes ���ith busiuesses ti��ithout
tlie nonnal confi•outations that go�anuuaut nuut fi�equantl}• mediata.
I undarstnnd fliat tlie plamune committee ma` lia��e little rzcoursa «hen a dz��eloper such
as JLT entars tha areua �vith a Izoal attihida tliat say's "Let's look at the facts•" and "the
nzighhor�l�ood's espectations doii t Yit zonina la�vs". C1ear14� I am not as ncquainted �vi8i
zoning laG�'s as JLT lppears to ba. Ho�ve�•ar, I thiiili it is clzar fliat JLT is not iuterastzd ui
thz ��alua tl�is neigh6orhvod Urings our cih�, a neigliUorhood vf �vhich «e 1re cei} proud.
Should «a facz loud uoisas uutil rivah�a uiidnight, I and mmn' of my naighbors «�ill Uegiu
to look for houseiue else�vliere. The brzlkup of our neiahUahood will no douUt result ui
an incrzase ai low-income rantal housnig, rlUier d�an tlie currant tuix of locv- to moderate-
uicome o«Yier -occupaut liousntg we currently enjdy. Tha cost to thz city for 8us sluft in
housmg «�ould be suUstaurial. The benefit to JLT would also be substantial, as it clearly
� �7
crom_ioinMi�+��°r Far..(551)659-91UVOice(S51)65 ToCOnimisslooerGaAysMOrtanatdoMr.TOmBeac� Paye2oRSunday.March2&199910ASlPU
��'ould ot�ar a ereat pool of lo�v-waga ��orkars ideal for tha industn� tha� proposa far tl�is �
sitz.
I sincaral�• liopa that JLT «ill joni us in fmd'ui� an altamatica usa for this sita. I faal flia
taam «ork approacli to ecouomic dac�elopuieut ui our arza has bean profitable to our
comnlunih�, iha cin�. and thz busuiesses in our arza. I solicit tha piaminie conunissivn to
rajact Uia cun proposal and eucouraQe JLT to bruiQ a ua�v proposal to tha tabla fliat
��'ill iucluda tha support of tha uaiehUorhood of wluch tha}� ���ish to bzcome a part.
Tl�oivas �Iu�dzr
76� Tahuu Street
St. Paul. �N » 10-4
•
�
� ��
-������� �N� �,���1u�;,�v �c��}�_� �l�,l'��
\����C`tl\1�:��� �T l�:n� �):� ��1,� _ �� r \Q.1�C�1 a,�4 1 g q q
�-�
� � .
\ o� �C,or�� mt��o^�`�
�r
n
U
�
� �1 U:�o� v� ,� �G �'�l �113� � U,hC_�
a� ����� C���-��� ��.���.�� ��.���� � Q.�`�
� �,`�o„�.` ��L� o� r��� `�0�� �"��.�wv..�; , a`��
�\�4^�� 1�v��� �.�.�: �) a�.p.� \��0'`�,� �;h 55 � U�� .
��'t�1 \�.�t��.�e, �w i�'��. ���.o. ��.3�� �.).'��, oh ��fi�-ha�.�,��
�i�,,��o�� Co��.� '� `�., �\ ,�,,'�,. � �,�, ��� mo�/
Ov.� 4.,���, �\ ��u�� t� � ���� '.� �--`�� � a,��.� � �,
\>\ ���o.,�� �-..,�,ti�,�,L W v��� . -c�.��
, �
�,�.� Y ��- ?����.U.>��� , �.� �1�„� ����m U.�. ,
� �a\ �>c� � o \�1«:��k� � y �'' �1�. S ��� V.�a,\S.�
�,`��.�., �z^�� ���- � ����, . ��� _�� a,� �: � �.; 0,�12, ��
��.�� . � .ca�Cc� o`����s � wo'U� �E C�a�k
v�a`���h �,��� ��c��.wv�l��'� . �� -l�c�.,��`� ��o��.t�
v� ��� v"�`�`��,, � ,c��. c " ��\`��
� �_�L��- ��.ti.`., \�.; ���� � —
����� ��i�� '�1`. f�\`��L�lc���:i. ��� `���}�, l �, \1� C�»\����
1Lp ��.�\\��C�. � �,\ `�.� Q..� \'�. .
�, � ��o.��` � c� ��.,'�,,�nc. I�;.fi, �J
�.� ��.r ..����vJ���. ...�,�� � a����� � ���� �v��
��� ern :� � ��.�.�c��t� C ��v �c4.,�. ��� �.�.Yc. ��
�� c�.�> �L , �.i`L�C�t� .�� h,ti`�, C,'���C� e�.� �n� cl _ U�� R�1R�
n� �.�s��Y�� , �r �.���� � �� , -�,.�L �t�cx2, ���.�' ��>v.��.�,c��
l�� �.�.��tZ• , � 0.�� �r. �.�� �ta �� - � ^��
�v'V;.�C�� ���.nl ����� 0.��- � �i �U.� �U.�� �� U�k' \N--
� '��'� 'C��� � -� .,��c�..�.0 � �.,�e��' � Cu�c� .������ !�
a-0.,�� �.'���.�, v�� ��. "
S o � �, c�- . , , \C�` ��-� r� ��9;�." �A
Z�,wvC�� �� C v I� C� �� ;�C� r
hov.�..�.�c���,,,r�,���� c��� _��,� ��� ��: .'.�T,��.�. C�.`c��� ;a► �.�,�,�c���Z�.
��v�.i, ��,�5..�..ti �, �� n���� h��� �,��.z�, �;�.�.��Yb� a� g,,:,�, ��
�.�....�v.sh�. ���l� '���...D��C�L. �-��S `b� i C�ioRA�; �0 ��
�\��.y uoNT \�� <A ��� 0 C= N y ��_ � r.
qq-S�y
� 59
iv.BT'CY7 25. 177� •
?lease Consider:
Increased noise pollution
Increased traffic
Lac�c cf routes to exit area
ail of t^.e aoove exist here. In; 1997 and 1998 a
trai2er stora;e area was at the same locatior..
�rucks were enterin� and exiting a� all hours. inis
�ade mucn noise pollution, caused �y hard 'cra{ing and
loud acceleration.
If trucks use �airvzew ;oin� ��iorth; a semapnore
would be �:eeded at P�:innehaha Avenue. In 1993 this cost
was �25,000.00. If goin� east on �',innehaha to 3r.ellin�,
t'r:ey er.t°r a^ already over used intersection.
Cur residents are much closer to tha propo�ed area
than t�.e resider�ts of B:vS? i�.idway Container Yard• `iheir
corplairts to noise nave been stron� in oppositioa ior •
ma^y years.
These homes were mostly built around 1910, so tney
have bee:� around lon�er tnan this business. �
We live in a
home ow;zed by the family from the time it was built.
�espectfully
Eu�er.e and �arbara Louden
1802 BZa�r nvenue
051-644-724
� �� n -�" � � f_ l
L `! � `<"�%?�z L � �/ C`
/
�G�� � ����
•
� So
i;R-29-0� �ON 15�1°
Chri;tine E. Olsen
1833 W. Nfinnchaha
S:. Paul, itiIIv 55104
I�larch 29, 1999
•
Gladys 1�foROn
Planning Commission
c/o Jean Birkhalz
1100 Cily Hall
25 W. 4 St.
St. Paul, MN 55101
Dear Ms. Morton:
PRT DuPPRTi�::tiT
FRK ti0. 612c257co:
RECEIVED
MAR 2 6 199�
E1.fiL'(NING & ECONOMIC DEYELOPMEPII
.�
� �S a-`{
I live across the street from the proposed Dawes Truck Temvnal. I am concerned about this proposed
facility and it's impact on the neighborhood.
Cathy Lue, from the HamlinaMidway Coalition, contacted me as soon as they knew about the proposed
plan. I attended a meeting with JLT (Jerry Trooien and 7oe Meyers), Cathy Lue, and several other members
of the community on February 17 at TLT's offices. At this meeting fhe plan was presenled and concerns
fi�oin the neighbors discussed. Those conccrns includcd light, sound, air pollutioi�, a�id tralT'ic. Tl�c piaci
sliowed the use ofFairview instead ofPrior. From conversations Cathy had with Tom Beech she,knew that
JLT was told not to use Fairview. The ne'sghbor5 asked JLT to not use Fairview and to consider soma
other use for ilus site. Mr. Trooien's response to al1 of this was that he was the owner and, since it was
zoned industrial, he could do as he wanted. He also totd us he had a signed contrad with Dawes for the
trucking facility and that this was a done deal.
Dawes would be doing for the community.
A second mce[ing, at Dawes reqaest, was held on March 16 at the Hamline Library. At that meeting John
McDaniels was questioned about Dawes operations. Many of the same issues were covered. Mr. McDaniels
was also asked wha.t Dawes would be bringing to the neighbothood and St. Paul.
None of thejobs would be newjobs coming into the community. It was unclear what other positive things
A tnird cornmunity meeting was held on March 22 at Iv'ewell Park. At this meeting approximately 45
neiglzbors expressed tltcir concerns for a trucking faciIity in the neighborhood. The neighbors voted
overwhelmingly to oppose the truCking facility.
I reafize that thece will be some kind of development on this site and understand why this would happen.
What I don't understand is why something more compatib(e with the neighborhood and community
couidn't be found.
I am cvilling to work with 7LT in further development of their property to fit the needs ands
concerns of the community.
• erely, ._}..
� Lti.,,�.a
Christine E. Olsen
� �-�'�"` �
� S/
i
779 C1ayland Street
Saint Pau1, MN 55104
March 26, 1999
Saint Paul Planning Commission
City Ha11
Saint Paul, N�i7 55101
RE: Proposed Truck Transfer Site
Fairview & Minnehaha Avenues
Gentlepersons:
My husband and I are homeowners 2 short blocks north and one
short block west of the proposed truck transfer site. I work as a
customer service representative for an insurance coinpany. We
bought our 1-1/2 story home 3 years ago with a VA loan and $0
down.
�
Just this past Wednesday, I heard Mayor Coleman on the radio, •
proclaiming renewed concern about the extreme shortage of
affordable housing in Saint Paul. Our Hamline-Midway neighborhood
consists largely of this scarce commodity!
Hamline-Midway is also a unique model of diversity and
stability in the Twin Cities. We are old and young, with lots of
children as we11 as retirees. We are blue collar, middle class,
and professionals. We are also white and black and Hmong and
Native American; the neighborhood church we belong to is bilingual
and bicultural--English and Hmong. We have parks, rec centers,
playgrounds, schools, churches, libraries, a nationally ]cnown
university, and neighborhood stores. We have active block clubs.
We maintain and update and improve our homes, and the government
shows its appreciation by raising our tax-assessed value every
year...
If you were trying to plan a modern urban neighborhood, it
would be very much like ours!
But the proposed truck transfer site bordered by Fairview and
Minnehaha Avenues--two old residential streets--is not
neighborhood-friendly! •
�t S Z
�q -S2-y
�
z
The "anticipaLed" hours of operatio� at the p site
extend from 7 a.m. ti11 9 p.m. on some wee;cnig=cs and ti11
midnight on others, plus some weekend hours, wi:n no stated
closing or "cxuiet hours." Neighbors on Fairview, N'_nnehaha, and
nearby streets wi11 have at most 7 hours of respite on selected
wee;cnights from the repeated high-decibel backup signals. And
those who work graveyard shift will have little if a�y rest.
The site wi11 also bring increased air pollution, in an area
that already has among the highest levels of air pollution in the
Twin Cities. Other environmental concerns inclua2 runoff and
visual pollution, which are both cited in the Planning Commission
Staff Report.
But the environmental damage to our neighborhood is not as
important as the threat to neighborhood safety. Semi's and all
the smaller trucks turning onto and off of Fairview to access this
site--opposite our newly reopened neighborhood store--would pose a
grav2 hazard, especially for children.
• OK, let's look at the "big picture": Per2aps, as the
Plann�ng Commission's Sta£f Report advises, the entrance and exit
could be on Prior instead of Fairview. The proposed truck
transfer site could be toned down and prettied up, behind
landscaping and some noise-barrier wa11s, as recommended by the
Staff Report.
Let's ca11 a spade a spade--this is the typical fig-leaf
solution to unsuitable development! The noise, even if somewhat
muffled, would still be a big problem for neighbors during the
facility's long and late hours of operation. The bia picture also
includes the additional facilities that the owner has planned for
other portions of this site, entailing sti11 more traffic and
pollution.
The planned truck transfer site wi11 not confer any benefits
at all on our neighborhood! Even under optimal conditions, it
will have a deleterious effect on our quality of life. Approval
of this particularly unsuitable project would therefore constitute
a"taking" from neighborhood residents, diminishing both our
peaceable enjoyment of our homes and our property values. This
• project would also compromise Hamline-Midway as a safe,
affordable, multicultural modern urban neighborhood. The Planning
Commission must exercise all due care to see that this
� 53
3
neighborhood and its quality of life are preserved.
Thank you for your attention.
Sincerely,
Amelia R. Hummel
cc: Mayor Norman Coleman
Councilmember Jay Benanav
Council President Dan Bostrom
Councilmember Jerry Blakey
Councilmember Christopher Coleman
Councilmember Mike Harris
Councilmember Jim Reiter
Councilmember Kathy Lantry
�
•
•
'�' Sy
, ni.To�aMinrl?r Fz�:(nit)659-910VO1ce.�65�)659�910TO'COmmrsslnnxGUCysNnrtontloAlr.TOmBearhatSCPaWNannmgCoinmisson Frg+tnf3StturdayMarc�2].199A3:dn;epy
�Q �J � t
• Corrunissioner Gladrs \iorton
St. Paul Planning Cemmission
1� R'est I�el1o� Eoulecard
5[. Paul, bL\ »102
F.�Z: C,/o Tom Beach, 266-9099
Dear Coaunissioner \Lorton:
I ain �nateE�il tor tlie opporauiin• aEforded U}• die coaunission to state m}• opia�oiis regarding
the proposed necr taick [ransker kacilite- [oc G2� Fairc Arenue. I hac-e li� in the
nei�hbochood adjacent to this proposed facility� for ten �•eats, and « � z: en the opporhinitf
to �cork c d7e H:unline �Iid�ca} Coalition Yor die past inondt eonceming et�s site.
\iy husband and I purchased a house on Tatum Stree[ ten }�zacs ago this mend�. \�'e, like
odiers in eur neighborhood, chose to li� in an inner-city neighborhood, c�illingl�• ttading
highec noise lzcels a�id trafdc for afTordable housing, a caciallt mited area, economically
diverse neia green parks fer eur children, pcozimity m Haml�ne lini� and
Hancock Elementar}•, and thricing businesses along Snelling:lcenue. The Ae�cell Park
neighborhood still oEters all diose d�ings to a great miE of people, including lo�cer-income,
ieorking class, and pcofessional people of all races and ages. R'e hace created secernl block
clubs, Ccime R�atclies, and m�� neighbor and I organize a nei��rhbothood-�vide P�g Roast in
our local pla}•�round each summer ���hich im hundreds oEcesidents. \�'e do no[ have a
horrible crime rate, trouble u-i[h daigs, or gangs.
• \�'e luie� ��heti �.e purchasrd a hoine in the ciry that �ce coutd not e�pect die quiet of a
suburb, the clean air of the counhy, but on 6alance our needs �cere met. At the tm1e, ece did
I,now that the site comered by Dlmnehaha and Fai:ciew �cas zoned I-1, or lib t industry.
T7ic site, ichidt has had industrial uses for ocei si�t�r years, c.as a facility Eor a computer
compan�� at the time. �f e did not a ce it much consideration, because �ce, reasonably,
assumed that industrial sites adjoining residential sites must make reasonable
accommodations. A distinction must be make betc �chat neighbors could reasonably
espect for decelopment on this site, and evhat is happening no�c. A computer faciliry is a faz
ccZ� from a trucking tieet �chich intends to operate hea��� tn�cks unTil 12 midnight, and,
indeed, the ciry's adopted land use plan itselt saps the cit} should consider altematices such
as special resttictions on lar�e micking firms. Thus, having a large tnickuig hcm move in
doccn the street «�as, in my opinien, neither foreseeable nor reasonaUle.
IS THIS SITE PL_-L� StiITABLE FOR CO3IPATIBLE bIISED tiSE I\
ACCORD iVCE ��TTH THE CIT�'S L_S:\D USE PLrL� � At present, it is not. Planning
Corrunittee staft cecommend that it can be made so bj• mo�-ing its entcance and using sound
baniers. I su�est that an}' comp:uiy opetating nois}' [iucks, unloading eyuipment such as
forklifts and hydraulic lifts, from secen in the moming ttntil midnight is not compatible with
a residential area. Period. No amount c+F sound restrictions �cilt cempletel�� muffle out these
sounds. L� addition, die lights used bp JLT have consistentl� cteated a peoblein and haee
not been remedied (despite empty promises by JL"� since JLT bought the site. In some
cases the lights shining into adjoining houses remain so bright, all night, that one can read at
night with no intcmal lights on. Such use deprives adjacent properties oE sleep, enjoyment of
u
X� ,ss
f�om: icn M�mler Fa: (651)6549IR Vome. (fi51)fi59-5111 To Cnn:missloner GIZN's Morton rlo Alr.TOm Beach zt SL Pa:J �lann•r.g Ccmmisson �a9? 7 0' 3 SaturAay. MarcA 27. 1999 3'd' FU
land, and creates a nuisance. � cemprehensice zoning plan e�ists ro stabdize pmpeet;,• uses.
Ligh[ industrial acti�-in' such as computer assembly, ottice or edier 8-�, ltbhtec n�ise and
trtftic use is �vi[hin the intent of the zoning, and also allows neighbors to continue to live
and enio5�, ecen impro�e, their homes. ?. nuisance use �cill, rathec, destaUilize the adjacent
residential area, as dap care centers ma5• (ose business, prepertc values mac c•,-ell decrease, and
diosr of us «ho lia� worked hard ro keep die neigliborhood clean and decent look for
other ptaces to lis-e.
DOES THE ECONObIIC INTE£.EST OF JLT L� DE�"ELOPI��G THIS SITE FOR A
TRIICI�TG F�CILITI OUTI�'EIGH THE INT'ERESTS OF I`TEIGHP>ORS ��TD THE
CITl OF ST. P�UL? �s die o�cnec o£ [he site, TLT has the nght to decelep tt and make a
pcota. Eut its interests do not ounceigh those of the citc and its neighborheoc. In this
instance, TLT might lose profi[ in not deceloping [his site Eor the pcesent pu:pose, but that
�ci11 be minga[ed bp its abiliq' to de� e(op it for more suitabte ptojec[s. The cin has an
inrerest in m:iintaining affordable heusinb fer its cesidents, and that �cill not be mitib red by
any addicional propecty' taties, etc. realized b�� rhis development. ��'i11 urban spra�cl rzsulting
from residen[s fleeing [his area beneti[ the citf? Nor �vill d�e increased ttaTTlc en Faircie�v
and Unicersits result in anydiing but increased maintenance costs. Similarl�, tne
hemee« and pcopertp o�cnecs cannot mitigate the loss of the value o[ eu� pr�pecty �vith
a neisp facility opeca[ing from secen untii midni�ht, keeping us accake, �: akmg oue children,
�:-idz hea�-�• traEYic cempeting ter scheol buses and leacin� us onlc one majoc outlet,
DIuinefiaha, Erom �cliidi to entu or lea�-e our neigftUorhood d�at is not ria� eled 6-r hea�
trucks.
�C�L3T IS THE TREND I'OR ZONIN G I�i �' T�IIS ARL' _'.:' The \lidc Hei�itts
nei�bochood esisted before the industrial use. \Ianp homes �cere buil� in late 1390s, or
earl}• 1900s--homes «ith historical and architectucat value. But, clearl}, flze are�a has become
home to industrial decelopmrnt. But not e�clusirely. ��'e have seen thc cih• impro�-e our
NeR Park corcununit�� building and playground, and open rno nec� scheols in the
iinmediate aces of this trucl;ing site. Sucely it is not in the best interest oFancone to
deliberatel}- locate large b oups of childcen neac such a site. The cit}• has not indicated that
residential use in this area �z'ill wane until it becomes so(elc industrial. Theretere, this site
cnust be deceloped in a caa�- that �cil1 centimie to be compaCble and not hacmLul io the
residential decelopment.
��"e are not asking that jLT tum this area into a park,. Of mucse as a neighborhood a�e must
be espected to enduce seme incon�enience rather than cur[aiI jLTs fceedom te use its site to
inake a pcofit, Uut TLT must also use this pcoperty ui a cFa}' ��at causes no un:easonable
haan to us. �Iodem societp requires Eactories, smelters, and taickin� Elee[s, and such
acti��icies are not nuisances if carned on in suitable lecalities and the adce�se impact on
neighbocutg localities is onlc acoida6le at pcohibitive cost. �C e suggest dtat using dzis site fot
a diEEerent, more suitable and respectful pucpose, does net censtimte prohibitice cost ro JLT.
��`hat �cill be prohibiti�e is the cost to us—these actic�des �cill interfere substantiallp and
Luzteasonably R-ith the interest oE substan[ial numbers oE landholders in the usc of enjopmrnt
of our land, interfere with our health, comfort and concenience by emission oE unpleasant
odors, fumes, loud noises, etcessive light, and much additional and dangerous heavy traffic.
•
•
•
� ,� `
Frmn:TOm�ninrix Fm:(651)659-911]VOice:(651�55491BTa'COmm�ssinnerGlatlySMOrtontloMr.TOmBeachat Pa9n3ot3SaNr�ay.Marc�2].19993a859Fnf
�q_sa`I
�
•
•
The old masim One \tust Use His Propertc So ds tiot To Injure That of �lnothec is deeplF
imbedded in rlmecican laR-. This should also applc to industrial sites that are bordered on
ta sides, closelS•, b5• houses. EceR- industrial anno}•ance cannot be addressed, of course, noc
erers thing that burdens the peace and ttanquillitc of a neighborhood. But in a
neib berhood that is alread5• burdened to the bteaking point bc encroaching industrial
anno}•ances, it is necessar�� for the ci�t� to look at its compzehensice plan and detemvne
�chether a trucking facilitq is reasonable to be placed in this site. Should the ciri of St. Paul
sacrifice an ethnicalls dicerse, economicallj• miszd, histocicallz' significani neigltborhood for
die sake e[ a particular h�e ok de� Should the cin• favor this deF cather
than nurture and support a neighborho�d that is a benefit to the cin'� Is this sitz reall}
appropriate �chen the lack of aEfocdable housin� has reached a crisis, �chen ucban spca�vl has
beceme au issue addressed bp dze Goccnzor of Dlinnesota, c•hen di� bIa} oT St. Paul
openlc reiteraces his support Eor inneo-ciR� neighborhoods+
I respectfiilly subcnit to this conunittee that it is not.
Thank pou for j•our consideration of these cemarks.
Sincerely,
Tulie Grifhn
7G�4 Tatum
TahiarChelton Block Club Leadre
� s�
MRR.13.1999 6�43PM HFlMLIIJEihiIDWAY N0.280 P.2
AY
HAMLINE M�DWAY CQA.LIT�ON
Ham4ne Park Plsp;round I3uildiug � t5G4 LaFoad Avenue, Saint Paul, D9�'i 55104 � 612-646•14S6 � 61Z-641-G I23
March 13,1999
Ms. Gladys 1Vlorton, Chair
St. Paul Planning Commission
15 W. Kelloag Blvd.
St. PauJ, MN 557.02
Dear Ms. Morton:
I am writing on behalf of the Hamline Midway Coalirion Board of Directors. �t its
NIarch 16th meeting, the '6oard of Directors voted ++na.��mously to oppose JL'I'
Company's proposal £or a truck transfer facility on Fairview and 1�tinnehalla
Avenues in St. Paul.
We want to thanlc you for � anfing a publzc heazing on this si�nificant issue, �vhich
we underst is scheduled for March 26th. � The HNIC Eoard of Directors x�quests
that, if possible, the heazing Ue held after usual business daytime hours, so tl�1t
constituents who would be affected by fliis proposed operation would be ablc• tu
paTti.cipate in the hearina,
T# you have questions, please contact zne or Jodi Bantley, HNIC Executive T7ireccor.
Thantc you. -
Sincerely,
/�/�. ,� �
L
Cath�rine Lue, Community Organizer
tr. Councilmember Jay Benanav
Steve IvlcKeown, HYi IC President
Pat Teiken, HMC Treasuzer and Sub-distxict A Representative
Dedicated to snaking t�e Hamlirae dtitfwaY s2e{gbbo-rhood a befler ptate to tiae asu! rWrk.
��a�, ��w���
\ J
�J
•
�F S�
�
h1tiR. �.1Sy'3 S�1�Phl HAt�LiNEihlI�b1HY
!�
,1 �
�
HAMLINE MID�V
N0.45E_P.1_
Post-it' F2x Note 7671 � 3_ ¢
To��M �[l�CFI From �.�l'f'N
c���c=_Ft �.1.G.P. co.
Pt+cne * Pror:e d i . ..
Z6G- qo9R
Ii3mline Park Placground Bwidin, � 1i64 L�fond �venue, Saint Paul, hiV �i I04 � 612•64G-19sG + 61:•641-6123
•
�s-ch 4, 1994
�-5. GLdys Mortoz
C1Lirpe:son
St Paul Planning Cou~�:-xtission
15 W Kello� Blvd.
St. Pau11V�' 557.02 "
Dezr �4s. iVlorton:
Lu E
� _ �-y
On UehalE of the TiamL-�e �2zdw av Coailition (FLy1C�.Board of DirecEors, T am requesting that the
St. Pau� Planning Comnussion hold a puUlic hearing JLT Cumpany-'s pzoposed freight transfer
facility on Fairvievv and W.est �riinnehaha'A.venues. This request is based on the unanimously
shared eonceir�s oE Ulock chtb 3eaders and other neighbors li�•ing close to the proposed sit�e, who
met with Coalition zepresentatives on Febn�ai�• 24. These consfituenis and T�C w to
pGblicl;�� sllare the follo�ain; cox�cems:
1; The residential area adjacent to JLT's propexEy is alzeadp satvrated with aix and noise
pollu�on from the entire industrial corridoY in,ihe westernportion of District 11.
2) Such a Eacility would necessarily generaEe additional noise polluiion irom increased fruck
traffic, indudin� the possibiLty of noise fzom id.l�nj hucks.
3) Lil:e�vise, flt� proposed facility would incsease ai: pollurion, par�cularly the unileallhy
diesel fimles from i�ucl<s. ,Several area residenis aze alze2dy aftlicted cvitn respiratory
pxoUlems• . ,
4) The siee plan sug�zsts that'izuc�: txaffic w'ould entex/eo ess on'Fairview Avenue, dizectly
across the sireet from a ro�nT of homes. Ineseased traffic rn1 Fain West IvSinnehaha and
Prior Avezuies, consideruzg their heavy cunent use in conjvnction wiCh the industrial corridor
and Suzlino on Northem-Santa Fe Railroad T-TuU Site, is hi�hly tutiwelcome.
5) Questions about the pruposed facility's hovrs of opera�on and daily volume of txaffie hace
not been satisfacEorily answezed.
HtiiC is IZOpeful that the Plaruung Co�ruivssion r,cill d ant tivs request for a public hearing on flie
JLT proposal. Please conEact me or Cathy Lus, 651-6�10-19S6 wifh youz decision. Thanlc you
fer y our considerafion.
Sincerzly,
��� m���
Jodi \�f. SantIey
Executive Director
• /jmU
cc: Steve 2vicl�eocvn, I�vIC Board Presidene
Cath}r Lue, I3MC Community Ozgaz�izez
Council��e� �is��y�,$��Fp�E Hamlina �tlzdioay neighborbood a belter place to lue and work.
sr, ��: � i•;� � ,��:..;.
� 3 5�
Feb-22-99 05:23P JLT
u_�2�:98 1G:1: td.t ootoaiace.
651 641 1244 P_02
���GR�UF 1�lC.
�„,��� �
738 Yandai4e Stre4i •� 4 'auE, µ� `�"`�tia (sst� 64s-St1 S�(fi51)
�eb�uazy 2?. 1499
41F- �l utit Bc;OLEi
7Qlllil�, S�CtiL:l�]SL
City af 5�.1'v+il
i7t�icr uf Lfcen�c, [nspccEiocr aud £nYironmental
3_+0 S�. Pcccr Surci. Su=�z J��
S�-I':�ui,htN 551Ur-ISIO
Dcu bi:. F3ca:.i::
l4`� vruu3.i li�� tn ga befacc dte Piaaeli�� Comiwssioti w;t':i uiu ptans f�ar I}swes
` Tt3wax��R o�� FebrwrS i�, 19w9.
n�1r- Bci1r T will be sLhenitting the plans yau requestccl u socro s� tfr�y srn
pcirued; eitheF li�ay or wnlor•e��'.
'�luuii you.
ti:ne�rtl}.
��"'-��-� ���
fiurc Wiitiam��n
31�5 Gcoup, ��-
t`A
u
�
� � `O
�
�� ,�vo,
- l�r wirt�
��
� �v
•
@
e�
�
��� '
dc7=l �``''>s
� � {�'�� . t
�,
�����
i .i9�.� �iv's �n`�.
� T'( �V.
��,
�
�
� ���vt.
�'i v �r i r�f
-- :��.�
�����
U��n r�n,��
�-I
�o
f O '• �O r��n� �ta
1���o�n
� l�( � ��
_;
;
;
�
�
'�] � /�V � �� ;
��. �`����t �� �;�
t�
- I � 1°U
�
� �
�, �o��� �..�v�..� f ��i ��� �.�,��►
55 No t,�.R� :
t ls Vdt i�t G�1�7
4�iVJ t 1'P"/�V.;
�N._�.�
!°
� ��
�� v,t'. GAR�
� ,t ��
� I t'^Zf��Cii ��-� i'T�'
v� °
��_s ati !
a
��
�'
�''
�I:� �u�, ;
.��;,
�,�� � €1 °�(.�;
o� {
�
�� t����s
°to
�+bM,�F�� �, y �' L�s � r� J�€ t r� � ,�s � �
Examples of Sound Levels
Threshold oYPai
Rock Baad
(at 100ft)
:, ,
� x �'�
Large Gat6ering
of People
��
`� ^ 't � �\
Conversational �
Speec6
140 dB
130
120
110
� Pneumatic
1 0 o Chipper
90
8 0 E
Dawntown St Pant
7 O Street Traffic
(Daytime)
6 0 E _ . B¢s�ness Office �
5 O E _ Yrivate Of£tce
40 � �
30 � I� ;
�
2 O Library
10
0
� �Z
�
•
�
�— - —_ — �
�' �
• I T ' ~ Wfltl� ;' F
� `
I � '
I ��
I
n3B 3t�x �
I a�
� - `<1
_ wl
I = z,
z,
�Ci
�
� � 'NOfYJ.WIYbIB
� 'e �� �
d ..� •
I f� � / M �� .lMMG 1p�
�� � � � .I
�^4.p �p+,0.. J. ; �,��; n
V� rnd
� � / i �1tl43
� � e\
/i � ,
e� � �
f �9 � �
m K
I , _ N 3 � �
.
- ._ ,_..r*������� ���3SvJa ������ ��y '
I '
� ,� :
� < ♦'
� 3NAtld ✓�r' �
�e3�r�.cs�
� J y�ne}(
% �
� w� ��
s
1 ��
I � � �e�m�sLe
� 3 � �3
I � �5�$�bb�. ���9'F�'e.�"€ai W
i8 �'� s��, erw '��a
�� ��.�ad S � '...an:�R
� u
� �ire��„��� �
� J I x .nAS � 1 'gp �. y
l
'_'__' '�'_ " _'�� -.',a�
� nw ..it€9 , �
3iva
rvonm
� \���
i n
�` Y r
M31AbIOJ
��
� b
���
WOIl1'
�� /
�.�--Sa`I
_' � �
m
� � a �-. .. , �
� ��
�'
0 �� � �vx���.
A _
�� ^
� �.
.S'� _ _ >� � �
', v __ °� 43II
S 3 ---- — —_=__ �4`CIS "z� ��` �
P -- CGa'
'r^� a � � 3 LL 3 I
e��'���.� o�'�<:� " � �a �
��r � �ezc.<� i o �
, �✓ Q R �J R I � sm��m iCy�� �yI
�; Z Q _ _I 30 3?m$�yn ~ L 2
f 9 - _' "�l � m ; � �d
c* — � nl �� ��� �
_ - , '�I�� w'!!ON v z 3 W � � 8
_ ' i -
� �
_ _ e �I � w> �$
� N3153M 9 0
�. 2 � ar w � �
°_ = I o a � E ��
�� '__ w Y � � � o� '
_.����"�' "�':n�wi � � � � � - _
, i .-1 � d 8> � �' E
`; ���� e oy �" j Z - ¢ J� o €� _ �
� Z F
r � � t : _`-, P000 _ a a_- °�f w:�
;;,. � � � 3 � _
fw�. °' �s h� r w� w �
�. a �owo, z W � � �' n3
Y Q � s � �
y �� oy �'__�_'_' � m s s W'; -
��� �b i �j ._.�,�, lL � � � a � x� �
�� ���_�J � ���,,, � Y ° S� 8 0
�\ �. ��,, s %;. � j � 3 5 m ¢ � i
. 's,�� � �� '�b t U � y W w`o ''" o '" z� a
�� °�C$� ��� �d�� � t i y �"% �
i �� � _� � � � i � i • ^ � � �
i �
� �
I \ ��S
1 \ � V+
���T \ -.rba..... : e
1 �\\\ 8 rt�+ ,�f, '(Y
I � oE �s
� ; ¢ r Aa� �
i �
�
j \ �aa
1 � � , A
♦
1 ����_�__� . ...
� � � �]'!'_-#�
-� -� 1 \
AMMJ � W1JM%31 I ��� AtlMl3 1
� � 1
� SW 30M]9m �� � EP
' � ��, � ���
� �
1 � � _ � � P�
1 1 � `� ��
i 1
� I a I �,
1
� 1 § 1 �
1
� 9xn3rvs 1 I '� �1
1 � � ���
I � � ��a
I
� � � '�.w,�1
� )
� EI zl , j 30wU9v3 �/
1
dl a j L� %
1
� �12 Q /
� i' 1VEA /
� i . ' i 6Wi�P
I '
1 � ..�.�:
r 1 � `__'"_""� ' �.,, :`
P�/ `` ��ti� '�� �
� �
y3�IM tll$$ISSiry _
�3
HIGALIGATS OF THE COMMERCIAL VEAICLE ROUTE ORDINANCE
All trucks of 15,000 lbs. rated gross weight or under may travel on any
street in the city with the exception of city parks and restricted
parkways as shown on the map. The gross weight is the rated weight of the
vehicle or combination of vehicles whether or not it is loaded.
All trucks over 15,000 lbs. rated gross weight must use the routes as
designated on the reverse side map except as follows:
Trucks (9 ton) may travel on any street within industrial districts and
the central business district.
When entering or leaving a truck terminal or making a pick up or delivery,
trucks (9 ton) shall reach or leave such location by traveling over the
shortest route from the nearest truck route. Direct travel between
deliveries, without returning to truck routes, will be allowed where the
distance between delivery points does not exceed one mile.
For delivery or pick up purposes, commercial vehicles (9 ton) may travel
on designated parkways between the delivery or pick up location and
adjacent intersections.
Randolph Avenue and St.Clair Avenue between West Seventh Street and
Cleveland Avenue; and Grand Avenue between Dale Street and Cretin Avenue
are not designated truck routes. However, commercial vehicles over 15,000
lbs. rated gross weight, when making a delivery, a pick up, or when
traveling to or from a truck terminal located in the area bounded by
Mississippi River Boulevard, Marshall Avenue, Snelling Avenue, Se2by
Avenue, Summit Avenue, Kellogg Boulevard, West Seventh Street, Otto Avenue •
and Highland Parkway, shall consider Randolph Avenue between West Seventh
Street and Cleveland Avenue; St.Clair Avenue between West Seventh Street
and Cleveland Avenue; and Grand Avenue between Dale Street and Cretin
Avenue as truck routes (9 ton), and all provisions of this ordinance
applicable to truck routes shall apply.
Except for recreational vehicles (RV's), no vehicle 22 feet in length or
longer or T feet in width or wider may park on any city street or alley
for more than 30 minutes or for longer than is reasonably necessary to
load or unload.
Clearly marked commercial vehicles may, between 5:00 AM and 11:00 AM, for
purposes of loading or unloading only, park in metered spaces without
payment or in truck loading zones. After 11:00 AM, commercial vehicles
may, for purposes of loading or unloading only, park in truck loading
zones to a maximum of 30 minutes.
No provision of this ordinance shall undermine or permit violation of any
rule or order of the State Commissioner of Transportation or of any State
law or provision regarding the regulation of any aspect of trucks or any
other vehicle.
City of St. Paul
Public Works Department
Traffic Division
800 City Hall Annex
266-6200
November, 1996
•
9j�j � �
, �q -sa�l
6 � ��f 1 J.rM ` <
C p' � t ` v
�"'>a, � r
• �o� - � ` �
� � � .�
i is �y
E a .::�= cK'-� c
� � LS i3:�- ` y '� .
WT 3:.w e y� � / .
� f ; COOrI]:r � � ¢'� O` �� /)
3.� r t � �
� �, � � 3 "
+� E � C
� c � �
K G �
� � 5�37 V
m y� bs..cr � so �
� 6 �
4 ��.t
E
15 �vJ
tS LS1Af d � .
- �h
IS 3Cr�yv ' I N �
} I ! `n N t
� / W S �
� £ t:E `�
3w 3�t.' � Q+ � �� : i
� � (�,(� ��,\
LS tGtl3_G3 \�" L C C1�'t'� � f--
EE� N 15 Mfd C C� ` W � 4
� iS L`� �
� P
I 15 1t4u6Jm \ "� -
1. d95 .y`
t:- �. M`- ' Nv0 b?+
F' �
\ 4k .
C•
� ` -
• i; r..s�.r \ M - .
r 35 b0 �
C
3.'+ :�5'+ S
� " Q \ _ �
tS 3Af ; i
j c \ 3' � �
' ^ G IS '�SVn . <: �' �3.�]
! �/ 1 u
4M� � �2 i` � + ? R',� L J �
v NJ3:53u "*
: b .�.., � � o O
CTl ° q '° r �. ; —
U � � � � �> ,
. 15 3� �+ � �
1 -_' ; T � 'ry Y
-�-i �' •
cn E g �
� " , u ..�.�. (
— k � s - � i
¢-i
•� < a... �:o.Yn 3� ��-
� Z ' �,�'� y a� ` � E ca ��
� j � '3 � � � r r'� i �\
O W 3Y 31)`M� 3.`� }'IY.vv L^5 � �`
U ¢ 1 Q �" ls Q
6 S � � ` i
"` � e Qt
' ; 5 �s +
� , � �
3v ?�ti35 3v ry�n35 :S
� � r L
U � � � � �� � � !S 'tliY i
��
M3.�wf 3+ M3wrf CS �i
i � �E
� �'�� Wx M V � � St PS
� r F `c 1
� Qhl�3a M 3v Pnl.�n3L w iv Ont3�3� '�`S �•
( J � �
� �l /
♦� -y C�" 1V N13'1J N ]N M'�3�fJ P� /
C
� � � 1 r
�`M.. �
�/ E b ��
_" � �.v�+W _ �
\./ l � if1 � �
�i
��
--� i
� j i
�---' �
�
'� �
---� �
T i LLt
r I C
. J,--i' z
w
��
�
2
-0
r.
� L7 ' ' I��� `:� ���:,: 1
�` `�� '' i� �� �
5I
�- ; ,�� :, �; I I � e `� � -� '.�.� I
'_ � � u , i
�, � � o ,
� i � � � �..� —
� t
� � i� � � ' =' ;
I
� I
�rn
J
I i .� W
� ._.�� -.-.� C}
� I I
I E�.� I i � I
� i E::E3 �
�..W. I I
�
I
�.......°
;
- ; �
Y
1
1
n
— I .._,
�,_
�: - I�� r
°'---- `" ::J �:
F�`=3 '�' � ^ ;
,:::_: _ ' i�
� �
� ^ , �'^[
�_.-.'i _� , 3 -
_ `
�.` In
,�
e_� � I —
� I,
�'_
_....._........._. _ _......_..
_y_ "_........_. ... ...._........... __.
�
1
;_-:;
„
�
�-��
' GL
�O
I�
�/ /
� '
; -,,
< <;
;i
��;
i.-:._ -�
1 t :
� 6:-
�_
PR(OR _-__.. ..__... _. -
�r��.e�i:d� ��".;�"�� �y�
�� ��� �����I��
: ;,_ '="c.,.. ��!'�'.^:��:.c �
\ \ \. O J . � . � �. i/: _ �_ --
�„ ' I I 9x �:
I
� -
� I �_
_ '' I
I
v J �_
� _ � I
��
----J
��
�u-�_. - c. z:� � . _' 's�a: � � .
% i '. i �i2'
—'�—
- �:
/
•
��i
2, :C -'iY'S
: �:�s--
S "�;�=�z
a
/ i� �I uP/"�
z�� ���'9f:�u�KLS
?` '
n-vs E;
`wSY� i
� �iRe.E nw
� � Tx.^ °.u.
� �V"4' �/uv
}w:_J� 1
� J ST�'
\� SW:S�
%/`7.`; ,�
�
L. ' ' i
i%'
/%
��%1�:.%
(.' � . � i
L��
� F:(^� y
Fx aCAl -. I Wb'
re YJ �S.++E �e: E _ .
MC° W^St
�'
� ' i-:_ _3==--ya w �c-:._..� ._". ' '
ua-.: '.N:ua:w I
, 4n'.a �ao�4 � /
FR �
S�19
� �
�r..nc a.vuwc
.+.�amECr:
�� _sa-y
HOG«'�fA�
A ft C H t T E C T 5
_'-.y � :-.
' s. z
� 4i 6]C..YA
/ S C3'.'2.
��
- x'.r.+ri �
V
Bi.IlJL�Ci Ot!\fA:
JLT
� k „ K , ,„.�_.. . GROUP
_ :39�'.��D.1LLi5i
Sf. P.iC1.1L� yi la
:6l?IWbllll
�xr..cc_z.t� F.�.C:61216t1-LS.t
• —�
PftOfECT LOG1P.0�`.
� / �m.�xv-c�a
\/ F.�¢n�vnv�tE
� Si. P.ill. \C1
� wwc_ xr.- c
SAE vr�! f �� �•.
ClE fJ S�P'�-CU x
�
� � st,uL�c �`.avr:
�
01'.�ES
� ! S _ ��.�QQ.`Ci
/�y N
p � F <
S �%43 I
�4%t �
` � S�fE PL.L� � SRE 4�'�.
l�,� _ �, IPROlEG7REVlE�YSEf
� 2-t;.99)
1 ! COi�S[Al'CROY 8m SEf
scww.wr. ' 1�]99
� RE�L{O�Ji I-(&99
r.u.c ze .:e �r.,. R..R7570\ �2 422.99
I ��8� �1�1Y�.b0J
_ � o�.�v n'a��
� C2�Gl'&7 BH
�
, ��, SFffFC Ad OF 6
���
� � � �
� 3 . �. 3 ._�, S , �, j , `� 3_ �
'�-0� !'-6" 6'�fi 9'_6 . G'�fi � g'=fi '!C�
' � � ' I� YIN.
.�
'm {
000c c�c
� e'-a' s �o' o a. cCCK xca
r;xcR x.. � ;��s;
�- s' x ia' cu ec;x ccca
'.��➢CCK P4� i1P.`2�
CCGR 1LCN - ICC% �
�
'`;
, .z
z� c�ae�s ,� _
i�
.7
,.T
.7
m1
.i
i.
.T
i .�
^ .T
)Z'-0' •� a�
�T
—T __-__-_
I . n _ _ .
,,.. -
; � �,;• �
i � �� �
i I ''''�/� �=�
11Eti a -
CNLEf 'U�
rae Ccac
LG-iS
r nrau�u- so�oc�r
c_�_ s�. rs_c.
r `
�s�'c:c cec�
wai=cu5�
�m
r�c:rt ro cc:ac vzai
Y]GT i'] &VZ JCS 1d'-0� C�}i A=i
0� :..^.NC. SLY3 CY 56\p CJSFICN ,N :CC< .li}
- SE= S�I:� R'�L FJ4 :r^hSG::C'CV/C.^.�Y_ _C \ a
�IoO� P�N
o� PF•�=*�
AI�
�6" P!FE 9CL'4ip
a e+cv a.i. eccx
A
�
�
1 � .
/\ I l C'
`/ �
i
� I
�'�.
_' p + I
� v ;
�
� ,
I
�
—_ ' E .
� �
0
�I
�i
_'� F � I
. v
.,
i1 � G 1
i�
a'-a' x ia' o.r. w« ccc�
w/xu w„�;= M.(te)
WOR 1CCE - COGi iCCV �
-d �
' '—_ � q '
i
8'-e % 10' O.d. CCOC DCCQ � ��/
w/�K ie.e � tn.C2)
oac�x iaac - occx icco - �
12' % 18' O.ti. OR!F_-IH OCJR ' �j
qN�'/E rUUP m.(�) '�n�
CCOR 1CC9 I
t •� �
_a. ^
T �`i �
��
I
i;�-0
J _�
4 � /' X
i a�
f '�
.
�
.{.'���,F:n C�.
Fi O r
AP. C�E
Y _ _.
,LL-"_=" _" "-_ _
�r w_ � -.i: � � -
iT_c.^C
AC" t4 . � Y Z.
�+FC
L`�.�i =••C__
�
g�Il.l���[ n�
JLT
GROL
: 39 l".j.�DA1.
5:. P.iLL. }L�
i6!�,sti.!
F.�.'i �5:?; �
P37 `EQ LCG
F.u���,�.
ST.. P.�l �.
BULDL\G Tc
DA".� c:
��Cti
� ��
�s
�AOR Pla.ti 3 SCF:
(PFtO.iECC REV�.��' `
2-L7-991
ca�srx�cna� s¢
1-7-99
��srov = i
REti15I0ti =?
D�TE �=
DEL�t�} IR
' (}iECt�7 BH
S[�ET �-3 OF
-�
.'
.�, . , �
North Star Chapter
PUBLIC HEARING
ST. PAUL CITY COUNCIL
a� "
MAY 12, 1999
RE: JLT TRUCIC TRANSFER FACILITY SITE PLAN
Amelia R. Hummel and Ronald G. Williams
779 Clayland Street
St. Paul, MN 55104
REPRESENTING: TWIN CITIES GROUP SIERR.A CLUB
A. SITE PLAN INCONSISTfiNT WITH I-1 ZONING DISTRICT
The Zoning Code of the City of St. Paul says that the intent of
the I-1 Industrial District is "to primarily accommodate
wholesale and warehouse activities, and industrial operations
whose external, physical effects are restricted to the area of
the district and in no manner affect the surrounding districts
a detrimental way." (Sec. 60.611) The Code further states that
new buildings in I-1 must conform to specific uses, including
"(3) Warehousing and wholesale establishments, and trucking
facilities." (Sec. 60.612) The thrust of the Zoning Code here
to delineate light industrial areas to contain only activity
which has no deleterious effects on the areas surrounding such
activity. The Code sharply distinguishes I-1 from the next
industrial classification, I-2, by stating that I-2 is for
certain "industrial operations whose external effects will be
felt in surrounding districts." (Sec. 60.621)
in
is
A confused reading of the Code would focus on the second
conjunct, ��and" in the sentence which includes "wholesale and
warehouse activities, and industrial operations...in no manner
af£ect the surrounding districts in a detrimental way." (Sec.
60.611) Upon such a reading, I-1 would include wholesale and
warehouse activities, regardless of whether or not they affected
the surrounding districts. Thus, you would have some I-1
activities which detrimentally affected adjoining neighborhoods
and some which did not.
1
�
� 1313 Fifth 3tz�et 3E, Suite #323 • Menneag�otis, MN 55414 •(612) 379•3853
� ay
Such a reading would mean that the Code is incoherent in setting
I-1 parameters. You would have radically different types of
activities in areas designated as I-1, some detrimentally
affecting neighboring districts, some not.(Sec. 60.612)
Furthermore, of the numerous specified I-1 uses, there would be
no way to tell, for most of them, whether they were the type that
were allowed to detrimentally affect its surroundings or of the
type given no such allowance. One such specified use is
"trucking facilities."
The City Zoning Code's delineation of I-1 districts is coherent.
It clearly indicates that trucking facilities, among others, are
one of the specified uses o£ I-1 and thus must "in no manner
affect the surrounding districts in a detrimental way." This
means the JLT Truck Transfer Facility proposal would have
conformed to code if the proposed site had been in an I-1
district where the trucking facility would not have disturbed the
surrounding neighborhood. However, since the proposed site abuts
a residential neighborhood, the proposed site plan does not
conform to the Zoning Code of the City of St. Paul.
B. PROPOSED SITE PLAN INCONSISTENT WITH 1980 CITY LAND USE PLAN
The Zoning Code with regard to site plan review and approval
states that "the planning commission shall consider and find that
the site plan is consistent with: (1) The city's adopted
comprehensive plan and development or project plans for sub-areas
of the city." (Sec. 62.108 (c)) The pertinent part of the 1980
City Land Use Plan (1980 Plan) says:
Mixing incompatible uses will create an unsuccessful
development. For example, uses which generate large volumes
of traffic, noise or air pollution cannot be combined with
uses requiring quiet. On the other hand, traditional
separation of uses is not necessary when the uses do not
interfere with each other or do not create external problems
such as noise or air pollution.
(p. 19) Since the site plan proposes activity which is
incompatible with the adjoining residential neighborhood, the
site plan is inconsistent with the 1980 Plan. This is true of
the originally proposed site plan and of the site plan with
restrictions, approved by the Planning Commission.
2
�q -s a�
On Page 3 of the Planning Committee's Resolution (Resolution)
approving the site plan with restrictions, it quotes the 1980
Plan: "The City should encourage conditions which allow the
mixing of appropriate light industry with housing and commercial
activities." (p. 1) The Resolution then quotes 1980 Plan Policy
(1.4-3): "In cases o£ incompatible land uses, the city will use
the techniques listed above [in Policy (1.4-2)] wherever possible
to create or improve existing buffers between land uses." (p. 10)
Finally, the Resolution cites Policy (1.4-4): "The city will
ensure through its site plan review requirements that all new
development provides adequate buffering as part of its design."
The problem with the Resolution here is that, with this site
plan, buffers are not sufficiently ameliorative to make the plan
conform to either the Zoning Code or the 1980 Plan. Often
buffers between light industrial and residential neighborhoods
are in the form of significant land tracts which are occupied by
some use which does not detrimentally affect the residential
neighborhood. But that is not possible at the Fairview and
Minnehaha site, since the proposed building is on land abutting
the residential neighborhood. Though the Resolution restricts
the site plan with noise barriers, these barriers would be
insufficient to negate significant detrimental effects on the
neighborhood with regard to noise and would have absolutely no
eifect on expected rise in air pollution.
There is yet another way the site plan is inconsistent with the
1980 P1an: since it threatens a residential neighborhood, it is
inconsistent with the following 1980 Plan objective:
To determine and support the most compatible solutions for
meeting housing demands while promoting energy conservation
and neighborhood stability.
(p. 20) The 1980 Plan further expresses concern about the
"increased demand for smaller, one and two-bedroom dwelling units
for both ownership and rental purposes." There are many smaller
single-family dwellings, plus a good number of duplexes and
quadruplexes, in the Fairview and Minnehaha neighborhood which
would be adversely affected by the proposed facility. One reason
there is so much development going on in Hamline-Midway is that
it is stable and safe. If this truck terminal project is allowed
to go forward, people would move out, the neighborhood would
3
r�� -S �-�1
decline, and the outward-bound residents would contribute to
urban sprawl. It could be argued that such a fall in demand for
this neighborhood's housing would lower city housing costs; but
in £act such suburban-bound flight would be the signal indicating
that this affordable neighborhood was about to go into a neglect-
and-decline cycle, with all the associated social costs. About
half of St. Paul's property tax revenue derives from residential
use, too, which is very unusual in this day and age. So on two
levels, the City is very aware of the need for affordable
housing. The 1980 Plan's concern is with preserving the supply
of good-quality affordable housing in livable neighborhoods. The
site plan in question is inconsistent with this goal.
C. PROPOSED SITE PLAN INCONSISTENT WITH 1980 DISTRICT 11 PLAN
As stated in the above section, the Zoning Code requires site
plans to be consistent with City sub-area plans, as well as with
the City Comprehensive Plan. The District 11 Plan is the sub-
area plan which includes Fairview and Minnehaha. Some pertinent
goals of the Plan as reported in the Planning Commission
Resolution are:
• Maintain the present balance between residential and
commercial and industrial use.
• Develop buffers to separate residential areas from
commercial and industrial areas.
• Confine through traffic to relatively few streets, treat
other streets as local, resident serving streets.
• When developing major through streets, minimize detriment to
bordering land uses.
(p. 3)
The site plan contravenes the District 11 Plan in several
respects:
(1) First, it would disturb the present balance between
residential and commercial and industrial use, not because
of light industrial activity at the site, but because the
proposed activity is incompatible with the adjacent
residential neighborhood. The result would be neighborhood
deterioration, possibly to the point that residential areas
would be converted to industrial areas.
�
c�� -S a4
(2) Second, the proposed buffers are insufficient to protect the
residential neighborhood from detrimental effects.
(3) Third, in further developing Prior Avenue (a major through
street), the site plan contravenes "minimiz[ing] detriment
to bordering land uses" because the planned facility is
incompatible with the adjoining residential neighborhood.
D. SITE PLAN RESTRICTIONS IMPRACTICABLE OR INEFFECTIVE
The condition that the develope_�erform a noise studv and
present noise mitigation plans to Commission staff prior to
permitting, does not protect the neighborhood. The Commission
has failed to provide for public review and comment, to ensure
that the study is valid and the proposed mitigation measures are
adequate. This condition violates the public's right to review
and comment. Appealing this amorphous approval is like trying to
nail Jell-O to the wall!
The addition of landsca�in� and some noise-barrier walls, as
recommended in the Planning Commission's Staff Report, would have
no effect on noise from the trucks coming and going on the
street; they would also do little to effectively reduce the
impact of air brake or high-decibel backup signal noise during
the facility's long and late hours of operation.
The restriction on ogeratina hours as a way of preventing
detrimental effects on the neighborhood is ineffective, since
semi-trailer trucks from out of state will be allowed to enter
the site at the time of their arrival, day or night. The noise
of such large trucks arriving after hours, including engine
noise, air brakes, and the mandated high-decibel backup signals
as they approach the loading bays or other parking locations
within the facility, is certain to affect neighbors adversely.
The 15-minute limit on idlina is unenforceable and therefore does
not adequately protect neighborhood residents from noise or air
pollution, The drivers wi11 be independent operators, and many
from out of state, so they wi11 not be under any company's
supervisory control. Placing this burden on the site owner or
the tenant trucking company would be like tasking the fox to
protect the chickens. The burden of monitoring and enforcement
5
��'U � !
thus appears to be upon neigrborhood residents, which is thus
unfairly burdened with monitoring round-the-clock arrivals in
order to preserve quiet and air quality.
Restrictions on trucks sto�oin� or idlina on neighborhood streets
is less enforceable than the 15-minute limit on idling, for the
same reasons.
Site barriers along Minnehaha will be inePfective because the
houses are on a hill above the site.
The restriction that "truck traffic mav not use Fairview Avenue"
is ineffective because, as indicated by the developer as well as
residents, the City does not effectively patrol Fairview Avenue
with the goal of restricting through truck traffic. Even with
the truck terminal entrance and exit on Fairview, there is an
experience-based concern that yet more trucks will use Fairview
and other neighborhood streets in order to avoid traffic at major
truck route intersections. As indicated by official City maps,
Fairview Avenue north of University Avenue is not a truck route.
The Commercial Vehicle Route Ordinance states:
Al1 trucks over 15,000 lb. rated gross weight must use the
routes as designated by the reverse side except as follows:
Trucks (9 ton) may travel on any street within industrial
districts and the central business district.
When entering or leaving a truck terminal. .., trucks (9
ton) shall reach or leave such location by traveling over
the shortest route from the nearest truck route.
This ordinance is violated daily, by substantial numbers of
trucks which use Fairview and Minnehaha Avenues. These avenues
border, but are not within, an industrial district; they are both
designated as local, resident-serving streets. It is not within
the developer's power to prevent independent truckers from
traveling along neighborhood streets. Any development,
therefore, which may lead to heavier truck use of Fairview Avenue
or other neighborhood streets is contraindicated. This is a
primary neighborhood concern addressing children's safety, noise,
and air pollution hazards. This restriction fails to protect the
adjacent neighborhood in any way at all.
�
�t� -5�-`f
E. HARM FROM INEFFECTIVE RESTRICTIONS
Harm £rom Noise
One of the earliest motivations for urban planning, historically,
was the recognition that decent housing for workers is essential
for productivity. No employer would want their shift workers to
live next to a facility like the proposed truck terminal.
According to the National Institutes of Health, lack of adequate
sleep can cause or aggravate other health problems. It also
causes children and adults to experience difficulties in memory
and concentration, thus adversely affecting learning, job
performance, and safety. In addition to shift workers who must
sleep during the day or in the evening, children and the ill or
disabled require rest and sleep during the day as well.
Daytime noise and noise-induced stress constitute a serious
threat to residents' physical health and emotional well being.
It is important to note that many of this working neighborhood's
80-90 year old homes lack air conditioning, so daytime and
nighttime noise will be especially harmful during the spring,
summer and fall, when windows are open for cooling and
ventilation.
Harm from Air Pollutio
Increased air pollution wi11 affect children playing outside,
residents walking or exercising outside, and anyone doing
anything inside older homes which lack central air conditioning.
It will have greatest immediate impact upon infants, the
elderly, and those with chronic or acute respiratory problems.
When my wife was collecting petition signatures along Fairview
and Minnehaha--right after returning to work after a bout of
pneumonia--she met two residents with oxygen tanks and many
others who volunteered the information that they had emphysema,
or that they or their children had asthma. This area already has
a very high level of air pollution, and many of its residents are
clearly at risk. The ill and disabled must not be driven from
their established homes by improper development of adjacent land,
in violation of the city plan and the zoning code.
F. ENVIRONMENTALLY SENSITIVE AREA
7
��. - s a�t
This thriving working neighborhood is environmentally endangered
and already under environmental siege from surrounding traffic
and industrial activities. newell Park, the little neighborhood
which includes Fairview and Minnehaha, is vulnerable because it
is bounded on three sides by light industrial activity--the
Burlington Northern container yard off Pierce Butler Road, the
factories between Prior and Transfer Road, and the I-1 area at
Fairview and Minnehaha.
In addition, it is only about 12 blocks away from what was, in
the past, the most air polluted site in Minnesota, Snelling and
University. In the 1980's this intersection was cited several
times by the EPA for air quality non-attainment. The City has
worked hard to reduce pollution levels at this intersection and,
consequently, has been cited only once in the last couple or
years. The City has put in place an alarm system which is
triggered when air pollution is high. It then finesses the
traffic signals to discourage traffic from entering the
intersection and encourage those in the intersection to more
quickly exit. A daily timing device and the "ring round" which
takes traffic around Spruce Tree Center also reduces air
pollution.
The fact that the City has to go to so much trouble to take care
of this problem and that there is, even now, occasional air
quality non-attainment, is evidence that the air quality problem
in this area is serious and that it would be vulnerable to
significant air pollution increases. In addition, the federal
EPA is now concerned with the kind of particulates that diesels
emit to the air and is studying the matter to see how the problem
can be reduced. The introduction of the proposed truck facility
threatens the air quality of this area, a problem which should be
studied, as we suggested in our "Proposed Environmental
Assessment."
During most of the year, it is bearable for most--though not all-
-residents. During the State Fair, however, the smog is visible
to the naked eye, and exercise may be dangerous for the unwary.
This is a strong community here, but to maintain it the City must
be vigilant in shielding it from incompatible activity and
environmental threats.
G. SITE PLAN IGNORES THE 1999 CITY LAND USE PLAN
8
q,�,—.say
The 1999 City Land Use Plan (1999 Plan) of St. Paul's
Comprehensive Plan was adopted by City Council on March 3, 1999,
and is subject to review by the Twin Cities' Metropolitan
Council. It was recommended by the St. Paul City Planning
Commission on September 25, 1998. Thus this impressive forward-
looking document is solidly backed by the entire government of
the City of St. Paul. Though it does not yet have legal force as
the 1980 Plan presently does, it certainly is an important guide
£or policy judgments of the type which are critical for the
Planning Commission and for the City Council in considering site
plan reviews.
In the 1999 Plan's discussion of Equitable Metropolitan
Development, it lists several policies, two of which are:
3.3.1 Saint Paul will support an increase in the number of
jobs and housing units in the city, and will try to focus
growth along transit corridors, thereby supporting the
strategies of the Metropolitan Council's Regional
Blueprint....
3.3.5 The City should express its support and, where
appropriate, join in housing programs and projects that
contribute to balanced populations (age and income) in
communities and neighborhoods throughout the East Metro
area.
(p. 14) This says we should promote growth along transit
corridors, not deterioration as the proposed plan threatens. MTC
Bus #7 runs along Minnehaha avenue through this neighborhood and
Bus #16A (plus limited stop #SO) runs on University Avenue, only
about 5 blocks south of Minnehaha. The #16 is one of the most
frequently running buses in the Twin Cities. The other policy
above talks of supporting balanced populations (age and income).
The Fairview and Minnehaha neighborhood is such a neighborhood,
with a strong balance among ages and with low income and middle-
range income. The 1999 Plan indicates preservation and
encouragement of such neighborhoods.
In its section on "Strategy 2: Neighborhoods as Urban Villages,"
the 1999 Plan states and "Objective 5.1 Urban Villages: Theme
with Variations" with policies including:
7
��,-�a`i
5.1.1 The City neighborhood organizations, developers and
realtors should use the urban village principles listed
below, which are condensed £rom the Charter of the Congress
for the New Urbanism, for assessing neighborhoods and
promoting the advantages of city living.
• Good neighborhoods are compact and pedestrian-friendly.
• Good neighborhoods have a mixture of land uses.
• Good neighborhoods have a broad range of housing types.
• Good neighborhoods are designed to support mass transit
with appropriate land uses and densities within walking
distance of public transportation.
• Good neighborhoods have commercial, civic, and
institutional activity embedded, not isolated in
remote, single-use complexes.
• Good neighborhoods have schools within walking and
short bicycling distance, for most children.
• Good neighborhoods have a range of park facilities,
from tot-lots to village greens to ballfields to
community gardens. (Large parks and conservation areas
serve as boundaries between neighborhoods.)
• Good neighborhoods are safe and secure.
• In good neighborhoods, the architecture and landscaping
physically define the streets and public places.
(pp- 25-26)
Amazingly, the above listed characteristics beautifully define
Newell Park, the neighborhood which includes Fairview and
Minnehaha.
Newell Park, in turn, is part of the larger Hamline-Midway
neighborhood, a model of diversity and stability in St. Paul. We
are old and young, with lots of children as well as retirees. We
are blue collar, middle class, and professionals. We are also
white and black and Hmong and Native American; the neighborhood
church my wife and I belong to is bilingual and bicultural--
English and Hmong. We have parks, recreational centers,
playgrounds, schools, churches, libraries, a nationally known
university, and neighborhood stores. We have active block clubs.
We maintain and update and improve our homes, and the government
shows its appreciation by raising our tax-assessed value every
year. This is a neighborhood not to be threatened with
incompatible development, but a neighborhood to be preserved!
10
qq-say
In its discussion of "Objective 5.2 Mixed Land Uses/Mixed Use
Development," the 1999 Plan list policies including:
5.2.1 In traditional neighborhoods, the City will support
compatible mixed use within single buildings and in separate
buildings in close proximity. Mixed use reduces
transportation time and cost. National surveys show that,
on average, city residents drive only half as many miles per
year as suburban dwellers, primarily because each trip is
shorter in the city.
(p. 27) This is yet another 1999 Plan ideal already mirrored in
the Hamline Midway neighborhood. The grocery store at Fairview
and Minnehaha has apartments above. A few blocks away off
Minnehaha and Snelling are other buildings, such as a coffee
shop, a hardware store, and a restaurant which also have
apartments above. If our neighborhood deteriorates because of
the proposed truck transfer facility, people will have to move
away from the mixed use neighborhood, thus contributing to urban
sprawl. This is precisely the kind of thing the 1999 plan is
trying to avoid. The City must promote compatible mixed
development, and preserve it where it already exists.
The 1999 Plan's Appendix C says:
10. Study alternatives and propose amendment to the zoning
code which would distinguish between small and large
trucking operation,s. Consider alternatives such as special
restrictions on large trucking firms and propose an
amendment so that wi11 limit large low-employee-density
trucking use of industrial land. The proposed amendment
should act to make consistent, with regard to trucking uses,
the zoning code and high density employment requirements
outlined in Appendix A of the Land Use Plan and Policy 24 of
the Summary and General Plan addressing intensive use of
industrial land.
(p. 71) It is my understanding that, in this regard, the City
intends to prohibit additional truck transfer facilities in St.
Paul, just as Roseville did some years ago and as other area
municipalities have done. It makes no sense for the City to
establish a policy like this and then squeeze in one more
development of the sort that this policy prohibits.
11
�q-say
H. SITE PLAN ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT NECESSARY
It is critical that City Council have adequate environmental
information in deciding on this site plan with serious possible
effects on its adjoining neighborhood. That is why we attached a
three page "Proposed Environmental Assessment" to our April 13,
1999 letter to Mayor Coleman requesting the City to do a serious
environmental study of the site plan's environmental effects on
the neighborhood. (I also said that the Environmental Equality
Board had denied our petition to do an Environmental Assessment
Worksheet on the grounds that the proposed building was less than
100,000 sq. ft. The petition was signed by 400 citizens, almost
all from our neighborhood.) In response to our request of the
Planning Commission to recommend that the City Council initiate
such a study, the Planning Commission declined to recommend the
study on the grounds that it "was advised.._that the City does
not have legal authority to undertake extraordinary environmental
review under a different process or name."
The City not only has the authority to order the environmental
study we suggested, it has the duty to do it. It is unhelpful to
label a suggested environmental study "extraordinary�� and then
contend that it need not be done. Here is what the State of
Minnesota's Environmental Rights Act says about environmental
protection:
The legislature finds and declares that each person is
entitled by right to the protection, preservation, and
enhancement of air, water, land, and other natural resources
located with in the state and that each person has the
responsibility to contribute to the protection,
preservation, and enhancement thereof.... Accordingly, it
is in the public interest to provide an adequate civil
remedy to protect air, water, land and other natural
resources located within the state from pollution,
impairment, or destruction.
(Minnesota Statutes 116B.01) The vehicle for the environmental
protection remedy is the state government, and by extension, city
government. A critical way the city is to effect environmental
protection is to gather sufficient information to make a
reasonable environmental assessment. An excellent way for the
City to gather information with regard to this site plan would be
12
`C�-Say
to do our "Proposed
the neighborhood a
protection.
Environmental Assessment." This would give
reasonable chance for its environmental
Accordingly, we again request that the City do the "Proposed
Environmental Assessment" and "that the City provide a pub2ic
comment period of at least 30 days following publication of the
report."
2. LACR OF ADEQUATE PUBLIC REVIEW OF SITE PLAN NOISE STUDY
The City is to be given credit for doing at least part of the
environmental study we recommended. At the March 26, 1999
Planning Commission Hearing, the City staff recommended that a
site plan noise study be done. For some reason this study was
long delayed and not made public until, Monday, May 10, 1999, the
very day we write these words. But this is only two days away
from the City Council public hearing! It is an extreme,
unreasonable and almost impossible burden for us to attempt to
find an expert who can interpret a noise study in the eleventh
hour like this.
We nevertheless offer a few hurried observations about the noise
study. The study addresses only truck engine noise at Dawes
Trucking anticipated operating levels from slow moving and idling
trucks. It ignores piercing back-up truck signals and air
brakes, the most bothersome of truck noises. It also ignores
opening and closing of dock doors. Even during hours when the
noise ordinance is not exceeded as an hour-long average of engine
noise levels, the instantaneous noise levels from air brakes and
repeated back-up beepers wi11 disturb neighborhoods peace and
quietude and will disrupt sleep.
A rather puzzling part of the study reports that the �'Number of
truck operations permitted per hour to remain below L10 55 dBa
[the highest night noise level allowed by the St. Paul noise
ordnance]" is 26. This apparently means that the amount of noise
at night created by 26 trucks in an hour is acceptable in
neighborhoods of Highland Park, Macalaster Groveland, and St.
Anthony Park, as well as Newe11 Park. However, it is difficult
to believe that any residential neighborhood in St. Paul would
tolerate such noise.
13
��l -S a�\
The noise study also ignores the affect of the proposed study on
daytime noise. We cannot tell from the study if the truck
facility would violate the ncise ordinance during the day. In
addition, the study does not indicate the present noise level in
the Fairview and Minnehaha neighborhood.
At this point it is important to bring to bear here our earlier
discussion of the Zoning Code. The zoning requirement states
that the neighborhood must not be adversely affected in any way
by I-1 activity. This is stricter than simply requiring that the
proposed activity not violate noise ordinances.
Finally, since the permit request relates to a building with 26
bays, it is imperative that any comprehensive study consider
noise impact at maximum operating capacity, not just presently
anticipated operating levels.
Out of due process concerns, our April 13th letter to Mayor
Coleman specifically requested "that the City provide a public
comment period of at least 30 days following publication of the
report tthe "Proposed Environmental Assessment"]. It is very
important that citizens have the opportunity to assess and
comment upon environmental assessments which so critically bear
upon their neighborhood preservation. Accordingly, we request
minimally, that a 30 day public comment period be allowed for the
noise study and a public hearing at the end of that period.
J. PROJECTED CAPACITY OF PROPOSED FACILITY?
The Resolution reports that 45 semi-trailer trucks and 40 smaller
trucks would use this facility weekly. (p. 2) However, it also
reports that the building would consist of 26 docks. With
optimal scheduling, such a building could accommodate over 100
trucks a day! The proposed site plan and its presently
anticipated levels of operation are seriously incompatible with
the residential neighborhood. But if the building were to
realize its capacity, the facility would violate the neighborhood
in spectacular fashion! Even the noise ordnance would be
radically exceeded. Air pollution also would dramatically rise.
One has to wonder, why is such a facility being built with that
kind of capacity? What is to stop the owner from allowing the
building to reach its capacity? It is a serious concern that
14
q`t
the proposed building would have a much more serious detrimental
e£fect on the neighborhood than the site plan suggests because
the site plan fails to address the building's capacity.
IC. ECONOMIC IMPACT UPON NEIGABORHOOD
The Planning Commission failed to address the financial impact of
the proposed facility upon neighborhood homeowners. Such an
incompatible industrial development would decrease their property
values and discourage lending institutions from financing home
improvement loans, second mortgages, or mortgages for prospective
purchasers of homes.
L. CONNECTION WITH AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT
The Planning Commission failed to give special consideration
under the Americans With Disabilities Act for neighbors with
respiratory and other disabilities, including asthmatic children
and adults, who are at high risk from increased air pollution;
from stress during the 2ong operating hours from noise of the
truck engines, backup beepers, and air brakes, and from loss of
sleep due to noise and aggravated respiratory problems.
Residents with chronic or disabling health problems should not be
forced out of an established affordable neighborhood by
incompatible adjacent development.
M. ALTERNATIVES TO TRUCK TRANSFER FACILITY
There are many reasonable development alternatives for this site
which would be compatible with the neighborhood. These would
include low polluting light industries which were not open in the
evening hours. The bus line on Minnehaha flat lancl make this
site perfect for disabled and elderly housing. Such a development
would create less air pollution than other alternatives, since
those residents would use the bus lines to a great extent. But
even other housing would be a better air pollution-wise than
introducing a lot of trucks to the area. That is because cars
would not emit the air particulates of truck diesel engines,
particulates which now of a major concern and study by the
federal EPA.
15
V � �4,.�._.�,�. ��- a� ����,�
Council File # ��'S�
�������� � `l�� RESOLU ON �J �eenSheet# �o�b��
�
ITY OF SAINT PAUL, NIINNESOTA
� �, / �/
Presented By
I'.Z`-� -�flI1L7
Committee: Date
2 WFIEREAS, JLT Group, in Zoning File No. 99-038, applied on Februaiy 24, 1999 for a
3 site plan review pursuant to the provisions of Saint Paul Legislative Code § 62.108 in order to
4 establish a truck facility on the west side of Fairview Avenue, one-half block south of Minnehaha
5 Avenue, and legally described as Section 33, Township 29, Range 23, except avenues the North
6 561 33/100 ft of nortYteast 1/4 of northwest 1/4 of Section 33, Township 29, Range 23; and
7
8 WHEREAS, JLT Group and the Hamline Midway Coalition requested the Saint Paul
9 Planning Commission to hold a public hearing on the proposed site plan; and
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
WFIEREAS, the Saint Paul Pluuiiug Commission conducted a public hearing on the site
plan application on March 26, 1998 and referred the matter to the Commissions Neighborhood
Plamiing Committee; and
WHEREAS, the Neighborhood Planning Committee met and discussed the site plan on
March 13, 1999 and March 20, 1499 and recommended approval of the site plan with conditions;
and
WHEREAS, on Apri123, 1999, the Saint Paul Planing Commission, having received the
recommendation submitted by its Neighborhood Planning Committee, made the following
findings as set forth in its resolution number 99-27:
Dawes Trucking The truck transfer facility would be built by JLT and operated by
Dawes Trucking. Dawes would bring a variety of goods to the site from local businesses
using smaller city trucks. The goods would then be consolidated inside the building and
loaded onto semi-trailers and shipped out of state. Dawes currently operates out of a
building located in Roseviile. However, this building is too small and Dawes wants to
move to get more room
2. Proposed operation John McDaniels, the owner of Dawes Trucking, described the
proposed opexation to staff, including the hours of operation and the number of trucks:
Hours of operation
- The facility would be open Monday through Friday. It would normally be
closed on weekends although occasionaliy there would be an individual
huck on weekends.
Page 1 of 9
1 G S S Zt�
2 -
During the week the facility would open at 7AM. Tuesdays and Fridays
3 aze the busiest days and the facility would normally stay open until
4 midnight on those nights. On Monday, Wednesday and Thursday the
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
facility would close at 8 or 9 P.M..
Peak hours are late afternoon (3 to 6 P.M.)
Number and types of trucks
— There would be appro�mately 35 semi-trailer trucks a week taking freight
out and another 10 semi-trailer trucks bring freight in. (On Tuesday and
Friday when they aze busier, there would be 10 semi-trailer hucks a day.
On Monday, Wednesday and Thursday there would be fewer semi-trailer
trucks.
There would be 6 to 8 smaller local hucks a day Monday thru Friday.
These trucks would leave in the morning, pick up ar deliver goods locally,
and return in the afternoon.
The large trailers typically take 3 or 4 hours to load. However, a trailer
may site at the dock for a day or two until it is picked up. The truck
engines would be turned off and would not run while the hucks are
parked. Elechical hook-ups for engine heaters would be provided in the
winter. If trailers will be parked for more than a few hours, the tractor is
unhooked and leaues the site.
Some of the semi-trailers would have refrigerator units. However, Dawes
would not be handling perishable good such as produce and so trucks with
refrigerator units would not run them while they were at the site.
There would not be any fueling stations or maintenance shops on site.
3. Existing operation Staff visited Dawes current locafion in Roseville two times and
observed the following:
— On Thursday, March 11 at 4:00 PM there were 10 trailers pazked at dock doors
and additional trailers parked on the site away from the building. (These trailers
did not have any engines running.) There was one truck backing up to a dock and
in the next 15 minutes two more hucks arrived on site. (These trucks had their
engines rum�ing.)
— On Monday, March 25 at 8:00 the business was closed. There were
approximately 10 trailers parked at dock doors and other trailers parked on the site
away from the building. One parked truck was running and had its lights on.
4. The site plan The plan shows a 27,740 square foot building. It would be 294' long on
the side facing Fairview and 93' deep. It would be 28'-5" ta11. The building would have a
small office on the south end but most of the building would be for storing and handling
goods. The building would have 21 overhead doors for large trucks on the west side
(facing away from Fanview) and 5 doors for smaller, local trucks on the north side (these
would be visible from the street). Access would be provided using two existing
driveways on Fairview. The site also has access from an existing driveway on Prior.
Page 2 of 9
a��Z�
2 5. Required findings Section 62.108(c) of the Zoning Code says that in "order to
3 approve the site plan, the plauuing commission shall consider and fmd that the site plan is
4 consistent with" the following:
5
6 (a) 7'he ciiy's adopted comprehensive plan and development or project plans for sub-
7 areas of the ciry.
9 The 1980 Ciry Wide Land Use Plan that was in effect when ttus project was
10 submitted to the City for site plan review says:
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
�)
The City should Encourage conditions wiuch allow the mixing of
appropriate light indushy with housing and cozzuuercial activities.
In cases of incompatible land use, the City will use the techniques lasted
above wherever possible to create or nnprove exis6ng buffers between
land uses. [The techniques referred to include landscaping, bernung or
fencing perimeters and mainta.ining building exteriors to complement
adjacent land uses.)
The City will ensure through it site plan review requirements that all new
development provides adequate buffering as part of its design.
The 1980 District 11 Plan which is currently in effect lists the following goals:
— Maintain the present balance beriveen residential and commercial and
industrial use.
— Develop buffers to separate residential areas from commercial and
industrial areas.
— Confine through traffic to relatively few streets, treat others streets as
local, resident serving streets.
— When developing majar through streets, minnnize detriment to bordering
land uses.
— Fairview between Minnehaha and Pierce Butler should be de-emphasized
as a through street and access form Fairview to Pierce Butler closed. (This
pro}ect is south of the area referred to in this recommendation.)
The site plan is not consistent with this finding but can be modified so that it is
consistent:
The existing driveways on Fairview must be closed to ensure that trucks
use Prior Avenue to enter the site.
Adequate visual and sound buffers must be provided.
Applfcable ordinances ofthe City ofSaint Paul.
Although trucking facilities are a pernutted use in an I-1 zoning district, the site
plan is not consistent with this finding. However, it can be modified so that it is
consistent:
Page 3 of 9
1 �� ��-f
2 — The building setback on Fauview does not meet the min;mum required
3 setback and therefore must be increased from 6' at least 7'-5".
4 — The site plan shows two driveways to Fairview Avenue. Fauview is not a
5 truck route. The site has access to Prior Avenue, which is a designated
6 truck route. Therefore, the e�sting driveways on Fairview must be closed
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
to ensure that trucks use Prior Avenue.
(c)
— It is likely that without any noise mirigation, noise from trucks will exceed
the maximum levels permitted by the Saint Paul legislarive code.
Therefore, a noise study must be conducted to deternune whether
additional noise mitigation is needed to ensure that the facility will comply
with the noise ordinance and help determine the design and location of any
noise mitigation tUat is needed.
Preservation of unique geologic, geographic or historically sigrzificant
characteristics of the city and environmentally sensitive areas.
The site plan is consistent with this finding. The site is a paved pazking lot on
industrial property and the surrounding azea is a residential neighborhood.
(d) Protection of adjacent and neighboring properties through reasonable provision
for such matters as surface water drainage, sound and sight buffers, preservation
of views, Zight and air, and those aspects of design which may have substantial
effects on neighboring Zand uses.
The site plan is not consistent with this finding but can be modified so that it is
consistent:
The residents in the area have complained in the past about truck traffic on
Fairview. The site plan calls for using the existing driveways on Fairview.
This would increase the amount of truck traffic on Fairview. The
driveways on Fairview should be closed so that all trucks must use Prior
Avenue. There is enough room to the south of the exisring main building
for trucks to get from Prior to the new building and trucks should be
required to use this to minunize noise to the surrounding residential
neighborhood.
Noise from hucks on the site would have a substanfial effect on
neighboring residentialland uses on Fairview and Minnehaha. A noise
study by an acoustical engineer should be required to determine if noise
barriers are needed and if they aze, how big they need to be and where they
should go. JLT is talking about conshucting another building north of the
truck transfer facility and this could act as a noise barrier if it was large
enough and it was for a use that did not generate significant additional
noise.
(e)
The arrangement of buildings, uses and facilities of the proposed development in
order to assure abutting property and/or its occupants will not be unreasonably
affected.
Page 4 of 9
�� s
2
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
The site plan is not consistent with tlus fmding but can be modified so that it is
consistent:
— Traffic on Fairview Avenue is already heavy. Permitting the proposed
truck facility to use driveways on Fairview would increase the amount of
traffic and would unreasonably affect the residential neighborhood across
the street. Therefore, the e�sisting driveways on Fairview should be closed
so that trucks use Prior Avenue.
�fl
— The building is arranged so that most of the loading docks aze on the west
side of the building and the building will block most of the noise from
these docks from residents on Fairview. However, residents on
Minnehaha will be hear noise from these docks unless noise barriers aze
built. The building also has five docks on the north end of the building
close to Fairview and noise barriers are needed for these docks too.
Creation of energy-conserving design through landscaping and Zocation,
orientation and elevation ofstructures.
The site plan meets current standazds for energy conservation and is consistent
with this finding.
(g) Safety and convenience of both vehicular and pedestrian traff c both within the
site and in relation to access streets, including traffic circulation features, the
locations and design of entrances and exits and parking areas within the site.
�)
(i)
Public Works staff has reviewed the site plan and deternuned that the plan,
including use of existing the driveways on Fairview for the primary access to the
truck facility, is safe and consistent with this fmding.
The satisfactory availabiliry and capacity of storm and sanitary sewers, including
solutions to any drainage problems in the area of the development.
There is adequate sewer available. The applicant has not prepazed a detailed
storm water drainage plan yet. The site plan is consistent with this finding if a
condition is added that a drainage plan must be submitted to staff for approval.
Sufficient landscaping, fences, walls and parking necessary to meet the above
objectives.
The site plan is not consistent with this finding but can be modified so that it is
consistent:
- Additional fences or wa11s must be constructed, if a sound study shows
they are needed to block noise to neighboring houses.
— There is no landscaping on the site now. The landscaping shown on the
site plan should be increased by planting shrubs that grow at least 10' tall
along the west side of the building. Additionallandscaping should be
planted around the perimeter of the site where ever noise barriers are
Page 5 of 9
�� required. The noise barriers should be setback 10' from the property line
2
3
to provide adequate room forlandscaping.
4 (j) Site accessibility in accordance with the provisions of the Americans with
5 Disabilities Act (ADA), including parking spaces, passenger Zoading zones and
6 accessible routes.
8 The site plan is consistent with this finding if one additional handicapped
9 accessible pazking space is provided.
10
11 (k) Provision for erosion and sediment control as specified in the "Ramsey Erosion
12 Sediment and Control Handbook "
13
14 The site plan does not show erosion or sediment control measures. A condition
15 for approval of the site plan should be that an erosion and sediment control plan
16 must be submitted to staff for approval.
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
WHEI2EAS, based upon the fmdings noted above, the Commission approved the said
site plan subject to the following conditions:
2.
3.
�
Driveways. All truck traffic to this facility must use the south driveway on Prior Avenue
and proceed via the area south of the main existing building. Truck traffic may not use
Fairview Avenue. The two existing driveways on Fauview must be closed and replaced
with curb and boulevard. Curb and boulevazd work shall be by permit. If other uses are
proposed on the site that generate levels of traffic that will not negatively impact the
adjacent residential neighborhood, the City would consider permitting reopening
driveways to Fairview for these uses as long as the trucking facility did not have access to
Fairview. Reopening driveways shall be by pernut.
Hours. Hours of operation must be restricted to 7 A.M. to 10 P.M. Monday through
Friday to protect the adjacent residenrial neighborhood. The facility may not operate on
Saturdays or Sundays.
Truck idling. Truck engines must be tumed off whenever riucks aze patked at the dock
or on site waiting for more than 15 minutes to load or unload at the dock.
Truck parking. Trucks may not stop or pazk on Fairview, Minnehaha or other neazby
residential streets. (Public Warks says it can post signs where needed to help enforce
this.)
5. Noise analysis and noise mifigation. A noise analysis must be done by an acoustical
engineer. The acoustical engineer will be one agreed to by both the City and the
applicant. The analysis will deternune the level of noise that could be anticipated from
the facility. ff the noise analysis indicates that the faciliry without noise mitigation
measures will exceed levels pernvtted under City noise regulations, sound mitigation
measures must be constructed to ensure that the facility conforms to City noise
regulations. Such sound mitigation measures must be in place prior to operations. If
another building will serve as a sound barrier, the walls must be substantaally complete
prior to operations.
Page 6 of 9
1 �,��s z�{
2 6. Lighting. E�terior lighting for the facility must be auned and shielded to m;n;mi�e glare
3 light and light spill over on to adjacent residential property.
4
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
7. Setbacks and landscaping. The setback on Fauview must be increased to 10 feet to
permit enough room for landscaping to soften the appeazance of the building. The
setback shall be planted and maintaiued with plant material approved by site plan staff
and which will grow at least 10 feet tall when mature in order to form a continuous row
along the entire east side of the building.
�
r�
10.
Additional landscaping must be planted azound the perimeter of the site wherever noise
barriers or visual screens aze required. The noise barriers or visual screens must be
setback 10' from the property line to provide adequate room for landscaping. The
existing chain link fence in these azeas must be removed.
Storm water management. A storm water management plan must be submitted to staff
for approval.
Accessible parking. One addirional handicapped accessible parking space must be
provided.
Erosion control. An erosion and sediment control plan must be submitted to staff for
approval.
WHEREAS, pursuant to the provisions of Saint Paul Legislative Code § 64.206, JLT
duly filed an appeal of the site plan approval on Apri123, 1999 and requested a hearing before
the Saint Pau1 City Council for the purpose of considering the actions taken by the said
commission; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to the provisions of Saint Paul Legislative Code § 64.206 the
Aamline Midway Coalition duly filed an appeal of the site plan approval and condiUons on May
4, 1999 and requested a hearing before the Saint Paul City Council for the purpose of considering
the actions taken by the said commission; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to the provisions of Saint Paul Legislarive Code § 64.206 the
Northstar Chapter of the Sierra Club duly filed an appeal of the site plan approval and conditions
on May 7, 1999 and requested a hearing before the Saint Paul City Council for the purpose of
considering the actions taken by the said commission; and
�VHEREAS, acting pursuant to Saint Paul Legislative Code §§ 64.206 - 64.208 and upon
notice to affected parties, the Saint Paul CiTy Council d'ad on May 12, 1999, duly conduct a
public hearing on these three appeals where all anterested parties were given an opportunity to be
heard; and
WHEREAS, the Council of the City of Saint Paul, having heazd the statements made and
having considered the application, the report of staff, the record, minutes and resolution of the
Zoning Committee and of the Saint Paul Plauniug Commission, does hereby;
Page 7 of 9
i �l��Z�
2 RESOLYE, to affirni the decision of the Planning Commission in this matter in that
3 there has been no showing by any pariy appealing the decision of the Planning Commission that
4 it committed an error as to fact, finding or procedure; and be it further
6 RESOLVED, that the Council ofthe City of Saint Paul adopts as its own, the findings
7 and conditions in this matter as set forth in Planning Commission Resolution No. 99-27; and be
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
it further
RESOLVED, that the Council of the City of Saint Paul, having heazd the statements
made and having considered the application, the report of staff, the record, minutes and
resolution of the Zoning Committee and of the Saint Paul Plauning Commission and acting in the
capacity authorized in Saint Paul Legislative Code § 64.207, hereby modifies the decision of the
Saint Paul Plamiing Commission by amending condition number 5 by adding a new condition
number 5.1 (A - E) as well as adding additional conditions 11, 12, 13, 14 to conditions 1-10 as
approved by the Pla.nning Commission in its resolution 99-27 dated Apri123, 1999.
5.1 Noise mitigation. Braslau and Associates conducted a noise analysis. Based upon this
analysis, the noise analysis and noise mitigation conditions set forth under condition
number 5 aze amended to require:
(A) That construction of the "second building" contemplated by the applicant must be
undertaken and substanrially completed before truck terminal operafions may
begin. The second building is necessary to protect homes in the adjacent
residential neighborhood from nighttime noise from hucking operations and to
protect these residential azeas from direct and reflected noise from trucking
operations.
(B) That a second noise analysis conducted by an acousfical engineer agreed to by
both the City and appiicant shall be conducted after the substantial completion of
the second building and that before the truck terminal operations may begin, this
second noise analysis must be submitted to the City for review to detemune
whether any additional noise mitigation measures must be considered.
(C) That any public address systems aze constructed and configured to eliminate
public address noise from adjacent residential neighborhoods.
11
12.
(D) Than any mechanical equipment not specifically analyzed must be constructed
and configured to comply with the most restrictive applicable state or municipal
noise standard in order to protect adjacent residential areas.
(E) All other conditions imposed under condition nuxnber 5 shall remain in full force
and effect.
Mitigation on Minnehaha Sound mitigation will be incorporated into the site plan
along Minnehaha Avenue.
No entrance on Minnehaha Trucks using this facility must not enter or e�t the site
from Minnehaha Avenue.
Page 8 of 9
1 �'1 �l—�2�
2 13. Number of trucks The number of hucks entering the site must not exceed 45 per week.
4 14. Annual approval based upon site plan compliance. The site plan is approved for one
5 year. The site plan shall be renewable annually thereafter only after staff makes an
6 annual report on the operations at the facility to the plaiming commission and a finding
7 by the plauuing commission that the facility is being operated in compliance with the
8 conditions contained in the site plan.
10
11
12
13
14
15
FLTRTHER RESOLVED, that the appeals of JLT, Hamline-Midway Coatition and the
Northstar Chapter of the Sierra Club be and aze hereby denied; and be it
FINALLY RESOLVED, that the City Clerk shall mail a copy of this resolution to JLT,
the Hamline-Midway Coalition and the Northstar Chapter of the Sierra Club, the Zoning
Adtninistrator and the Saint Paul Planning Commission.
� $�.`�
�,�.rr•t.� �
�
�
�
�� l� t���
f�r�-�`-�
\
OR1GiNAL
By:
Requested by Department of:
By:
Adopted by cil: ate
Adoption ertified by Cou
By: —
Approved by Mayor: Date
Form Ap ved by City Attorney
$Y: �ffC.�� G-B-��
Approved by Mayor for Submission to Council
By:
By. � , \
���-��_ �`t � �`�°�q
AdoptedbyCouncil: Date �
Adoptio eitiSed by Council � � e '
By: ., a._ �,,,.�,_—_
--�"
Approved by Mayor: Date
�t�t S?1-t
June 8
DAiE INITipTED
GREEN SHEET
� � � f , •
Ass�cx
TOTAL # OF SIGNATURE PAGES
oe.�n�r owECron
arvwuca
� ❑ anwnowar ❑ arcctcxK
❑ nuuxa�amneFSOai ❑ n�uxw.��rc
❑YYORryRIffi4lAIiI) ❑
(CLIP ALL LOCATIONS FOR SIGNATURE)
Memorializing the decision of the City Council on May 12, 1999, denying the appeal of JLT
6roup to a decision of the Planning Commission approving a site plan for a truck facility
at approximately 630 Prior Avenue North with conditions regulating access to the site,
noise, hours of operation and other issues.
PLANNING CAMMISSION
CIB COMM{TTEE
CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION
ISSUE,
OF TRANSAMION S
Why)
Has this persoNfi�m ever xroriced under a coMrzct for fhia depaAment?
YES NO
Hasthis ye�soNfirtn evet been a dty employeeT
YES NO
Does this personlfirm possess a sldl� not iwrmallYD� M' any wrtent city emPloyee?
YES NO
is Mis perso�rm a farpetetl vendorT
YES NO
�lain all ves answers on senarate sheet and attach to areen shcet
COST/REVENUE BUDGETED (CIRCLE ONE)
YES NO
SOURCE ACTIVITY NUMBER
3
�q -s�.�{
CI'I`Y �F SAIN'I` PALJj., 390 Ciry Halt Telephone: 612d66-8510
Norm Coleman, Mayor IS West Kellogg Boulevard Facsimile: 612-266-8513
Saint Paul, MN 55102
June 29, 1999
Council President Dan Bostrom
and Members of the City Council
310 and 320 City Hall
15 West Kellogg Boulevard
Saint Paul, Minnesota 55102
RE: Veto of Council File Number 99-52�: JLT Group
Dear Council President Bostrom and Members of the City Council:
I am returnin� to you, with my veto, Council File 99-524. This resolution unnecessarily
puts the city and its taxpayers at sianificant risk of le�al liability. Some of the conditions in
the resolution arguably go beyond the city's le�al authority in limiting JLT Group's right to
develop its property. This would leave our residents on the hook to pay the costs of a'
potential lawsuit and adverse verdict.
The proposal by the JLT Group to develop industrial property at Minnehaha and Fairview
in the Midway area has under�one a great deal of scrutiny by staff, residents, the Hamline-
Midway Coalition, the Planning Commission and its Nei�hborhoods subcommittee, the
Business Review Council, the City Council and especially Councilmember Benanav and his
staff. The process has presented a challenge in balancing the ri�hts of the JLT Group to
develop its property with the nei�hborhood residents' desire to be protected from noise
and disruption. The resolution presented by the City Council is close to being a fair
balance but severai modifications need to be made.
Of the fifteen site plan conditions approved by the City Council four unreasonably restrict
the JLT Group's ri�lit to develop its properiy. Specifically the restrictions on the hours of
operation (condition 2), the limits on the number of trucks entering the facility (condition
13), and the annual approvai provision (condition 14), are too restrictive and place
unreasonable hardships on the business. In addition, condition number three (3) control(ing
truck idlin�, is not presently warranted accordin� to the noise analysis prepared by the
acoustical en�ineer. I think these site plan conditions can be modified to all concerned and
thereby eliminate any need to resort to the courts to resolve this matter.
�
�(q-Say
Councii President Dan Bostrom and Members of the City Council
7une 29, 1999
Page Two
I urge the Council to pass an effective compromise that will allow this important
development to proceed while maintaining essential protections for the adjacent
neighborhood.
Sincerely,
�JA- ��II�U�
Norm Coleman
Mayor
NC:drm
c: Saint Paul Plannin� Commission Members
Business Review Council Members
Robert Kessler, Director, License, Inspection and Environmental Protection (LIEP)
Brian Sweeney, Director, Plannin� and Economic Development (PED)
OFFICE OF Tf� CITY ATTORNEY
Clayton M. Robinson, Jr., CiryAttorrsey
�R -Sa.�
CITY OF SAINT PAUL
Narm Coleman, Mayor
Civil Division
400 Ciry Hal(
I S West Ke[logg Blvd
Saint PauT, Minnesota 55702
Telephone: 651266�710
Facsimile: 657 298-5679
CiOEdPk.n �9."�,°: i��? t':�;'?or
June 8, 1999
Nancy Anderson
Council Secretary
310 City Hall
15 West Kellogg Blvd.
St. Paul, MN 55102
;,. + ..r.ar
Re: Appeals by JLT, Inc., Siena Club - Northstar Chapter, Hamline-Midway Coalition.
Zoning File No. 99-038
Council Action Date: May 12, 1999
Dear Nancy:
Attached please fmd the signed original of a resolution memorializing the decision of the Saint
Paul City Council to deny all the appeals in the above-entitled matter. Please place this mattei
on the Council's consent agenda at your earliest convenience.
If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to call.
Very ly yours,
� " ���'!✓��
Peter W. Warner
Assistant City Attomey
PWW/rmb
Enclosure
OFFICE OF LICENSE, TNSPECTTONS AND
ENVIItONMENTALPROTECTION
Robert Kets[er, Direc[or
q�, -s ay
CITY OF SAINT PAUL
Norm Coleman, Mayor
B UII DING INSPECI70N AND
DESIGN
350 St Peter Srreet
Suite 310
Saint Paut, Minnesota SSIO2-I510
Te[ephone: 612-266900]
Facsimile: 612-266-9099
Apri127, 1999
Ms. Nancy Anderson
City Council Reseazch Office
Room 310 City Hall
Saint Paul, MN 55102
Dear Ms. Anderson:
I would like to confirm that a public heazing before the City Council is scheduled for Wednesday, May
12, 1999 for the following zoning case:
Appellant: JLT Group
File Number: 99-101
Purpose: Appeal of a decision by the Planning Commission to approve a site pian for a
uucking faciliry with conditions regulating access to the site, noise, hours of
operation and other issues.
Location: Approxunately 630 Prior Avenue North
I have confirmed this date with the o�ce of Counciimember Benanav. My understanding is that this
public hearing request wili appeaz on the agenda of the City Council at your earliest convenience and
that you will publish notice of the hearing in the Saint Paul I.egal I,edger.
Please call me at 651-266-9086 if you have any questions.
Sincerely,
/ !�-�✓✓�
Tom Beach
Zoning Section
Vi':aiia:s � .. ^ -t
������'�
� FmsrRUn� •
MOTICEAF PUBLIC HEARIIVG
The Saint Paul City Counci] wi7l conduct
a public hearing on Wednesday, May 12,
"1999, at 5:30 p.m. in the City Council
Chambers, Third Floor, City Hall-
Courthouse, to consider the appea] of JLT
Group to a decision of the Planning
Commission approving a site plan for a
iruelflng facility at approximately 630 Prior
Avenue North with conditions regulating
�access to the site, noise, hourspf operaUon
and other issues.
Dated: Apri128, 1999
NANCYANDERSON '
Assistant City Council Secretary
, - (Apr.3a) �
s=====' ST. PAIIL LLGAL LEDGER'==s'==
OFFICE OF LICENSE, INSPECTIONS AND
FvWII20N�lEN'I'AL PROTECTiON
Rabert Kessler, Director
Qg -S a-�\
• � CITY OF SAINT PAUL
'�� Norm Caleman, Mayor
May 5, 1999
Ms. Nancy Anderson
Secretary to the City Council
Room 310 City Hall
Saint Paul, Minnesota 55102
ZAFRY PROFESSIONAL
BUIIDING
Suite 300
350 St. Peter Srreet
Sent Pau1, Minnesota SSIO2-I570
Telephone: 612-2669090
Facsr,ti[e: 672-266-9099
6I2-2669124
RE: Appeal of the Planning Commissions decision to approve with conditions a site plan review
for the JLT/Dawes Trucking facility proposed for the southwest corner of Minnehaha and
Fairview
Public hearing at City Council scheduled for Wednesday, May 12, 1999
Zoning Files #99-101 and 99-107
Deaz Ms. Anderson:
• PLANNING COMI'IISSION APPROVED THE STTE PLAN WITH CONDTTIONS
On Apri123 the Planning Commission approved the site plan for a trucking facility at the southwest
corner of Minnehaha and Fairview. The approval is subject to 10 conditions intended to minimize the
impact of truck noise and tr�c on the residential neighborhood located across the street, including
conditions that:
— Prohibit truck access from Fairview Avenue and require them to use Prior Avenue
— Limit hours of operation
�
— Limit truck idling
— Prohibit truck parking on neazby streets
— Require that the applicant pay for a noise study to help determine if noise barriers aze needed. (JLT
hopes to have the noise study completed before the City Council meets.)
The Neighborhood and Current Planning Commission and LIEP staff recommended approval with
conditions.
At the public hearing 17 people spoke in opposition and 10 letters in opposition were received.
APPEALS HAVE BEEN FILED BY THE APPLICANT AND T'HE DISTRICT COUNCIL
The applicant, JLT Group, has appealed rivo of the conditions attached by the Planning Commission.
One of these conditions limits the hours of operations to between 7 AM and 10 PM Monday through
Friday with no operations on Saturday or Sunday. The other condition requires that trucks must be
turned off when they aze parked at the dock or when they aze on site for more than 15 minutes waiting to
go to a dock to load or unload.. JLT says that trucking facilities aze a permitted use and that the nature of
the trucking industry make tltese conditions impractical.
The Hamline Midway Coalition has appealed the Plannina Commission's decision to approve the site
plan. They say tha[ even with all of the required conditions, a trucking faciliry at this location will have a •
negative impact on the residential property across Fairview and Minnehaha. They aze concemed about
noise and air pollution from the facility. They feel that the conditions limiting hours and truck idling aze
not enforceable. They are afraid that noise wilt be a problem even if the noise study being done says the
facility will not violate City noise standazds.
Please notify me if any member of the City Councit wishes to have slides of the site presented at the
public hearing.
Sincerely,
,
Tom Beach
ATTACHNIENTS
page 1 Appeals from JLT Group and Hamline Midway Coalition
page 4 Planning Commission resolution
page 10 Planning Commission minutes
page 28 Staff report and recommendations
page 33 Letters to the Planning Commission
page 61 Noise information
page 63 Truck route information
page 65 Location map and site plan
�
r �
L.J
_Apr-26-99 10:54A Constructors and Assoc. 651 848-0783
SAIKT
s�di
�
��AA
APPLICATION fOR APPEAL
Departmenl ujPlarsning a1�d Economic Develnpmertl
Zoxii�g Section
1100 Cily Ha11 AnxeY
ZS 6'es1 Fourdt Street
Saint Pau7,14f.�'SSIPZ
266-5589
APPELLANT ►Yame 3 '+-� G
Address `: Q V�--'�`'"" �'a ��' V�.�._.-�
CityS� 3�- �Q St.�Zip paytime phone
t�RQPERTY Zoning File Name_^�-� �� /�M'Rj � ""'� -
LOCAT{oN A���ess/LOCation �iwh�'.��s � �►SQr
TYPE OF APP�AL: Application is hereby made for an appeal to the:
CJ Board oS Zoning Appeals �City Caunci!
u�der the provisions of Chapter 64, Section ��. Paragraph of #he Zoning Code, to
appeal a decision made by the_ ��tM� '-��•��'��"`
+��27� q , 19 File number. � ��
on --
(dafe of dQCision)
GftOl]NDS FOft APPEAL: �xplain why you feel there ha5 been an error in any requirement,
pErmit, decision or refusaf made by an ad a o the Plan n Comm ssion fact, procedure of
finding made by the Board of Zoning App 9
�.�: � �-�� � �"�� �"�� �
c���
Attach additional sheet if
P_02
���'�
•
•
Applicani's signaturs� — Pate `E' City agent •
�
•
n
U
rwr. �.is��� ic�:�sar•i
HHIILIMEiMIDb1HY
�
���
t�'0.237 P.1
a��s��
q���d7
HA.MLINE 1V��DWAY CQA�,IT�QI�.�
Ham�utePazkPlaygroundBwldi¢g � 1564L�iondAcenue,SaintPaul,DiY551Q4 • -6?G-i9sG • -641-6t23
May?,1999 —� — — — �--- —
Councilmember Daniel Bosirom
St. Paul Ciry Covnci?
1� W, Kelloga Blvd.
St. Paul, Iv1�i 155102
Dear Councilmember Bos�rom:
On behalf of the neighbors Iiving in tlte area surroundina F.airview and �
iviinnehaha Avenues, the Hamline IvTidway Coalitiori Board of birectors wishes to
appeal the Planning Cominission's April 23, 1999 appro�al of the jI,T/T)awes
Truckinb faality siCe plan. The proposed truck transfer fariiity is an incompatible
land use with respect to the residential area direcfly east and north of the siEe.
In approvulg Ehe site plazt, tIze Planning Commission was mandated to follow St.
Paul Zoniag Code �62.103 (c) conceming Site Plan review and approval, Said Code
staee5: •
"In order to approve the site plan, Ehe Plazu Contu'ussion sltell consider
and fznd that the sit� plan is consiseent with... (4) Protection of adjacent and
neighbocing properties through reasonable provision for suclt maEters as
surface tivater drainage, sotuld and sight btiffezs, preservafion of views, light
ai�d air, and those aspec�.s of design which may have suUstan�ial effect on
nei�hboring land uses."
The Planning CommiSSion recoo ized rhe significant ad�erse impact of the
proposed truck transfer facility on tlie neighborhood and placed ten (10) candiEions
on its resolution of approval to easz these effects. However, it erred in approving
tfie plan because neighboring properties and residents wili not Ue protecEed and wiIl
be negaHvely impacted �vith regard to these important factors.
1) 'I'he area arowld Ivinlnehalla and �airvzew curren1y has an elevated air
pollurion index as a result of: a) uldustry to the immediaEe south, west, and
northwest; b) �eavy truck and other vehicular tra`8c bn several nearby major
streees and thoroujhfares; and, c) the Burlin,o-,ton Vorthem-Santa Fe Railroad
Intermodal facility, located five (5) b1oc1<s nortll of tne site. The proposed facility
will generate considerable smaIl truck and semi-tiuck traffic and idling. Both Ehe
gasoline and the diesel fuel will increase the air poIIu!ion index and,
consequently, presenE more of a healtlz hazard Htian the present air quaIity. In its
resolution, the Commission placed a 15-minute lir_ut on t�uck idling, but #his
condition is not consistently enforceaUle.
Dedicate�lla muwin� ll�e Nuntlane daidmc�y ne��hborbeoct a 6e.Ke�• plrrce to ln�e ancl wark,
�.�m
2
iHf. �.1:55 1���2EPM Hr+MLINEihIIuW�IY
No.237 P.2
•
Councii Pmsident Dan Bo<_hom
�1ay 4,1999
Pa�e 2
Fe: 2F �99a3S
2) Accordin� Ya the manager oF Dawes Tzucldng, semi-trucks from aut-of-state wili
arrice at all �nes oE day and ni;11e and be allowed to enter the sitz at anytime,
including night-time. The noise of trucks arriving a#ter the approved hours of
operation--between 7:00 a.m. and 1d:Od p.m.—and the possible running of their
motors, is certain to affect neighbors. xhe testimony of Dawes Trucking
representatives and the impossibility of canstanh enforcement defies the viability
of this condition.
3) Durino the approved hours of operaf�an (7:00 a,m. - lO:QQ p.m.), noise from truck
traffic, engine idling, back-up beepers and air brakes is of great concexn to fhe
neighborhood. The Plaruung Commission required the applicant to conduct a
noise study to deterr.une if JLT w-ill Ue requixed to build a sound barrier.
Residents are concerned fihaE if the sfudy does not proc� concl¢sivety that noise
miHgation measures must be tal<en, the noise will necerLheless be an on-going
nuisance to the nei�hbors. I�1 passing the site plan, the Plannin� Commission
failed to ensure compatibiliEy of this plan tivith neighboring residents.
For the above reasons, we ask that the City Council accept and hear our appeal. We
oppose the site plan because we Uelieve that the operation of the JLT/Dawes truck
h�ansfer facilifiy is incompatiUle with the residential neighborhood to the immediate
north and east of the siEe.
4�%e Iook forward to hearing from pou conceming our request. Please conEact me or
Cathy Lue, I�MC commtuuty organizer, at (651) 646-1986—phone; (651) 641-67.23—fa.�c.
Sincerely,
��� ��
Jod.i M. BanClep
Executice Director
/jmU
cc:
Councilmembet Jay Benanav
Councilmember Jerzy Blal<ey
Tom Beach, LIEP
Gladys Morton, Planninb Commission
��
u
3
�q ,sa�
�
city of saint paul
planning commission resolution
fite number 99-27
date Apri1 23, 199
�VF�REAS, JLT GROUP, file �99038, has submitted a Site Pian for review under the provisions of
Section 62.103 of the Saint Paul Le�islative Code, to allow a trucking facility on the west side of
Fairviecv Avenue, % block south of Ivfinnehaha Avenue, le�ally described as Section 33 To�vnship 29
Range 23 except avenues the norch 561 33/100 feet of northeast I!4 of northwest 1/4 of Section 33,
Township 29 Range 23; and
`VHEREAS, the Saint Paul Planning Commission, on 03/26/99, held a public hearing at �vhich all
persons present were given an oppoRunity to be heard pursuant to said application in accordance with the
requirements of Section 62.103 of the Saint Paul Legisfative Code; and
`VHEREAS, the Saint Paul Planning Commission, based on the evidence presznted at the public hearin�
as substantially reflected in the minutes, made the foltowin� findin�s of fact:
• l. Dawes Trucl:ina The truck transfec faciliry would be built by JLT and operated by Dawes
Tnickin�. Dawes would brin� a variety of goods to the site from local businesses using smaller city
trucks. The goods �vould then be consolidated inside the building and toadzd onto semi-trailers and
shipped out of state. Da�ves currently operates out of a buildin� located in Roseville. Ho�vever, this
building is too small and Da�ves �vants to move to get more room
2. Proposed operatio❑ John McDaniels, the owner of Dawes Trucking, described the proposed
operation to staff, includina the hours of operation and thz number of trucks:
Hours of operation
- The facility would be open Monday throueh Friday. It would normally be closed on
weekends although occasionally there would be an individual truck on weekends.
- During the week the facility woufd open at 7A�1. Tuesdays and Fridays are the busiest days
and the facility would normally stay open until midni�ht on those niehts. On Monday,
Wednesday and Thursday the facility wou(d cfose at 8 or 9 P.M.. y
- Peak hours are late afternoon (3 to 6 P.MJ
•
moved bv Faricy
seconded bv
in favor 14 (2 abstentions
Dandrea, Donnelly-Cohen)
against
�
ZF �99038
Pa�e 2 of Resolution
Number and types of trucl:s
— There wou(d be approsimately 35 semi-trailer trucks a�veek takin� frei�ht out and another
10 semi-trailer trucks brin� frei�ht in. (On Tuesday and Friday when they are busier, there
«�oufd be 10 semi-trailer trucks a day. On bfonday, �Vednesday and Thursday there would
be fe�ver semi-trailer trucks.
— There would be 6 to 8 smaller local trucks a day Ivlonday thru Friday. These trucks would
[eave in the morning, pick up or de[iver goods [oca(ly, and retum in the afrernoon.
— The lar�e traifers rypically take 3 or 4 hours to toad. However, a traiter may site at the dock
for a day or tw�o until it is picked up. The truck engines would be tumed off and would not
run whi[e the trucks are parked. Electrica( hook-ups for engine heaters would be provided in
the winter. If trailers wi(I be parked for more than a few hours, the tractor is unhooked and
leaves the site.
— Some of the semi-trailers wouid have refri�erator units. However, Dawes wou[d not 6e
handlin� perishable good such as produce and so tucks with refri�erator units would not run
them while they were at the site.
— There would not be any fuelin� stations or main[znance shops on site.
•
Existing operation Staff visited Dawes current location in Roseville rivo times and observed the
FOI IOR7Ro:
— On Thursday, March 11 at 4:00 PM there �vere 10 trailers parked at dock doors and additional
trailers parked on the site away from the buildin�. (These trailers did not have any engines •
ranniag.) There was oae tr¢ck backina up to a dock and in the aext 15 minutes nvo more trucks
arrived on site. (These trucks had their en�ines runnin�.)
— On Monday, March 2� at 8:00 thz business �vas closed. There were approximately 10 trailers
parked at dock doors and other trailers parked oa the site away frorri ihe buildin�. One parked
truck was runnin� and had its li�hts on.
4. The site plan The plan shotivs a 27,740 square foot building. Ii tivould be 294' long oa the side
facin� Fairview and 93' deep. It woufd be 28'-5" talL The buitdin� would have a small ofFice on the
south end but most of the building �vould be for storin� and handling goods. The building would
have 21 overhead doors for laroe trucks on the west side (facin� ativay from Fairview) and 5 doors for
smalfer, local trucks on the north side (these woufd be visible from the street). Access would be
provided using rivo existin� driveways on Fairview. The site also has access from an existing
driveway on Prior.
Reqnired findinas Sec[ion 62.108(c) of the Zonin� Code says that in "order to approve the site
plan, the plannin� commission sltalf consider and find [hat the site plan is consistent with" the
fol(owin�:
(a) The city's aclopted comprehensive p1ar: and developmznt or project plans for sub-areas of the
city.
Thz 1930 Ciry' �Vide Land Use Plan that �vas in effec[ «hen this project was submitted to the
City for site plan revie�v says:
.
s
�� - s a'
ZF �99038
• Pa�e 3 of Resolution
- The City should Encoura�e conditions which allow the mixing of appropriate light industry
with housin� and commercial activities.
- In cases of incompatible land use, the City will use the techniques listed above wherever
possible to create or improve existin� buffers behveen land uses. [The techniques referred to
include landscapin�, berming or fencin� perimeters and maintainin� buildin� exteriors to
comp(ement adjacent land uses.)
— The City will ensure throu�h it site plan review requirements that all new development
provides adzquate bufferin� as part of its design.
The 1930 District 11 Plan which is currently in effect lists the followin� goats:
— bfaintain [he present balance beriveen residential and commerciaf and industrial use.
— Develop buffers to separate residential areas from commercia( and industrial areas.
— Confine through traffic to relativefy few streets, treat others streets as local, resident serving
streets.
— �Vhen developing major throu?h streets, minimize dztriment to borderin� land uses.
— Fairview behveen Minnehaha and Pierce Butler should be de-emphasized as a through street
and access form Fairvietiv to Pierce Butler c(osed. (This project is south of the area referred
to in this recommendation.)
The sire plan is not consistent with this findins but can be modified so that it is consistent:
• — The esisting driveways on Fairview must be ctosed to ensure that trucks use Prior Avenue to
en[er the site.
— Adequate visual and sound buffers must be provided.
(b) Applicable ardinances of the City of Saint Patrl.
Althou�h truckin� facilities are a permitted use in an I-I zoning district, the site plan is not
consistent with this findin�. However, it can be modified so that it is consistent:
— The building setback on Fairview does not meet the minimum required setback and therefore
must be increased from 6' at least 7'-5".
— The site plan shows hvo drive�vays to Fairview Avenue. Fairview is not a truck route. The
site has access to Prior Avenue, �vhich is a designated truck route. Therefore, the existing
driveways on Fairview must be closed to ensure that trucks use Prior Avenue.
— It is likely that without any noise miti�ation, noise from trucks �vill exceed the maximum
feve(s permitted by the Saint Paul Iegislative code. Therefore, a noise study must be
conducted to determine whether additional noise miti�ation is needed to ensure that the
faciliry will compfy �vith the noise ordinance and help detertnine the design and location of
any noise miti�ation that is needed.
(c) Preszrvation of unique geologiq geographic or historically signrftcant characteristics of the city
and environmentally sensitive areas.
The sitz plan is consistent with this findin�. The site is a paved parkin� tot on industrial
• ZF 99038
�
ZF #99033
Page 4 of Resolution
property and the surrounding area is a residen[ial neighborhood.
(d) Protectian of adjacent and neighboring properties through reasonable pravi,rion for such
matters as surface water drainage, soz�nd and sight buffers, preservation of views, light and air,
and thase aspects of clesign which may hme substantia! effects on neighbaring land uses.
The site plan is not consistent �vith thi; findin� but can be modified so that it is consistent:
— The residznts in the area have complained in the past about truck tra�c on Fairview. The
site plan calls for using the existiag driveways on Fairview. This uoald increase the amount
of truck traffic on Fairview. The driveways on Fairview should be closed so that all trucks
must use Prior Avenue. There is enou�h room to the south of the existin� main building for
trucks to get from Prior to the ne�v buifdin� and trucks should be required to use this to
minimize noise to the surroundin� residential neighborhood.
— Noise from trucks on the site �vould have a substantial effect on neighboring residential land
uses_on Fairview and Minnehaha. A noise study by an acoustical en�ineer should be
reqaired to determine if noise barriers are needed and if they are, hocv big they need to be
and where they should go. JLT is talking about constructing another building north of the
truck transfer facitity and this could act as a noise barrier if it �vas (arae enough and it was
for a use that did not generate significant additional noise. �
•
(e) The arrangement of bc�ildings, :�ses and facilities of the proposed development in order to assure �
nbutting property ancUor its occ:rpants tivi11 nat be zmrecr,ronably affected
The site plan is not consistent �vith this findina but can be modified so that it is consistent:
— Traffic on Fairview Avenue is already hear,y. Permittin� the proposed truck facility to use
driveways on Fairview would incrzase the amount of traffic and would unreasonably affect
tlie residential neighborhood across the street. Therefore, the existing driveways on Fairview
should be cfosed so that trucks use Prior Avenue.
— The buildins is arranged so that most of the loading docks are on the ��est side of the
baildin� and the buiidin� will block most of the noise from these docks from residents on
Fairview. However, residents on Minnehaha will be hear noise from these docks unless
noise barriers are built. The buildin� afso has fice docks on the north end of the building
close to Fairview and noise barriers are needed for these docks too.
(� Creation of energy-eonserving design through landscaping ancf location, orientation and
elevation ofstruch�res.
The site plan meets current standards for eneray conservation and is consisten[ with this finding.
(g) Safety nnd com�enience of both vehiczrlar and pedestrian traffic bath within the site and in
relntiof: to access streets, including traffic circulation features, the locations ancf design of
entrances and exits ar:d parkir:g areas within the site.
Public l�,'orks staff has revie�ved t(�e site plan and dztermined that the pfan, inc[uding use of
existing the driveways on Fairview for the primary access to the truck facility, is safe and •
consistent with ihis findin�.
7
q g�- sa�
ZF k99038
• Pa�e 5 of Resolution
(h) The satisfactory availability and capacity ofstorm and sanitary sewers, incZuding solutions to
any drainage problems in the area of the development.
There is adequaie sewer available. The applicant has not prepared a detailed storm water
draina�e plan yet. The site plan is consistent with this finding if a condition is added that a
draina�e plan must be submitted to staff for approval.
(i) Sz�cient landscaping, fences, walls and parking necessary to meet the above objectives.
The site plan is not consistent with this findin� but can be modified so that it is consistent:
- Additional fences or walls must be constructed, if a sound study shows they are needed to
block noise to neighboring houses.
— There is no landscaping on the site now. The landscaping shown on the site plan should be
increased by plantin� shrubs that grow at least 10' tall along the west side of the building.
Additional landscaping should be planted around the perimeter of the site where ever noise
barriers are required. The noise barriers should be setback 10' from the property line to
provide adequate room for landscaping.
Q) Site accessibility in accordance with the provisions of the Americans with Disabilities Act
(ADA), inclt�ding parking spaces, passenger loading zones and accessible rozrtes.
• The site plan is consistent �vith this finding if one additional handicapped accessible parking
space is provided.
(k) Provision for erosion and sediment control ns specified in the "Ramsey Erosion Sediment and
Control Handbook. "
The site plan does not show erosion or sediment control measures. A condition for approval of
the site plan should be that an erosion and sediment control pfan must be submitted to staff for
approval.
NOW, THEREFQRE, BE IT RESOLV ED, by the Saint Paul Planning Commission, that under the
authority of the City's Le�islative Code, the appfication for Site Pfan Review to establish a trucking
facility on the west side of Fairview Avenue,'/: block south of Minnehaha Avenue is hereby approved,
subject to the following conditions:
I. Ariveways All truck traffic to this facility must use the south driveway on Prior Avenue and
proceed via the area south of the main existing buildin�. Truck tra�c may not use Fairview Avenue.
The two esistin� driveways on Fairview must be closed and replaced with curb and boulevard. Curb
and boulevard work shall be by permit. If other uses are proposed on the site that generate levels of
traffic that will not ne�atively impact the adjacent residentia( neighborhood, the City would consider
pzrmittin� reopenin� driveways to Fairview for these uses as lon� as the trucking facility did not
• have access to Fairvietiv. Reopening driveways shall be by permit.
��
ZF #99038
Page 6 of Resolution
2. Hours Hours of operation must be restricted to 7 AM to 10 PM Monday through Friday to protect
the adjacent residential neighborhood. The facility may not operate on Saturdays or Sundays.
3. Truck idling Truck en�ines must be turned aff �vhenever trucks are parked at the dock or on site
waitina for more than 15 minutes to load or unload at the dock.
4. Truck parking Trucks may not stop or park on Fairview, Minnehaha or other nearby residential
streets. (Pubfic Works says it can post signs cvhere needed to help enforce this.)
5. Noise analysis and noise mitigation A noise analysis must be done by an acousticat engineer.
The acoustical engineer will be one agreed to by both the City and the applicant. The analysis will
determine the [evel of noise that could be anticipated from the facility. If The noise analysis indicates
that the facility without noise mitigation measures will exceed leve(s permitted under City noise
regulations, sound miti�ation measures must be constructed to ensure that the facility conforms to
City noise regulations. Such sound mitigation measures must be in place prior to operations
beginning at the facility. If walls or fences will act as sound barriers they must be in place prior to
operations. If another buildin� wilf serve as a sound barrier, the walls must be substantially complete
prior to operations.
•
6. Lighfina Exterior ti�htia� for the faciliry must be aimed and shielded to minimize glaze light and
li�ht spill over on to adjacent residential property.
7. Setbacl:s and landscaping The setback on Fairview must be increased to 10 feet to permit enou�h •
room for landscaping to soften the appearance of the buildin�. The setback shall be planted and
maintained with plant material approved by site plan staff and which will grow at least 10 feet tall
when mature in order to focm a continuous row alon� the entire east side of the building.
Addi[ional landscapiag must be planted around the perimeter of the site where ever noise barriers or
visual screens are required. The noise barriers or visual screens must be setback 10' from the
property line to provide adequate room for landscaping. The esisting chain link fence in these areas
must be removed.
8. Storm water management A storm water management plan must be submitted to staff for
approval..
9. Accessible parl:ing Oae additional handicapped accessible parking space must be provided.
10. Erosion control An erosion and sediment control plan must be su6mitted to staff for approval.
1\Pedlsys2\SHA RE DIBIRKHOLZ�PLANN ING\RES O LU"C�ILTResolution.wpd
�
0
�� -�a�
Saint Paul Planning Commission
Ciri' Hall Conference Center
15 Kellogg Boulevard West
A meeting of the Plannin� Commission of the City of Saint Paul was held Friday, Apri123, 1999, at 830
a.m, in the Conference Center of City Hall.
Commissionen
Present:
Commissioners
Absent:
Mmes. Donnelly-Cohen, Duarte, Engh, Faricy, Geisser, McCall, Morton, Nordin
and Messrs. Corbey, Dandrea, Field, Fotsch, Kramer, Mardell, Nowlin and Shakir.
Messrs. Gervais, *Gordon, *Johnson, Kon„ and *Margulies
*Excused
VI. Neighborhood and Current Plannine Committee
JLT Group Site Plan for a truckin� facility on the west side of Fairview Avenue, % block
south of Minnehaha Avenue -(Tom Beach, 2b6-9086, LIEP)
Commissioner Faricy reported that the committee met last Tuesday to review the site plan for
Dawes Trucking Company, located on JLT property in the Midway. The Committee came up
with a unanimous recommendation for the Planning Commission.
MOTION: Commissioner Faricy moved approval ojthe requesred sire plan, subject to the
fol[owing ten conditions:
Drivewavs Al! truck traffiC to this jacility must use the south driveway on Prior Avenue
and proceed via the area south of the main existing building. Truck traffic may not use
Fairview Avenue. The !wo existing driveways on Fairview must be closed and replaced
with curb and bou[evard Curb and boulevard work shall be by permit Ijother uses are
proposed on the site that generate leve[s of traJfic that wi11 not negatively impact the
adjacent residential neighborhood, the Ciry wou[d consider permitting reopening
driveways to Fairview jor these uses as long as the trucking facility did not have access to
Fairview. Reopening driveways shal! be by permit.
2. Hours Hours of operation must be restricted to 7A��1 to 10 PMMonday through
Friday to protect tlee adjacent residential neighbo�hood Thefacility may not operate on
Saturdays or Sundays.
3. Truck idling Truck engines must be turned off whenever trucks are parked at the dock
or on site waiting for more than 15 minutes to load or unload at rhe dock.
4. Truck parking Trucks may not stop or park on Fairview, Minnehaha or other nearby
�
7
•
•
�0
�
t
ct � - �S �-�i
. residential streets. (Public Works says it can post signs where needed to help enforce
this.)
5. Noise analysis and noise mitigation A noise analysis must be done by an acoustical
engineer. The acoustical engineer wi!! be one agreed to by both the City and the
applicant The anaZysis wi!! determine the level of noise that cou[d be anticipated from
the facility. If the noise analysis indicates that the facility without noise mitigation
measures will exceed levels permitted under City noise regulations, sound mitigation
measures must be consiructed to ensure that the faci[iry conforms to Ciry noise
regulations. Such sound mitigation measures must be in p[ace prior to operations
beginning at the facility. If walls or fences wi!! act ar sound barriers they must be in
place prior to operations. If another building wi[I serve as a sound barrier, the walls
must be substantially complete prior to operations.
6. Lighting Exterior lighting for the facility must be aimed and shie[ded to minimiZe glare
light and light spill over on to adjacent residenlial praperty.
7. Setbacks and landscaping The setback on Fairview must be increased to IO feet to
permit enough room for landscaping to soften the appearance of the building. The
setback shall be p[anted and maintained with plant material approved by site plan staff
and which wi!! grow at least IO feet tall when mature in order to jorm a continuous row
along the entire east side of the building.
• Additional landscaping must be planted around t/te perimeter ojthe site where ever noise
barriers ar visual screens are required The noise barriers or visual screens must be
setback 10'jrom the property line to provide adequate room for landscaping. The
existing chain link jence in these areas must be removed
8. Storm water management A storm water management plan must be submitted to staJf
for approval.
9. Accessible parking One additional handicapped accessible parking space must be
provided
10. Erosion control An erosion and sediment contral plan must be submitted to staffjor
approval.
Commissioner Nordin asked if the City would require JLT Group to come back for another site
plan review if they decide to build the other building somewhere else on the site. Mr. Beach
responded that they would. Commissioner Nordin commented that it is very difficult to control
where the trucks park when they arrive afrer the site closes at 10 p.m. She asked if it might be
possible to ask the truckers to park in a designated area in the rear of the site to idle their trucks.
Ivir. Beach stated that it is his understandin� that the applicant would be a�reeable to
desionatin� some spots down by Prior behind an existing buildin�.
NIOTIOti Commissioner Nordin moved to add under the 4"' condition that the owners
• establish an area of truck parking in the secluded southwest corner of the site jor early truck
�
I1
�
,ii
r%
;i
:�
arrival; Commissioner Geisser seconded the motion.
Commissioner Faricy informed the Commission that such a discussion took p(ace at the
committee meeting and it was her recollection that they decided to leave that issue to ttte
discretion of the Departmeat of License, Inspection and Environmental Protection and the
owner to figure out a legitimate, logical place for them to park.
Commissioner Geisser encouraged other commissioners to add their ideas.
Commissioner Faricy added that some of these trucks will be coming in al( ni�ht long. Talking
with a trucker, she found out that truckers must keep a log. They can drive for 10 hours
strai�ht; then they have to be ofFthe road for 8 hours. If they drive 70 hours in seven days, they
have to take 24 hours off: There is no question that these trucks will come and go at different
hours. Many of these truckers are individual corporations. We will need to do something about
these trucks or they will be lined-up on Prior, idling. Perhaps, afrer the noise analysis,
something can be set up.
Commissioner Fotsch realizes that if these trucks come in at different times, they will need to
go somewhere. His concem is that if any of them aze allowed to come in, the hour requiremeni
is eliminated. Once they get to the site, iYs another intrusion into the neighborhood. There aze
many truck stops around the Interstate. He thinks they should be required to time their arrival
into the site when it's open. He does not support the amendment.
Commissioner Nordin stated that the reason why she is bringing pazking on-site to the table is
because of her experience of living in the city. In the Northwest Quadrant where she lives there
is a �Vards Distribution Center on the southwest comer of Snelling and Como. The owners of a
handful of houses near there have done everything possible to try to get the City to help them,
but there is no way to control the truckers. They come and go as they p]ease. The diesel's need
to run in our cold climate. All the streets around the Wazds azea aze signed for no pazking after
10 p.m. and before 6 a.m., but the residents are constantly calling the police tellin� them that
there are trucks pazked violating the law.
Commissioner Faricy asked if Commissioner Nordin would go along with aliowing LIEP to
make that decision with Dawes Trucking. Commissioner Nordin agreed to add that to the
amendment.
Commissioner Corbey asked Mr. Beach if the truckers will be empioyees of Dawes Trucking or
independent operators in order to establish responsibility. Mr. Beach believes the truckers aze
not employed by Dawes Truckin�. Commissioner Corbey thinks the Commission needs to
adopt some type of motion that will cover these truckers, because if they're not employees of
Dawes, they will be running wild.
Commissioner Kramer appreciated the intent of the motion, but he feels that the Committee has
put together a good resolution and he doesdt want to further complicate the issue. The
nei�hborhood hasn't talked about the issue of a designated place for the truckers to idIe and the
committee didn't address it. He said he was uncomfortable with trying to craft a statement
today, about where the trucks wiil be allowed to id(e on-site without havine the appropriate
�
•
•
•
)2
a�-Sa�t
discussions. He sTated he is a�ainst adopting this amendment. If that decision is delegated to
staff (LIEP), it eliminates any public involvement in that decision. Ma} be that's something the
Commission wants to do, but that issue has not been addressed, and Commissioner ICr
• not comfortable with inserting ii in as a condition.
amer is
Mr. Beach responded about the comment that if LIEP handled this issue, there would not be any
chance for neighborhood input. He suggested that the amendment could be
would detennine the truck idling area in consultation with the district co¢ncit. He added
LIEP did phrased that LIEP
make a decision about where the trucks could park and someone didn't ao �at if
the decision could be appealed.
o ree with it,
Commissioner Nordin suggested different Ianguage for the amendment: The owr�er shall
coordinate with LIEP and the district councii to establish a designated idfe area for afrer hour
truck parking. The idle area shall be marked with adequate signage. Commissioner Geisser
accepted the change in language.
Commissioner Now]in stated that he wil( go along with the Committee recommendation, but he
is still troubled by the bigger picture here. It is his understanding that the Commission is
looking only at the site plan review because the zoning authorizes this use. This property is
located on the edge of an industrial area that has had many trucking concems. It is a big chunk
of land, and this is a very Iow intensity use, in his opinion. It's obvious that this use could
create a problem. He wonders if the Committee got assurance that this use was " �� •
area or did they make the assumption that, based upon zoning, they had to 0o with it.
OK m this
Commissioner Faricy responded that the Committee did look at the situation and the did
the decision based upon the zoning because this site is zoned I-1.
Y make
• Commissioner Kramer asked for clarification on the amendment. Was it that there shall be this
facility for parking on the site or that it wili exist if they can work it out? Commissioner Nordin
replied that the amendment is intended to say that LIEP, the owner, and the district council shall
discuss and determi�e whether ihere would be a designated "idle" area. If they agree to put one
on-site, then the idle area shall be marked with adequate si�nage.
Mr. Warner stated that it's good to invo(ve the district planning counci! if this altows for closer
contact with the neighbors and their concerns. He asked Commissioner Nordin if, impl;c�t;n
her motion, she was g�ving the district counci! some sort of veto authori
Nordin replied that he is giving the neighborhood the option of having the trucks park
ty. Commissioner
anywhere they want on the street and having residents make phone calis to the police because
the truckers are not followin� the signage or settling for the trucks to park on a certain
of the site that would be the least disruptive to their residential neighborhood.
respoaded that, with respect to zoning, the authority to zone is vested in the City and the ortion
Planning Commission in their advisory capacity. It can't o an Mr� Warner
exclusively, has the authority to decide the conditions, etcg If the mot on s t make sur t at the
❑eighborhood district council is involved in the process, thars great. If it is anythin�
that, it would be an improper delegation of the City's zonin� authoritv.
o more than
CommissionerNordin asked ifthis issae coWd be delayed fortwo weeks, The Commission
b'
•
��
�
responded that it could not.
Commissioner En�h spoke against the motion because: 1) it undoes the conditions in #3, #4 and
#5; 2) there are a host of conditions already imposed; and 3) there's a dirth of knowiedge on •
what the noise mitigation is going to be. She appreciates the motion because it's seems to be
trying to contemplate some practical reality, but on the other hand, there's a gap of information
the Commission is not even going to know. She also feels the motion is micro mana�ing what
the staff is going to have to determine at a later date. Staff needs to have the leeway to
implement all of these conditions, which she thinks are fairly restrictive and should be,
considering where the property is.
Commissioner Faricy called the question.
Commissioner Nordin withdrew her motion to amend.
Commissioner Faricy withdrew calling the question.
Commissioner Field asked if the Commission acts today on the motion as it stands, can it come
back at a later time, if the problem exists, and modify the site plan to permit such an "idling"
area, if there's a human cry. Mr. Wamer replied that the Commission could do that. Certainly,
if it appears in the future that the conditions are not being abided with, the City has a number of
legal tools that it could take advantage of to bring a cause of action. Commissioner Field asked
if, afrer the City undertook some type of enforcement proceedin�, could the Planning
Commission modify the site plan to accomplish what Commissioner Nordin su��ested. Mr.
Wamer replied that it all depends on the outcome of the enforcement action that City brings.
Commissioner Field asked if the applicant, in this particulaz case, determined, that in light of
police calls, it would make more sense to estab(ish a parking spot on their property for truckers •
to park, could they then apply for a revision of their site pIan, which woald then be subject to
staff and eventually, Planning Commission review. Mr. Wamer replied thac they probably
could not. It is their property; it's a permitted use. If they wanted to establish a parking azea, it
probably wouldn't require any City review.
Commissioner Nordin asked if a legal recourse was the only recourse the neighborhood might
have if there is a probtem in the future. Mr. Wamer responded that the City has a variety of
tools that it could exercise, legaliy, to address the problem on-site, if there are problems and
complaints are made. The nei�hbors have the option of a number of legal theories they could
apply.
Commissioner Corbey, referrin� to the letter received from the JLT Group, stated that they
proudly say that they own approximately 2 squaze feet in the Midway area. He asked if
the Planning Commission could suggest that they allow the truck parking for Dawes on other
property owned by JLT, perhaps at 739 Vandalia Street, in order to sett(e this situation. Mr.
Warner replied that it could.
Commissioners Dandrea and Donnelly-Cohen abstained from the discussion and also from the
vote.
�
�
!'f
�g - s a`t
The motion on the floor to approve Ihe requested site plan with conditions carried on a roll
ca!! vote (Dand�ea ¢nd Donnelly-Cohen ¢bstaining),
• �• Communications Commitfee
Commissioner ICrar�er reported that the Committee is waiting for the first draft of
report from the City desi�er.
the annual
�- Task Force Repo�
Advertisina Si n Committee Prelimina
n' Re ort -(La�, Soderholm, 266-6575)
Commissioner Field reported that the task force held a
it was moved to lay the matter over in its entire
meeting one week ago, Thursday, where
known, regarding the use of amortization. � until the outco
me of pe�ding legislation is
Commissioner Engh, referr�ng
resolution to adopt the Saint to the following provision in the recentl
on it vis-a-vis state law that wou d�o err r e an ecial District Si y p�sed City Council
gn Plan, asked what is the timing
y sort of study on the use of amortization:
RESOLVED, that the Council requests that the Plannino
back to the City Council within six months as to the use of amortiz 4on for e
bi(Iboards in the Saint Anthon Park, and report
Specia( Sign Districts and as to the a Grand Avenue, Smith Avenue and mOVal of
ppropriate amortization eriod Hl°h�a�d Village
Mr. Ford res p for such uses;
• ponded that in the City Council's adoption of that the amorti2ation provision was
eliminated. Mr. Ford asked Mr. Soderholm if there was an
Mr. Soderholm replied that the Planning Commission's report wili consist of hvo sentences if
the law is y��er clarification on the study.
with regards to nd make rts ci�ement for the Plannin�
Counci( approved the resolution to have a s o Commissio to finish its work
ty-wide rec ommendations. He added that the City
following up with an ordinance amendmentth k,;i�n district for District 12, M W
the four readings, and also requires a public hearin go before the Ci rner is
already says the g but it will do exactly�vhatithe�re ol � nugh
y are on record as S�pporting. Mr, W�er believes that ordinance
next Wednesday's agenda for third reading,
wi11 be on
Commissioner Field elaborated that there is a petition circulating involvin
nuisance as reflects bi(Iboards to go onto the ballet. He added that his understandino
that special sig� districts were to g some theory of
voted in opposition to the Saint Antho y gpe�a�ls� 9°ality ofa a h� been
of the Saint Anthon area. p� area. He noted that he
the use of a special sign district on an entire area � on District because it was all enco
if it were possible, that the Advertising Task Force ook at
special area, e.g., Grand Avenue. In the case of Saint Anthon o res ect ce
tooi to accomplish an objective that Saint Anthon p � 4ua(ities of a
with the intent of the s ecial si� Y he found it was used more as a
Y Pazk wanted, but he didn't see it in keeping
districts in eve P an district. He thinks the Commission wi(! be seeine
ry planning district of the city, and he doesn't think that w
legislation. o Special sign
as the intent of the
•
�
��
Saint Paul Planning Commission
City Hall Conference Center
15 Kellogg Boulevard West
A meeting of the Planning Commission of the City of Saint Paul was held Friday, March 26, 1999, at
8:30 a.m. in the Conference Center of City Hall.
Commissioners
Present:
Commissioners
Absent:
Mmes. Duarte, Engh, Geisser, McCall, MoROn, and Messrs. Corbey, Dandrea, Field,
Fotsch, Gervais, Gordon, Johnson, Kramer, Mardell, Margulies, and Shakir.
Mmes. *Donnelly-Cohen, *Faricy *Nordin and Messrs. Kong and *Nowlin
*Excused
Also Preseat: Ken Ford, Planning Administrator, Jean Birkholz, Martha Faust, Tom Harren, Nancy
Homans, Larry Soderholm, Jim Zdon, Department of Planning and Economic
Development staff; Tom Beach and Bob Kessler from the Department of License,
Inspection and Environmental Protection.
IV. PUBLIC HEARING: Site Plan Review for a trucl:ing facility on the west side of Fairview
Avenue,'/z block south of Aiinnehaha Avenue, JLT Group (Tom Beach, 266,9086, LIEP).
Chair Morcon read the rules and procedures for pubiic hearin�.
Mr. Tom Beach eave a short presentation before testimony w�as taken. JLT Group submitted a
site plan in February for a new truck transfer faciiity. Eazlier this month the Hamline-Midway
Coalition asked the Plannine Commission to hold a public heazing. Mr. Beach noted that since
the staff report was written, there have been more discussions with JLT. There are some
chanees to the written staff report; a sheet has been passed out reflecting those changes.
The properry at 625 Fairview Avenue is owned by JLT Group; the wcking facility will go on a
eastern portion of the property, next to Fairview Avenue. JLT will build the building and the
facility wilf be operated by Da�ves Trucking. Most of their business involves bringing in a
variety of goods from local businesses using smaller city trucks. Those goods aze brought inio
the building, consotidated into packa�es by location and loaded onto semi-trucks that make the
deliveries. Dawes Truckine is currently located in Roseville. They are relocating because they
need more room.
Mr. Beach show�ed stides of the site.
�
\J
�
u
��
� � -S �-�
John MacDaniels, owner of Dawes Truckin�, informed Mc Beach about their operation. 11te
• facility will be open Monday through Friday; it's normally closed on weekends, but an
occasional truck will come in. Durin� the week, they open about 7 a.m. Tuesdays and Fridays
are generally the busiest days and they stay open unti] midnight. On Mondays, Wednesdays
and Thursdays, the facility is open until 8 or 9 p.m. The peak hours are in the late aftemoon
from 3 to 6 p.m. Right now they have 35 semi-trailers a week taking freight out; and about 10
semi-trailers a week bringing frei�ht in. They also have from six to ei�ht local trucks coming
and going each day, Monday throu�h Friday. Typically, the semi-trailers take three or four
hours to load or unload. Sometimes trucks leave their engines on while they are loading or
unloadin�, but they don't leave them on overnieht. There will be electrical heaters provided in
the winter so that they won't need to run their heaters all night. Some of the trucks will have
refrigerator uniu, but they will not need to be running. There will be no fuelin� stations or
maintenance facilities on the site.
The Board of Directors of the Hamline-Midway Coalition voted unanimously to oppose this
project. Two letters were received from the neighborhood; one was in opposition; the other was
in support.
Next, Mr. Beach went through the required findings. The first one states that the Planning
Commission shall consider and find that the site plan is consistent with the city's adopted
comprehensive plan and development or project plans for sub-areas of the ciry. Since the City's
recently adopted comprehensive plan was not in effect when this application came in, the
fortner plan must be used. The plan says that in cases of incompatible land uses, the City wi(I
use techniques such as landscaping, berming, or fencing site perimeters in maintaining building
• exteriors to create buffers bern-een ]and uses. The District 1 I Plan also talks about creating
buffers to separate residentia! areas from commercial and industrial areas. It also talks about
traffic concems. Staff thinks that the site plan can be consistent with these policies if noise
barriers are erected. The exact design of these noise barriers hasn't been worked out yet. 3LT
Group is talking about putting another buifdins alon� Minnehaha for something like mini-
storage that wouldn't create much noise, which might act like a noise barrier, if it is built. If the
building is not built, perhaps some walled fences will need to be built along Fairview.
The earlier staff report also recommended closing all the driveways on Fairview so that trucks
would need to come in off Prior. Afrer talking with JLT, staff has modified its recommendation
on this. JLT says they need access on Fairview because they glan to su6divide the property.
Now, staff recommends that the northem most driveway is closed and JLT has agreed.
The next finding is that the site plan must be consistent with the applicable ordinances of the
City of Saint Paul. Trucking facilities are a permitted use on this property since it is zoned I-1.
A question that came up here is whether or not Fairview is a truck route. The City Attorney
said that Fairview is not a truck route, however, the regulations say that trucks can use a non-
truck route "when necessary in entering or leaving a truck terminal" and then they must use the
shoRest route to get to a truck route. JLT says they won't have access to Prior Avenue (a truck
route), so staff is recommending they have at least one driveway out to Fairview. Staff
originally recommended that there be a sound study done to see if the City's noise ordinance
would be exceeded, but since has decided that would not be necessary. A reasonable solution
might be attained if they decide to erect the other building. There's a small discrepancy as faz
as the setback from Fairview Avenue. It needs to be a little bigger than shown. StafF is
• recommendin� that the setback be increased.
�
��
The next finding has to do with preservation of unique geological, geographic or historically
significant characteristics of the city and environmentally sensitive areas. The site doesn't fall
into those categories. The were some concems raised by the neighborhood concerning .
environmental issues, particularly, air quality. Mr. Beach said he called the Minnesota
Pollution Control Agency and the Environment Quality Board about the issues. Both said that
this faciliry was quite a bit smaller Than anything that would trigger any formai environmental
review. Both also said that a situation may cause irritable odors without violating any
ordinance. Perhaps, there may be a restriction on when wcks tum off their engines.
The next f nding deals with protection of adjacent and neighboring properties. Staff is now
recommending that it will meet that finding if they close one driveway on Fairview Avenue and
put up the noise barriers.
The next finding has to do with the arrangement of building and uses. Staff is recommending
that the plan is consistent with that finding, if the changes are made.
Re�arding energy conservation, the plan is consistent with the current practices.
Regardino safety and convenience of both vehicular and pedestrian traffic, Public Works
reviewed this site plan and determined that the plan, induding the use of the existing driveways
on Fairview for the primary access to the truck faciliry, is safe and consistent with this fmding.
Drainaae. The site plan doesn't deal with that yet, but can be added on if these other things aze
approved.
Landscaping, fencing, wails, and parking. There witl be some kind of requirement for either •
walls or buildin�s to block sound. Staff recommends that there be at least 10 feet between the
building and the sidewalk to plant vegetation.
Site accessibility. They need to provide one more handicapped parking spot.
Erosion and sediment control. They don't yet have a plan.
Staff recommends approva( of the site plan subject to the following conditions:
1. Driveways. The north driveway on Fairview must be c[osed and the south driveway must
be widened as determined by Public Works to handle lazge trucks.
2. Souad barriers. Sound mitigation measures must be designed and constructed to ensure
that the development conforms to City noise regulations. If walls are required for sound
barriers, they must be in place before the building is occupied. If another new buiIding will
act as a sound banier, work must begin on that building before the trucking building is
occupied.
3. Truck idling. Truck engines must be tumed offwhenever trucks are at the docks or aze
standing on the site waiting to get to a dock. More discussion on that this moming leaves
this up to staff, the neighborhood and JLT to work out.
4. Parking on adjacent streets. Trucks using this site may not pazk on Fairview or
Minnehaha.
5. Hours of operation. Hours of operation must be timited to between 6 a.m. and 12
midni�ht. .
6. Setbacks and lattdscaping. The setback on Fairview must be increased to 10 feet to permit
�
��
�g-S�y
enou�h room for landscaping to soften the appearance of the buildina. The setback must be
• planted with shrubs that will get at least ] 0 feet tall when mature to form a continuous row
alon� the entire east side ofthe building.
Additional ]andscaping must be planted around the perimeter of the site wherever noise
barriers are required. Noise barriers or other new buildings must be setback 10' from the
property line to provide adequate room for landscaping.
7. Storm water plan. A storm water management plan must be submitted to staff for
approval.
8. Accessible parlting. One additional handicapped accessible parkin� space must be
provided.
9. Erosion and sediment control. An erosion and sediment control plan must be submitted
to staff for approval.
Commissioner Field sfiated he is distressed by Mr. Beach's comment that we just pass over the
issue of truck idlin�. He noted he would be interested in the discussions that took place this
mornin� and how it's possible to come up with a recommendation like that. Mr. Beach replied
that the discussion was with the o�vmer who said that there are times, especiafly during the
winter, when truckers don't want to shut off their engines. Commissioner Field asked if the
nei�hborhood was involved. Mr. Beach responded it was not.
Commissioner Gordon asked what noise mitigation efforts Mr. Beach recommend. Mr. Beach
noted that they would depend on whether the other building goes up. If the building is e�ected
and if it's a use that doesn't generate additional traffic, it should take care of much of the
• problem witli noise bouncin� up to Ivfinnehaha. In addition, he thinks there should be a wal( or
fence along Fairview Avenue. If the buildin� doesn't get built, then the City would require
more noise barriers. Commissioner Gordon asked how high those would be. Mr. Beach replied
that hasn't been worked out yet. It would be a solid barrier. Commissioner Gordon asked if
JLT just needs to begin work on the other building in order for Dawes to occupy the truck
building. Mr. Beach stated that was reasonable. Commissioner Gordon asked if Mr. Beach is
satisfied that the other building or solid barriers will adequately mitigate the noise emanating
from this operation. Mr. Beach replied that he was because the people who wouid be affected
most are those east along Fairview, they are dosest to the trucks. He is confident they will not
hear anything because the docks are on the opposite side of the buildin=. A wall can be placed
north alon� Fairview to help on that side, and if the building is erected, it should take care of the
noise problem. If the building is not built, then perhaps a wing wall coming out of the north
end of the building may need to be built. Commissioner Gordon asked about the noise from the
trucks ingressing and egressing from the building. Mr. Beach stated there witl be noise from
trucks. Commissioner Gordon asked how Mr. Beach knew that the noise from the lrucks
entering and exiting wouldn't be excessive. Mr. Beach stated that he knew for sure that the
noise would not violate the City's noise ordinance based on past experience with other cases.
Mr. Beach added that there was no formal testing done in this case, but the architect did check
w ith a noise meter. Commissioner Gordon stated that he is concemed about the fact that the
initial recommendation included a noise study and the revised recommendation does not. He
asked why that requirement was dropped; it would indicate, with an acceptable level of
confidence, whether the noise is going to be unacceptable or not. Mr. Beach replied that staff is
confident they will be able to evaluate whether the proposal will meet the standard or not.
� Commissioner Gordon asked who would select the company or individual to perform the noise
study. Mr. Beach said that in the past, the applicant has selected the person and the City has
`��
)9
either accepted the person or su�gested ano[her. Commissioner Gordon asked if there was a
down side for requirin� the noise study before approvins an application. Mr. Beach responded
it is primarily the cost to the developer and about a two week delay of the project. •
Commissioner Geisser asked Mr. Beach what the decision was on how these added trucks
would affect the level of air quality of the neighborhood. Mr. Beach replied that staff at the
Minnesota Pollution Control Agency and the Environmental Quality Board indicated that this
would not require an environmentai assessment worksheet (EAW) or an indirect source permit.
Their professional judgment was that in terms of air quality tha[ can be measured, this would
not violate standards that they have; there might, however, be a problem w�ith odor.
Commissioner Geisser was concerned about their making these judgtnents without doing any
type of study. Mr. Beach stated that this is a case that is far below what they would normally be
concerned with. He asked the Environmental Quality Boazd what their threshold was and they
answered that with a trucking facility, it needs to be 600,000 squaze feet; this is 25,000 squaze
feet. Commissioner Geisser asked if the City has any ordinances that are separate from these in
terms of level of noise or air quality, where abutting a residential neighborhood. Mr. Beach
replied that the City has a noise ordinance, but not an air quatity ordinance.
h1r. Bob Kessler, Director for the Department ofLicense, Inspection and Environmentai
Protection addressed the Commission. He stated that the reason he did not feel that a noise
study was necessary because there are often noise studies done where they rarely show that the
new use will be in violation of the City's noise ordinance. Sometimes ho�vever, there aze
complaints about noise whether or not the facility meets the threshold in the ordinance. Then
the department needs to do whatever it can to mitigate the noise even thou�h it doesn't violate
the ordinance.
Commissioner Corbey asked how many decibels is estimated a truck emit; entering and leaving •
the premises, and what does the ordinance call for. Mr. Beach rep[ied that he doesn't have a
figure on decibels when a truck enters or leaves a facilit} or drivin� by. The ordinance deals
with a more lon�-term noise, e.g., a truck idling. Accordina to the ordinance, the noise has to
be present more than 10% of the time in a given hour. In this case, you can't exceed 75
decibels during the day (measured at the residential zoning line) and from 11 p.m. to 7 a.m.,
that drops down to 5� decibels. There is a graph on page 16 of the staff repoR that helps to
define those levels. The level that you'd find in a private office is 55 decibels; 75 decibels is a
large gathering of people or downtown Saint Paul.
Commissioner Mardell asked where other truck terminals are located in the City of Saint Paul,
and if there are any other truck terminals that are located in close proximity to residential
neighborhoods. Mr. Beach listed: 1) the Burlington-Northern facility on Pierce-Butler (noise
within the site); 2) a trucking facility on West Minnehaha near Dale (some problems); 3) a
trucking facility on Petham Avenue, soaYh of University Avenue thaY are similar types of
facilities in the City. There are complaints from time to time.
Commissioner Corbey asked if it woutd make a difference if the docks on the north end of the
building were moved to the south side of the building so the noise and pollution wouldn't spill
into the neighborhood on Minnehaha. Mr. Beach repiied that if the docks were on the south
side, they would interfere with the Fairview driveway. Commissioner Corbey asked why the
entrance to the facility could not be along Prior Avenue, a truck route. He noted that the
buildings along there are old and di(apidated and wondered if there would be a comprehensive •
plan in the future to redevelop that wfiole iayout of buildines. Mr. Beach responded that the
�'
0
aq -�S ��I
drive�vays alona Fairview have been there for years, and the applicant has objections to closing
• those driveways because of possible fumre plans for the property.
Commissioner Gordon asked if the noise study would be of help in determinina what the noise
miti�ation efforts should be. Mr. Kessler replied that Mr. Beach is the expert on that and coutd
provide advise on what types of walls or barriers or miti�ation measures might be employed.
He has done that in many cases in the pazt, so the City would not necessazily need a consuitant
for that. When there is noise disturbing a neighborhood and it doesn't violate the City's
ordinance, which is usually the case, it is di�cult to come up with measures to do what is
necessary to help eliminate the noise. Commissioner Gordon asked if the noise study would be
of help in deciding issues like whether an operation should not run until midniaht, but only until
10 p.m. Mr. Kessler replied that it is possible that a professionally done study could provide
information that staff could not gathec. In this case, Mr. Kessler didn't think it was a likely
possibility and he didn't think that there was enough unknown information to require a study to
be done. Because this facility has not been fully used for a long time, it is naturally going to be
disruptive to the neighborhood.
Mr. KuR Williams, JLT Group, gave a short presentation. This formerNavy and Unysis
facility was purchased by JLT Group three years ago. A substantial amount of that property has
already been re-developed. They hope to build four more buildings on this site. Under this
proposal there are two buildings (the second one will take 60 days to confirm). The site is
zoned industrial and JLT knows that this is a good project. Dawes Transport has a July move-in
timetable.
• Commissioner Field asked what types of use the additiona( buildings at this site will be. Mr.
Williams replied that as a developer, he doesn't kno�v the answer to that question. The second
building on this site wif] be a mini-gara�e. The other buildings probably wil] be office
buildin�s.
Commissioner Gordon asked if working out the noise issue might include doin� a noise study.
Mr. Wifliams replied that he is not sure how to do a noise study. Commissioner Gordon asked
if he had a problem with hiring a consultant who knows how to do noise studies. Mr. Williams
responded that a noise study is a matter of timing and cost. Commissioner Gordon asked what
it would cost to have a noise study done. Mr. Williams answered that he did not know.
Public testimony began.
John Van De Weghe, 1807 Blair Avenue, addressed the Commission in opposition. He was
the lead speaker for the neighborhood delegation who a�e opposed to the facility altogether.
His concerns are noise, air qua(ity, safety, etc. On Tuesday, he sat in his car from 4:55-5:10
p.m. on Minnehaha and Fairview. He counted 200 cars or vehicles that came through the
intersection in fifreen minutes. Mr. Van De Weghe also submitted written testimony from a
neighbor.
2. Thomas Minder, 764 Tatum Street, addressed the Commission in opposition. He stated that
his community is a socioeconomic diverse neighborhood and a benefit to Saint Paul.
Already existing in the neighborhood is an industrial corridor (Pierce Butler Route),
carrying a lot of truck traffic. It is four-five blocks from his house, yet they heaz the traffic
• on it all day long. Burlington-Northen, to the north is the same situation. To the west is the
Amtrak Station, with trains arriving at midnight and at 7 a.m. To the east, they have the
x
21
hiehest pollution area in the Twin Cities, the Snelling-University intersection. Further to
the north is the Saint Paul Stadium, a great benefit to the city, and in the summer months •
the neighborhood listens to the crowd cheering. To the south is University Avenue and all
summer long, hot rods travel up and down University oa Friday and Saturday nights, which
makes a lot of racket. The neighborhood is overtvn with noise and air pollution. His
children are awakened every moming now at 7 a.m. without the truck transfer facility. He
feels this truck facility will break the community, an asset, a model of community activiry.
The community has worked with landowners in the past to resolve problems. Economic
development is obviously, a very important issue in the community. It's important to the
Ciry of Saint Paut; iYs important for JLT to make a profit and the community invites them
into the community to do so. Clearly, JLT has not invited the neighborhood to the table to
discuss iT. He inveTed JLT to come up wiYh a business plan that makes the money, provides
jobs for the neighborhood and the Ciry of Saint Paul, and becomes a partner with the
community, not a detriment to it.
Commissioner Gordon asked if there have been no meetings between JLT and the community.
Mc Minder replied there have been two meetings; he was unable to be present at the meetings.
3. Michael Samuelson, 17�8 Hewitt Avenue, addressed the Commission in opposition. He
referred to finding 62.108 of the Zonin� Code in regard to the site plan. This type of firm, a
trucking firm, is not appropriate under the Comprehensive Plan: The Land Use Chapter.
These types (truckins facility) of uses should be considered to be restricted. There is an
issue of concern hare about the best use of this land. The neighborhood appreciates the
oppoRUnity for JLT to move into the neighborhood and provide for appropriate job
producing businesses. Under the Port Authority's rule of assistance programs is "per 1,000 •
square feet of building space there is a minimum of one job on a site coverage of 30% per
site." This plan does not even come close to this. This will not provide livin� wage jobs
for the community. Fifteen years ago, this site was projected as an opportuniTy to provide
living wage jobs in light industrial work that would employ the residents of our community.
That �vould be welcomed, but a trucking ftrm that brings noise, disturbance, complaints,
pollution, etc., is not appropriate under the Saint Paul Comprehensive Plan: the Land Use
Chapter, and specifically, in the goals and objectives of the City to bring firms that provide
jobs. This will not provide jobs for Saint Paul. In addition, he echoed the concems of the
previous speaker, Thomas Minder, by sayin� that this use will force people out of the
neighborhood, the community they have chosen to live in. The community already lives
with noise on all four sides. This use will bring trucks up and dowm Fairview Avenue (not a
truck route) because JLT wants tfie entrances there. They shouldn't be allowed to do that.
If you allow them to do that, how and where does the community go to respond? Mr.
Samuelson noted that if he were to add a third story to his home, which is not allowed, he
would be in trouble. This is an incompatible use with the Land Use Plan and with the long
range vision of this community. He asked the Commission to oppose this site plan and
recommend that JLT work with the community to find a compatible use. The community
woutd be willing to a(so work with the Port Authority and the Plannina and Economic
Development staff to come with a re-development plan. He asked that the Commission put
a moratorium on this site altogether in order to work on a coraprehensive pian for this siYe.
Chair Morton asked Mr. Beach to clarify whether this site plan complies with the
Comprehensive Plan. He stated that a new Land Use Plan was just adopted and he originally •
cited that in the staff report. The City Attomey advised, however, that the o]d Land Use Plan be
referred to because the new one w�as not in effect when this plan was submitted. This use is in
A'
qt
a�-sa�
conformance with the earlier Land Use Plan.
• 4. Joe Potraski, 1636 Minnehaha Avenue West, addressed the Commission in opposition. He
stated that he is very disappointed with Mr. Beach's stance because he is basically, asking
the snake not to eat the mouse and then lea�ing it up to the snake to make sure he doesn't
eat the mouse. There are too many questions about the noise and pollution that he is
leaving up to JLT. The proposed semi-truck transfer station is not a proper use for this site
in this neighborhood. The zoning of this lot allows for many uses, but the proposed use is
not a proper use in the community now. Semi-trucks aze already illegally using the
community's side streets. JLT has already admitted, previously, that it can have no
influence or control over the semi-truck drivers once they leave their property. The City of
Saint Paul cannot now protect the community from the illegal use of iu sides streets by the
j semi-truck drivers. Everyone existing in the community has a responsibility to not cause
� damage to the community, which the semi-truck uansfer station certainly would. The very
loud beep, beep, beep that is required by law when the trucks back up can be heazd from
Burlington Northem on a day when the wind is not blowing in the opposite direction, one-
half mile from his house, as the crow flies. With the transfer station just right across the
street from many homes, the loud beep, beep, beep will be a constant disturbance. The
level of the beep cannot be lowered because of OCHA's standards. T'he pollution caused by
semi's running, not only in the winter, but also in the summer for the air conditioning, will
be a problem. There are many decisions which Mr. Beach has lefr the community out of.
He has bowed to JLT and JLT's architect. He is glad that the Commission has noticed these
failures and encouraged the Commission to tum dow�n this project. He noted that he has
worked with the MPCA for 2%z years to try to get them just to notice the smell coming
from the factory on Minnehaha and Fairview and Minnehaha and Fryer. lfiey have failed
• to find it. They have failed to stand up for the community. He stated that he is very
uncomfortable in leaving anything to JLT because once they are there, iYs going to be ev8n
harder to enforce. He added that he is happy with what he has experienced here today. He
thought he would come here and experience peopte who really didn't have much interest or
questions, but he was pleased to hear the wise questions that were asked by the
Commission.
5. Ron Williams, 779 Clayland Street, three blocks from Minnehaha and Fairview, addressed
the Commission in opposition. Three years ago he and his wife bought their house with 0
dollars down in an area with busing and one they could afford. They aze very concemed
that the JLT proposal could mean that they will be stuck in a deteriorating neighborhood.
Mr. Williams is representing the Sierra Club this morning whose goals include "to protect
the quality of the namral and human environment." The focus of his concem today is the
protection of kids. In a couple of days, the Sierra Club intends to submit an Environmental
Assessment Worksheet petition. This petition stresses that there are certain envuonmental
problems that need to be addressed by the City conceming the JLT proposal: 1) safety; 2)
noise; 3) air quality; 4) visual quality; 5) light pollution; and 6) water. The JLT proposal
brings a very serious safety concern to the children of the community, especially to
Fairview Avenue children. For this reason, it is imperative that the JLT be prohibited from
using Fairview Avenue for their trucks. Twenty trucks per day running until midnight will
bring a serious noise issue. It dcesn't have to be this way. There is no reason why a facility
that is compatible with the residential neighborhood cannot be placed on this property. An
additional twenty trucks per day will have a serious air poilution impact on an azea that is
• now only 12 blocks away from Snel(ing and University, the most air polluted point in the
State of Minnesota. He encouraged the Planning Commission to recommend doing and
�
2Z
EAW for this proposal. He noted that the developer is threatening the City with deadlines,
hopin� that the City will rubber-stamp their request. This is very inappropriate; the City •
must reasonably consider the developer's request.
6. Ken Schuba, 179� Blair, addressed the Commission in opposition. He asked the
Commission to wnsider what impact this facifity will have on some of the community's
sources of income. His wife is a licensed day-care provider, located less than'/z block from
Fairview Avenue. Some of her clients have aiready expressed a concern about the idea of a
warehouse being so close to the day-care. Their concems are the same as he and his wife:
1) heavy traffic; 2) noise; 3) lazge trucks; 4) unsafe driving habits; etc. Ifthese clients aze
lost, it will be increasingly more di�cult to find new clients with these less than appealing
aspects in the neighborhood. There are several home day-cares in the neighborhood. One
is located directly across the street from the proposed site. This will definitely affect their
ability to find and keep clients. The facility will not only affect the community's quality of
life, but it will also affect its sources of income. If their income suffers, it has a ripple
affect that affects more than just his family. They will not have the financial resources to
maintain their property, their house value will fall, their neighbors' house value will fall,
they may wind up on public assistance, and the pressures of financial instability affect ali
members of a household. This financia( impact is of great concern to Mr. Schuba and his
family. This neighborhood is on the up-swing. House values are going up. People aze
takinL pride in their homes, doing work to update and remodel, all in an efFort to raise the
qualit}• of living for everyone in the neighborhood. This nei�borhood has a home gazden
show; a neighborhood that fights to have gun shops removed for safety's sake; a
nei�hborhood that is concemed about the trucking facility that will decrease the aesthetics,
increase the pollution, increase the noise, increase the crime, and in rurn, decrease the •
values of their homes. The people who own this land do not need to worry about the issues
that the neighborhood has. They will never be confronted with the likes of a trucking
warehouse being built across the street from their homes. They will never need to worry
about semi-trucks cruising down the streets that their kids will be riding their bikes on,
diesel engines starting up at 5 a.m., or trucks runnin� all night long so that the drivers can
sleep in their cabs. We do, and we are concemed; and we do not think that we should be
affected by a big company getting big�er, especiatly at the expense of people trying to
improve a wonderful part of our city. Obviously, this company is not trying to be a good
nei�hbor. They, obviously, have no regard for the people who live here. How can we allow
someone with so little concern for the community to start a business that will only cause
more and more problems down the road.
Last week the Roseville City Council, in their wisdom, stopped Cub Foods plans because
"they fear the store will disrupt their ►ives around the clock with noise, fumes, trucks,
loadin„ lights, and all the extra traffic." Mayor pon Wall stated, "My concern is that this a
shopping center next to a residential area; it involves the wider community."
Francine Panioa, 1800 Blair, addressed the Commission in opposition. She and her family
also run the comer grocery store of the community at Minnehaha and Fairview. They
purchased the building, approximately one year aso, to renovate it and bring it back to its
old quality, its old look, and to keep the neighborhood a neighborhood, a store for people to
go with their children and to send their children to. She is concemed for the safety of these
children and their parents with their strollers. Another issue is the invasion of the lights this •
company already has on the people who live on Minnehaha. The three tenants who live in
her business buildin� have had the same privacy complaints. In the evening, the lights are
�
2 '1
� a -sa �{
so imasive that they cannot just close their shades and be alone. The neighborhood expects
� that this +nvasion will be mukiplied by a great amount. Already, they have had io invest in
new shades and draperies in order to keep both the noise and lighu out of their own living
rooms. There are some seventy plus children running around the blocks in a six block
radius. More trucks travelin� in this community will make it even more dangerous than it
already is with trucks using the side streets. The community would like to keep it a nice
nei�hborhood for famities to feel safe.
8. Jim Twembold, 1762 Blair, addressed the Commission in opposition. He tives one block
from the proposed site. He is concemed about security and safety issues. Within four
blocks of this siie, there are two schools, several churches, several family services, and four
parks. The buildings are primarily family-owned and occupied buildin�s. The
neighborhood is full of kids. When the truckers deliver late at night, they will run their
trucks all night. Just as one's house is maintained at a 70 degree temperature, they will
maintain their truck at a 70 degree temperature so they can relax and sleep. There's also the
issue of them spending the night there with no bathrooms; the issue of them storing empty
trailers which can invite others to spend the night out of the rain or kids Iooking for a piace
to cause trouble. There is no way of policing that. Locks only keep honest people honest.
Any given day, you can see trucks going up and down the side streets. It was said that
Fairview is not a designated truck route, but to the truckers, their time is money and they're
going to take the shortest route from A to B. We don't need any more trucks going up and
down the side streets. This company's busiest time is from 3- 6 p.m.; thaYs when the
schools are getting out; that's when parents are either dropping off or picking up their kids
from the local day cares.
• The first tape ended here; the second tape was blank.
9. Maz�orie Schma]z, 1829 West Minnehaha, addressed the Commission in opposition. Ms.
Schmalz lives right across the street from this proposal and is emotionally affected by
blankness, e.g., the view of a close blank neighbor's house from their dining room window
was remedied by the addition of a deck. Now, this proposal talks about putting up a long,
high barrier along Fairview. She is also concerned about the air quality and odors the new
use will cause.
]0. Bob Molden, 1817 Van Buren, addressed the Commission in opposition. Mr. Molden lives
right across the street from the north gate on the proposed site. During the State Fair one
year, there were 200 school buses that used this site to park. The noise and the stench were
nearly unbearable, and that was just an indication to him of what they will face with this
facility. He expects that twenty trucks is not the actual figure; there will be more and more.
Eventually, the facility will turn into a monster. He feels that JLT needs help to find an
alternative use and the community is willing to help him. Since Govemor Ventura is
courting the movie industry, perhaps this facility could be used for that.
I 1. Cheryf Hammerlindl, 672 NoRh Fairview, addressed the Commission in opposition. She
and her husband live directly across the street from this proposed facility. Her fust concern
is the safety of the children of the community. There have been six serious accidents at the
gates on Fairview involving trucks. There are forty-two children on the block they live and
• thirty-five children on the next block. The peak hours for Dawes is from 3- 6 p.m.; those
are also the peak hours for children being outside. Another concem is that her husband
works at night, so he sleeps during the day. With all the extra noise created by the trucks,
fi�
2S
he will have more difficulty sleepin�.
12. Steven Wilson, 680 Fairview Avenue North, addressed the Commission in opposition. He
thinks that to keep the ingress and egress of this facility along Fairview is a very poorly
thought-out decision. The added truck traffic will further endanger the children, shake
houses, decrease air quality, and increase noise and light pollution. There aze other uses
that woutd be rrtore appropriate for this site.
13. Roberta Mach, 1804 Englewood Avenue, addressed the Commission in opposition. Ms.
Mach lives one block north of Fairview and Minnehaha and is concerned about home
values goinL down and Fairview Avenue becoming a truck route.
I4. Sara Oxten, 1798 Blair Avenue, addressed the Commission in opposition. Ms. Oxten has
been impressed with the neighborhood, but is dismayed by the odors already there
emanating from businesses. She was surprised to hear that Fairview was not a truck route.
She thought it was because of all the truck tra�c. She thinks that JLT should be able to
make money, but not at her and the neighborhood's expense.
I5. Carol Minogue, 1846 Englewood, addressed the Commission in opposition. Ms. Minogue
expressed concem about the property values of the community's homes going down if this
faciliry is al(owed to locate on Fairview. She also submitted a letter from a neighbor.
16. Paul LaBelle, 1895 Tatum, addressed the Commission in opposition. His home is a day
care and he is concerned, primarily, about safety.
17. K. Nighten�ale, ] 689 Van Buren Avenue, addressed the Commission in opposition. She
mentioned that there are 54 block clubs in the neighborhood; there is great community
involvement. If this proposed facility moves in, her family is moving out.
Mr. Brian Houmann, JLT Group's architect, addressed the Commission, commenting that the
Planning Commission should be concerning itse(f with site plan issues. The proposed facility is
within its rights to be there. He explained that they will be taking down the pole lights and
putting up building lights that shine into the site.
Commissioner Geisser stated that the Planning Commission has a Comprehensive Plan that
they expect people to respect. They also expect people to respect the health and safety issues of
the community, a community that pays taxes. It is the intention of the Land Use Chapter to
place more intense uses outward; less intense uses towazd residentiat neighborhoods. She noted
that is apparent from the testimony that there is not a good understanding between the
neighborhood and JLT. There aze other issues beside zoning that should be taken into
consideration regarding this decision.
Mr. Houmann stated that 7LT is bringing this use before the CiTy because this is what they have.
Commissioner Geisser pointed out that discussions with the neighborhood are very important.
Mr. Houmann said that JLT had two meetings with the neighborhood.
Commissioner Kramer asked what specific changes resulted from the meetings with the
community. Mr. Houmann noted the possibie erection of noise barriers.
Commissioner Corbey asked if any consideration was given to locate this facility on the
r1
LJ
•
•
�
2L
�a-��.y
northwest comer of the site, and asked why they chose this section of the site. Mr. Houmann
. answered that this facility would not fit as well on the northwest corner. Commissioner Mazdell
added that the northwest site probably would not be as eas}' to access with the trucks.
bIOTION: Commissioner Gordon moved to close the public hearing and refer the matter to
the Neighborhood and Current Planning Committee; the motion was seconded by
Commissioner Geisser and carried unanimously on a voice vnte.
Commissioner Gordon urged the applicant to meet with the local community.
V. Zonine Committee
#99-030 Jonathan E. Waaner - Rezone from RT-1 to B2-C to allow for a therapeutic massage,
rehabilitation and chronic pain center at 366 West King, between Smith and Manomin (Martha
Faust, 266-6572).
Commissioner Gervais reported that this case was laid over until the next Zoning Committee
meeting, Tuesday, March 30.
#99-031 Tena Lv - Special condition use permit to allow for on-site auto zepair at 1047
University Avenue, beriveen Oxford and Lesington Parkway, in conjunction with the vehicle
warranties the applicant offers customers (Nancy Homans, 266-6557).
bIOTION: Commissioner Gervais maved approval ojthe requested specia! cnndition use
permit to a!!ow jor on-site auto repair at 1047 University Avenue, befween Oxford and
• Lexington Parkway, in conjunction with the vehicle wurtanties fhe applicani offers
custamers.
Commissioner Geisser noted that this applicant came before the Commission in the past and the
Commission allowed no repairs to be done on-site. The Commission recently had an extensive
discussion about whether the proposed Ryder Truck rental facility was an appropriate use on the
site directly to the west, given current plans calling for higher density uses on University
Avenue. Why should University Avenue be allowed to have all these "interim" uses.
Commissioner Gervais replied that all ofthose things were discussed at the Zoning Committee
meeting, but fett Mr. Ly should be allowed to fulfil warranties he offers on used cazs.
Commissioner Gordon added that Mr. Ly has just one bay for repair. He doesn't think this will
afFect too much.
Commissioner Shakir asked if the resolution will meet the district council's concerns. Ms.
Homans replied that District 7 has raised issues related both to the previous prohibition of
repairs on-site and to the large signs that were erected for a previous car dealer. She said that
the district council is likely to be disappointed in the Zoning Committee's recommendation.
Commissioner Kramer noted that there is no condition that limits repair work. He reported that
the SCUP permitted for Ryder has been appealed to the Ciry Council. He asked if there was
any prudence in waiting to hear what the City Council does in that case.
• Mr. Ford stated that he thought each case should be considered on its own merits and this
applicant should not have to wait for Ciry Council action on someone else's case.
�
i7
PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
1. APPLICANT: JLT Group
2. CLASSIFICATION: Site Plan Review
3. LOCATION: 625 Fairview Avenue ('/: block souih of Minnehaha)
4. PLANNING DISTRICT: Hamline Midway Coalition (District 11)
5. LEGAL DESCRIPTION: See file
6. PRESENTZONING: I-1
7. STAFF INVESTIGATION AND REPORT:
DATE OF HEARING: 3/26198
ZONING CODE REFERENCE: 62.708(c)
DATE: 3/19/99 BY: Tom Beach
8. DATE RECEIVED: 2/23l99 DEADLINE FOR ACTION: 4/25/99
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A. PURPOSE: Site plan review for a new truck transfer facility.
B. PARCEL SIZE: The proposed building and the paved area around it for trucks would be cover 2.5
acres. It wouid be located at the east end of a larger piece of industrial property that runs from
Fairview to Prior on the south side of Minnehaha and covers 14.5 acres
C. EXISTING LAND USE: The area where the truck Vansfer facility would be built is currently a parking
lot. There are two driveways on Fairview Avenue. (These driveways have gates which are currently
locked and have snow in front of them indicating that they have not been used recently).
The rest of the property has a variety of offices and industrial uses and more parking. The main
building on the site has approximately 15 loading docks on the south (back) side.
D. SURROUNDING LAND USE:
The area to the east (across Fairview) and to the north (across Minnehaha) is residential. (Zoned
R-4, RT-1 and RM-2)
The area to the west and south is industrial. (Zoned I-1)
E. ZONING CODE CITATION: Section 62.108(c) lists a number of findings that the Planning
Commission must make in order to approve a site plan. These are listed and discussed in Section H
below.
F. HISTORY: The site has been had industrial uses for over 60 years. At one time Controi Data was a
major tenant. JLT bought the property about 3 years ago and has been renovating the existing
buildings.
� DISTRICT COUNCIL RECOMMENDATION: The Hamfine Midway Coalifion requested a public
hearing on this site plan. They have concems about truck traffic, noise and air pollution. Their Board
of Directors voted unanimously to oppose the project. (See attached letters.)
•
•
H. FINDINGS:
1. Dawes Trucking The truck transfer facility would be built by JLT and operated by Dawes
Trucking. Dawes would bring a variety of goods to the site from local businesses using smaller �
city trucks. The goods would then be consolidated inside the building and loaded onto semi-
trailers and shipped out of state. Dawes currently operates out of a building located in Roseville.
However, this buiiding is too small and Dawes wants to move to get more room
��
�a-sa�{
2. Proposed operation John McDaniels, the owner of Dawes Trucking, described the proposed
operation to staff, including the hours of operation and the number ot trucks:
Hours of operation
• - The facility would be open Monday through Friday. It would normally be closed on
weekends although occasionally there would be an individual truck on weekends.
- During the week the facility would open at 7AM. Tuesdays and Fridays are the busiest
days and the facility would normally stay open until midnight on those nights. On
Monday, Wednesday and Thursdey the facifity would ciose at 8 or 9 P.M..
- Peak hours are late afternoon (3 to 6 P.M.)
Number and types of trucks
— There would be approximately 35 semi-trailer trucks a week taking freight out and another
10 semi-trailer trucks bring freight in. (On Tuesday and Friday when they are busier,
there would be 10 semi-trailer trucks a day. On Monday, Wednesday and Thursday
there wouid be fewer semi-trailer trucks.
— There would be 6 to 8 smailer local trucks a day Monday thru Friday. These trucks would
leave in the morning, pick up or deliver goods locally, and return in the afternoon.
— The large trailers typically take 3 or 4 hours to load. However, a trailer may site at the
dock for a day or two until it is picked up. The truck engines would be turned off and
would not run while the trucks are parked. Electrical hook-ups for engine heaters would
be provided in the winter. If traiters will be parked for more than a few hours, the tractor
is unhooked and leaves the site.
— Some of the semi-trailers would have refrigerator units. However, Dawes wouid not be
handling perishable good such as produce and so tucks with refrigerator units would not
run them while they were at the site.
— There would not be any fueling stations or maintenance shops on site.
3. Existing operation Staff visited Dawes current location in Roseville two times and observed
the following:
• — On Thursday, March 11 at 4:00 PM there were 10 trailers parked at dock doors and additional
trailers parked on the site away from the building. (These trailers did not have any engines
running.) There was one truck backing up to a dock and in the next 15 minutes two more
trucks arrived on site. (These trucks had their engines running.)
— On Monday, March 25 at 8:00 the business was closed. There were approximately 10 trailers
parked at dock doors and other trailers parked on the site away from the building. One
parked truck was running and had its lights on.
4. The site plan The pian shows a 27,740 square foot buiiding. It would be 294' long on the side
facing Fairview and 93' deep. It wouid be 28'-5" tall. The building would have a small office on
the south end but most of the building would be for storing and handling goods. The building
would have 21 overhead doors for large trucks on the west side (facing away from Fairview) and 5
doors for smaller, local trucks on the north side (these wouid be visible from the street). Access
would be provided using rivo existing driveways on Fairview. The site also has access from an
existing driveway on Prior.
5. Required findings Section 62.108(c) of the Zoning Code says that in "order to approve the
site plan, the planning commission shall consider and find that the site plan is consistent with" the
following:
(a) The city's adopted comprehensive plan and development or project plans for sub-areas of the
city.
The City's recently adopted Land Use Plan supports "compatible mixed use". The site plan is
not compatible with the adjacent residential neighborhood. The plan could be made more
• compatible by closing the existing driveways on Fairview so that trucks must use Prior and
installing sound barriers.
The Land Use Plan also says the City should "consider alternatives such as special
restrictions on large trucking firms."
� G
The draft District 11 Plan supports steps to mitigate the impact of the Burlington NoRhen
intermodal freight yard which is located '/z mile to the north. Taking steps to mitigate the
impact of this site would be consistent with that.
(b) Applicable ordinances of the City of Saint Paul. •
The site plan does not meet the minimum required setback along Fairview: the required
setback for the buiiding is 7'-5" and the proposed site plan shows a setback of 6'.
There is a question about whether Fairview Avenue can be used as a truck route. Staff is
reviewing this with Public Works and the City Attorney's office and will have more information
at the public hearing.
There is a question about whether the noise from trucks wouid exceed the maximum levels
established in the City's noise ordinance. Staff is recommending that a noise study be done
to determine if mitigation, such as noise barriers, is needed to meet these noise limits.
"fruckirtg facilities are a permitted use in an I-1 zoning district and the site plan meets all other
applicable ordinances.
(c) Preservation of unique geologic, geographic or historically sign�cant cha�acterisfics of the city
and environmentally sensitive areas.
The site plan is consistent with this finding. The site is a paved parking lot on industrial
property and the surrounding area is a residentiai neighborhood.
The neighborhood has environmental concerns about air pollution from existing truck traffic
on the site and the additional fra�c that this facifify woufd generate. Staff is not aware that the
site is in violation of any air quality regulations but is contacting the MPCA to confirm this.
(d) Protection of adjacent and neighboring properties through reasonable provision for such •
matters as surface water drainage, sound and sighf buffers, preservation of views, light and
air, and those aspects of design which may have substanfial effecfs on neighboring land uses.
The site pian is not consistent with this finding but can be modified so that it is consistent
— The residents in the area have complained in the past about truck traffic on Fairview. The
site plan calis for using the exisUng driveways on Fairview. This would increase the
amount of truck traffic on Fairview. The driveways on Fairview should be closed so tfiat
all trucks must use Prior Avenue. There is enough room behind the existing main building
for Wcks to get from Prior to the new building.
— Noise from trucks on the site would have a substantial effect on neighboring residential
land uses on Fairview and Minnehaha. A noise study by an acoustical engineer should
be required to determine if noise barriers are needed and if they are, how big they need to
be and where they should go. JLT is taiking about constructing another buiiding north ot
the truck transfer facility and this could act as a noise barrier if it was large enough and it
was for a use that did not generate a lot of additional noise.
(e) The arrangement of buildings, uses and facilities of the proposed development in order to
assure abutting property and/or its occupants will not be unreasonably affected.
The site plan is not consistent with this finding but can be modified so that it is consistent
— The arrangement of the driveways wiU increase traffic on Fairview Avenue. The existing
driveways shouid be closed so that trucks use Prior Avenue.
— The building is arranged so that most of the loading docks are on the west side of the
building and the building wili biock most of the noise from these docks from residents on •
Fairview. However, residents on Minnehaha will be hear noise from these docks unless
noise barriers are built. The building also has five docks on the north end of the building
close to Fairview and noise barriers are needed for these docks too.
30
(� Creation of energy-conserving design through landscaping and location, orientation and aq 'S a �
elevation of structures.
• The site plan meets current standards for energy conservation and is consistent with this
finding.
(g) Safefy and convenience of both vehicular and pedesfian traffic both within the site and in
relation to access streets, including tra�c circulafion features, the locations and design of
entrances and exits and parking areas within the site.
Public Works staff has reviewed the site plan and determined that the plan, including use of
existing the driveways on Fairview for the primary access to the truck facility, is safe and
consistent with this finding.
(h) The satisfactory availability and capacity of siorm and sanitary sewers, including soiutions to
any drainage problems in fhe area of the development.
There is adequate sewer available. The applicant has not prepared a detailed storm water
drainage plan yet. The site plan is consistent with this finding if a condition is added that a
drainage plan must be submitted to staff for approval.
(i) Suffcient landscaping, fences, walls and parking necessary to meet the above objectives.
The site plan is not consistent with this finding but can be modified so that it is consistent:
— Additional fences or walls should be constructed, if needed, to block noise to neighboring
houses.
— There is no iandscaping on the site now. The landscaping shown on the site plan should
• be increased by planting shrubs that grow at least 10' tali along the west side of the
building. Additional landscaping should be planted around the perimeter of the site where
ever noise barriers are required. The noise barriers should be setback 10' from the
property line to provide adequate room for landscaping.
Q) Site accessibi�ity in accordance with the provisions of the Americans with Disabilities Act
(ADA), including parking spaces, passenger loading zones and accessible routes.
The site plan is consistent with this finding if one additional handicapped accessible parking
space is provided.
(k) Provision for erosion and sediment control as specified in the "Ramsey Erosion Sediment
and Control Handbook."
The site pian does not show erosion or sediment control measures. A condition for approvai
of the site pian should be that an erosion and sediment control pian must be submitted to staff
forapprovai
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Based on findings 1-5, staff recommends that the site plan be
approved subject to the following conditions:
1. The property owner must close the two existing driveways on Fairview at his expense and
repiace with them with curb and boulevard so that all trucks coming to the trucking facility wouid
have to use Prior Avenue. in the future, if other uses are proposed on the site that would
generate Ievels of traffic consistent with the adjacent neighborhood, the City would consider
• permitting driveways on Fairview for these uses as long as the trucking facility did not have
access to Fairview.
2. The property owner must pay an acoustical engineer to do a noise study. The purpose of this
study would be to determine the ievels of noise that could be anticipated from the truck transfer
� �)
facility and to propose options for mitigating the noise.
3. Based ort ihe resulis ot the noise sur*rey, sound mitigation measures must be designed and
—constructed to ensure that the development conforms to City noise regulatio�s. .
4. The setback on Fairview must be increased to 10 feet to permit enough room for landscaping to
soften the appearance of the building. The setback must be pianted with shrubs that wiil get at
least 10 feet tall when mature to form a continuous row along the entire east side of the building.
5. Additional landscaping must be planted around the perimeter of the site where ever noise barriers
are required. The noise barriers must be setback 10' from the property line to provide adequate
room for landscaping.
6. A storm water management plan must be submitted to staff tor approval.
7. One additional handicapped accessibie parking space must be provided.
8. An erosion and sediment control plan must be submitted to staff for approval.
! '
•
r1
U
�1C
J'� i M r. wu��- re t e,., � J � k �c
'�Gsc re�ee� r eesvr"r`'`' ` h..�,�4 2�
PLfMN�� Ct71MlKtttiG�'� cr�'
STAFF RECOMMENDATION FOR JLT/DAWES TRUCK FACILITY �� P «'� t�
Revised 3/26/99 j-{ cs�� ��] c+ - S�
• `l
Staf� r2commends that the site plan be approv=d subject to th� foilowing condiYions:
1. Driveways The nortn drivewa/ on Fairview must be clos°d and the south drive�aay must be
wid=ned as d2termined by Public Works to handle large trucks.
2. Sound barriers Sound mitigation measures must be designzd and construct2d to ensure that-the
dev=lopment conforms to City noise regulations. If wails ara rzquired for sound barriers, they must be
in place before the building is occupied. If another new building wilt act as a sound barrier, work mus!
begin on that buiiding beforz the trucking building is occuoied.
3. Truck idling Truck engines must be turned ofi wfienever trucks are at the docks or on standing on
the site waiting to get to a dock.
4. Parking on adjacent streets Trucks using this site may not park on Fairvew or Minnehaha.
5. Hours of operetion Hours of operation must be limited to between 6 AM and 12 midnight.
6. Setbacks and landscaping The setback on Fairview must be increased to 10 feet to permit
enough room for landscaping to soften the appearance of the building. The setback must be planted
with shrubs that wiil get at least 10 feet tail when mature to form a continuous row along the entire
east side of the building.
Additional landscaping must be planted around the perimeter of the site where ever noise barriers are
required. Noise barriers or other new bui4dings must be setback 10' from the property line fo provide
• adequate room for landscaping.
7. Storm water plan A storm wat2r management plan must b2 submitted to staff for approval.
8. Accessible park+ng One additiona4 handicapped accessib(e parking space must be provided.
9. Erosion and sediment control An erosion and sediment control pian must be submitted to staff for
approval.
\ J
33
�LTGROUP INC.
739 Vandalia Street • St. Paui, MN 55114 (651) 641-1111 •(651) 641-1244 Fa•
����
April 19, 1999
Peter W. Wazner
Assistant City Attorney
City of Saint Paul
400 City Hall & Court House
15 W. Ketlogg Boulevard
St. Paul, MN 55102
RE: Project: Dawes Trucking @ Minnehaha and Fairview Avenues
Dear Mr. Warner:
After the last committee meeting of the Plannin� Commission I thou�ht it advisable to •
share our thoughts with you in re�ard to the issues that have arisen.
It must be noted again that our plan certainly conforms with both the letter and the
spirit of the zoning of the property. We are not askin� for variance; but instead others
seem to be requesting a chan�e in the types of uses allowed on this site and in the
area.
As owner of approximately 2,000,000 sq. ft. of industrial property in the Midway, we
certainly are familiar with the kinds of activities that occur here on a daily basis.
While this particular tenant is a"trucking company", it must be noted that
distribution companies in the area often have more truck traffic than might be seen
from Dawes Truckin�.
In regard to Fairview Avenue being a truck route or not, we find it almost amusing to
observe that this particular debate can only be described as what it must have been
like to watch medieval theolo�ians arguin� about how many an�els could dance on
the head of a pin. Or, perhaps, Bill Clinton explainin� the meanin� of "it."
The fact is tnxcks drive regularly on Fairview Avenue. There are si�ns that clearly
mark it as a truck route. (We will provide the pictures if someone cares.) City of St.
Paul attorney, Mr. Matt Pfhol, has told us it is a truck route. To our knowled�e the •
City has never attempted to re�ulate the trucks on Fairview Avenue goin� north from
� �Y
c�,�,
• University Avenue. Perhaps someone can show us that attempt? Candidly, we find it
duplicitous to su�gest we cannot use Fairview Avenue for trucks. What will the plan
be for our immediate nei�hborin� businesses that re�ularly use trucks today on
Fairview Avenue?
But, someone minht say this new use will create an undesirable amount of new truck
traffic on Fairview Avenue. The truth is that with a smaller buildin� like this there is
no way an inordinate amount of new traffic could be created. There has also been a
down ri�ht misrepresentin� implication that trucks wil] be "weavin�" and "windin�°
their way through nei�hborhood streets. There is as much chance of that as there is of
having truck traffic on Summit Avenue.
As is so often the case, perhaps some people should pause, catch their breath and
rethink what their real problems are. In our view, trucks backing in perpendicular to
Fairview Avenue (as is the case on Fairview Avenue) poses a much bigger safety
hazard. In addition, a few weeks a�o we cooperated with authorities who used a
second story location in one of our buildin�s to observe and arrest suspects due to a
significant dru� violation across the street on Minnehaha. While not having heard
from the neighborhood on that score, we will say "you're welcome" in advance.
• Sound Abatement — we find it interestin� that select commission members have found
• the project Q,�v_ of violatin� sound ordinances prior to the buildin� and business
havin� yet to be open. Where is the fairness in that position? If the tenant should be
in violation of noise ordinance, they shouid be treated as any other business in St. Paul
and appropriate measures should be taken. Where does this guilty before openin�
come from? In point of fact, this business does not test jackhammers. They have a
small fleet of modern equipment and have been a law-abiding business.
• Subdivision of Parcel — we were astounded by the suggestion from one member who
said that trucks should only enter from Prior because we were out of line
(paraphrasing) in our concern over future marketing to other tenants and our ability to
spiit the parcel if need be for financin� purposes, etc.
I would ask that member if he owned a I S-acre parcel in the middle of the Twin Cities
would he want that risht taken away from him? I could believe this suggestion
coming from someone with a partisan point of view. From an appointed position of
responsibility in seein� that property rights are upheld as part of a commissioner's
duty it is astonishin�.
We have been a slight bit surprised that there has been less than full support for our
continuin� improvements to the parcel. We have spent millions and millions of dollars on
this parcel and this new buildin� follows that course. When Bob Kessler came out to
discuss the project, he did so in a professionai and rational manner. I did not say he is
• squishy cheesecake. Rather he displayed savvy and poise. I have since leazned from a
respected peer, Scott Tankenhoff of Hillcrest Development (whose company has made
sizable contributions to the improvement of St. Paul) that he also felt Mr. Kessler did a
3� �
good job on his most recent project. We were willin� to listen to Mr. Kessler's .
suggestions in order to meet time requirements of the tenant. Those timings are now in
jeopardy. We understand we had staffs' recommendation and now we are unclear as to
where we stand. We would be willing to meet one last time to brin� needed clarity if
anyone desires. This includes the issue of a sound barrier.
We stand ready to discuss these matters with any and all participants.
Thank you for your attention.
Sincerely,
Jerr�� y "Ffoo�
cc: Commission Members
Council Member Benanav
City Staff
Mayor's Office
District 11
•
u
,z�r_iur �aro��ttv
3�
RPR-13-1999 12�18 FIRST RSSET MRNRGEMENT
612 973 1061 P.02i08
/�� �� `
- t
SIERRA CLUB
North Star Chapcec
779 Clayland Street
St. Paul, MN 55109
612-973-1145 (daytime/messages)
651-69?-9303 (home/messages)
Apri1 13, 1999
Mayor Notmari COleman
City of St. Paul
15 west Kellogg Boulevard
St. Paul, MN 55101
RE: RequAat to MaYOr'� Office for Environmental Assessment
JL'f Truck Trans£er Site Proposal (Minnehaha e Faizview
Av¢niles )
Dear Mayor Coleman:
ihe JT.2 Truck i:ansfer Site Proposal fails four of your most important and often-
stated development tests:
• 11 job creation
2) tax base
3) affordable housing
4) neighboshood preservation
•
and rejuvenation.
The Eocus of the Sierra Club's concern, o£ couzse, is #9--the neighborhood
environmental and a.uality-of-life issues.
In an eEfott to ensure thac the City cbtains sufficient information to make an
appropriate decision on the truck t=ansfer site proposal, the Sie=ra Club recently
sponsozed a neighbozhood-based petition effo=t. The petition (co v attached)
requested the Minnesota Environmental Quality Board (EQS) to initiate an Environment
Assessment Wozksheee (EAw) with tegard to the proposed site.
The EQB rejected the EAw petition on the basis of the exemption for structures
measuzing less than 100,000 square feet of intezioz sguare Eootage. The pzoposed
£acility consists of outdoor loading platforms and paved truck bays in conjunction
with intetior temporary scoraqe spaee. Most of the environmental and neighborkood
issues, however, revolve around the proposed facility's outdoor activities_ Since
this project falls outside the Minnesota EQB's jurisdiction, we are bringing this
maCter to the City's attention-
The 393 petition siGnatures, obtained by neighborhood volunteers, cleaxly indicate
the neighborhood's overwhelming endorsement of the need for such an environmental
assessment addressing the following issue�:
a1 Safety concerns because the truck entrance and exit driveways on Faizview vill
cau5e a significantly increasad traffic hazard £or neigkborhood childzen and
Fairview auto traffic;
b) Ext=eme noise pollution caused by truck engines and backup signals dusing the
"anticipated" operating hours of 'I a.m. to midnight two weeknights and 7 a.m. to 9
p.m• three weeknights, plus some weekend hours;
c) ziaht eollution due to powerful bzight lights shining f=om the site into Faizvie*.r
a.venue bedrooms at night;
d) Pollution of the visual environment in this residential neiqhborhood;
e) Water pollution Prom runo££ of hydrocarbons and detergents used to clean
pavements;
� 37
APR-13-1999 12�19 FIRST ASSET MRNAGEMENT 612 973 1061 P.93i08
f) Increased air pollutioa caused by additional tzuck tra£Eic to a site wichin 12
blocks of Snelling � University, the most polluted site in Minnesota, and running of
diesel tzuck eagines while parked at the sice_
The petition siynatuses also teetify to the signezs' belief that the City wi11 be
responsive to their concerns. In fact, many of the 343 adult siqners also siqned
sepatate, unofficial petition sheets liscing their minor children! It is czitieally
important to the future of this unique neighborhood, and 'to ouz childzen, that the
City be provided with the requested envizonmencal data.
We are therefore now askina that Your of£iee perform an environmental aa3essment
of the p=oposed truck tsansfer site develonmene pro�ect• Specifically, we are
asking the City to perEoxm an envizonmencal assasssene, to inc2ude the in£ormation
speei£ied on the attached YROPOSED ENVIIiONb�L7Tl�L ASSESSMENT.
The Twin Cizies Gioup of the Sierra Club also understands "the bigqer pictuse"--the
economic and political and economic context Within which developmenL issaes must be
decided. we wou2d therefo:e also like to present our views regarding the £irst
three -- eeonomic -- issues in the lisc at the beginning of thi� letter: 1) job
creation; 2) cax base; and 3) afforflable housing.
We be2ieve the proposed truck trans£er sice has litcle economic vaS.ue for St. Paul
in tezms of eichet tas base enhancement o= job ereation, and threatens both public
safety and the survival of this valuable affordable-houeinq neiqhk�orhood.
Although chis Rropezty is not wzder port Authority jurisdiction and is not
requesting Cicy Pundinq, nonetheless ue would like Lo compare the Authority's
Sxownfields Neiqhborhood Redevelopment Criteria'S economic quidelines. FirSt,
add=essing enhancement of the tax base, the Port Authozity iequires that the
facility constitute a•'value-added liyhz mznufacturing" use. TI:is truck ZransEer
site is a freiqhti transportation faeility to be used Dy independenc truckers, aot a
manufacturing facilicy. Second, the pozt Authority's guideline for iob creaiion ie
"at leasc one job per 1,000 squa=e feec of buildirg spaee," with "wage rates ac
least S9 pe: hour," With 7D5 of nev hires consiszing of St. Paul residents.
Although loadir.g and unloading freighc is labor intenszve, such work is mose likely
to be hired on a casual basis through "tmmp" ager.cies. Tke proposed truck freight
trans£er site wi11 not gene:ate anywhere near the 27 new, full-time, living-crage
sta£f jobs chat the Port Authority would require iP this pzopezty were a zeclaimed
brownfield.
The legally apalicable City developmenc critezia, of course, are set fozth in the
St. Paul Comprehensive Land Use P2an. both the new city plan (approved by the Cicy
Council and pending approval by the Mecropolican council), and the preceding plan
c,hich is still in effect, requite developm.ent to be compatible witk the euiroundinq
neighborhood. The new city Land Use Y1an prohibics che constnzction of any new
truck traasfer sites anywhere in St. Paul. It is thu3 obvious that City land use
policy t:nequivocallY requires compacibilitV with the existinq nei4�orhood.
ih¢ Sierra Club has a sincere concern £os preeesvinq the quality of life in this
extraordinary urban residentia2 neiqhborhood. This established residential
neighborhood, in the Neue21 Park area o£ Hamline-Miduay, is a striking exam�le of a
safe, stable, multizacial neighbozhood with a mix of economi-c level3 and housing
types, plus many of the resources and amenities that urban planz:ers vould plan in an
urban neighborhood iE they Were p2anning a neighbozhood zoday: _public and private
elementary 9CI100�9� churches, parks, playgrounds, zecreation centers, bus routes,
and locally-owned teLail stores and eatinq establishments, plus a public 2ibraty and
nationally known university, 2nd czicically scazce af£ordable housinq.
Two days before the Planninq Cemmission hearinq, we were excited and encouzaqed by
your public statemenc emphasizing that maYntaining and expanding the supply of
affordable housing in St. Paul is a top iiayoral priority. The vast 7najo=ity of
homes are owner-occupied, and the vasc majority are we11 saintained. We know the
r;r..t,�� t,;nr .an�rA fnr nvr nr;nfihorh�nd. 'oeeause it Lewazds us Lesidents each year
estate ta:c¢s, howevet, many smalle.c ot olfler homes s:ill fall into the "a£fo=dable
categoty for blue-collar wotkers, veterans, younq families, and empty nestess who
appzeciace che many advantaqes of living in Sc. Paul.
i
•
•
�
� IQ
APR-13-1999 12�19 FIRST ASSET MANRGEMENT
612 973 1061 P.04i08
�q -S2 `-�
The �roposed tzuck transEer sice, bordered by £a:rviem ar.d Minnehaha Avenues--CWo
• o1d resicential streets--is inLrinsically not r.eiqh'corhood-friendly. Noise, air
pollution, and pu'alic sa£ety issues together eoastitute a serious, i�i.nent threac
to the health of neighbors and the ecoaomic h¢alth of the neighborhood.
Noise: The "anticipated" houzs of operation aL :he proposed site estend £roia 7 a.m.
till 9 p.m. on so:,�e weeknights and ti12 :cidr.ig�t on oeh¢rs, plus some weekead hours,
raith no scaced closing or "quiet hour�." Neighbors on Fair+iew, Minaehaha, and
nearby streets will have at most 7 hours o: res�ice on seleetez weel:nights from the
zepeated high-decibel backuo signals; those who vork gsaveyard shift xill have
little if any rest. Many homes lack air co.^.ditioaing ar.d must leave vindovs open
durinq warm weathe=.
Accordinq to the National Instituces of Health, lack of adequace sleec can cause oz
aggravate ocher health problems. ic also causee children and adults to experience
difficulties in memory and concencration, thus zdr•ersely affecting learninq, job
performance, and safecy. The addition o£ lancseaping and some noise-baxziet walls,
as recommended in the Planning cecsnis>ion's Staf` tteport, would have no ePfect on
noise £rom the trucks coming and going on the street; they would also do little to
eff2ctively reduce the impact of hiq%�-decibel backup signal noise during the
facility's long and lace hours of operation.
Air Pollution: The sice will also brinq increased air pollucion, in an area that
already has the highesti level of air pollution in the 'hrin Cities. Othe=
environmental concerns include runo£f and visual pollucion, which are both cized in
the Planning Conmiseion Scaff Feport. The '•big picture" also includes add.itional,
unspecified facilities that zhe ownEr has planned for other porcior.s of this site,
entailing siill more traffic and pollution.
Safetv, however, is our primary concern. It is one thing to say "Not in my
backyard," and quite another to say "DOn'i zun over our chiLdren!"
•
•
As many residents reminded the Plannir.g Commission ac itis Mazch 26 public hearing,
the proposed truck freight trans£er site is directly onposite 2 overwhelminqly
T-nT'
worse,
The safety issue is paramountl Peak hours of ooeration--in the a£ternoon--eoincide
danqerously wish after-school child pedestrian traffic to and £rom zhe neighborhood
grocery store at Minnehaha and Fairview, homes and in-home daycare centers in
adjacent and nearby blocks, Newe11 Park Recreation Center at Fairview and HewiCt,
the public playqround ac Clayland and Chelton Streets, and the public library at
Minnehaha and 5nelling Avenues. Even if the child's route does not cross Fairview,
we all know that chi.ldren may unexpectedly rur:, skate, skateboard or zide bicycles
or tricycles into the street.
Neighboss voiced concezns chae the pro�osed sem:.tzailes truck entxazce and exit
driveways on Fairview would soon necessitate the widening of Fairview Avenue and
consewent loss of the boulevazd ("ttee-lawn"), making such danqer to children even
more likely. Residents also testifiec' that evea nov, many trucks are illegaily
using Fairview Avenue north o£ Minnehaha--past Nevell Park, going into Pierce-Butler
Route--and residential sice-streets as tzuck through xoutes. 2his illegal practice
can only be expected co increase if a czuck fze;.qhc cransfer facility is built at
Fairview and Minnehaha Avenues.
Tn conclusion, neighborhood residents and the 1oca1 5ierra Club believe that the
planned cruck transfer site will not confer ar.y signifieant economic oz fiscal
benefits on St. Paul, and that 7.ts a�proval vould spe11 danger and neighborhood
detezioration, cempromising Hamline-A?idway as a i:nique, sa£e, af£ordable,
multiculLUra1 urban neiqhborhood. Even under optimal conditions, with the Planning
Cemmission Staf£ Report's recommended mzti.gat:r.g improvements, che approval of this
particularly unsuitable project by the City vould threaten public safety and
�
� 35
qPR-13-1999 12�20 FIRST RSSET MRNRGEMENT
PROPOSED ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESMENT
JLT Truck Transfer Si�e
Minnehaha and FairvieW Avenues
1. Description:
Give a complete description of the proposed
ancillarv facilities.
Emphasize construction and operation methods
that wi11 cause physical manipulation of the
produce wastes.
612 973 1061
project and
P.05i08
and features
environment or
Indicate the timing and duration of construction activities,
2. Permits and Approvals Required_
List all known local, state, and federal permits, approvals,
and funding required.
3. Land Use:
Describe current and recent past land use and development on
the site and on adjacent laads.
Discuss the compatibility of the project with adjacent and
nearby land uses; indicate whether any potential conflicts
involve envirorunental natters.
Identify any potential environmental hazard due to past land
uses, such as soil contamination or abaadoned storage tanks.
4. Water Quality - Surface Water Runof£:
Compare the quantity and quality of the site runoff before
and after the project.
Describe methods to be used Lo manage and/or treat runoff.
Identify the route(s) and receiving water bodies for runoff
from the site; estimate the impact of the runofz on the
quality of the receiving waters.
5. Tra£fic and Public Sa£ety:
Estimated total Average Dai1y Traffic (ADT) qenerated:
Hours oP operation: w2ekdays
Weekend
Estimated maximun peak hour traffic:
Timing/Hours of peak hour operation:
For each affected road, indicate the ADT and the
directional distribution of traffic with and without the
project.
Provide an estimate of the imgact on traffic congestion on
the affected roads and describe any traffic improvements
which wi11 be necessary.
?�ddress any traffic-related public safety concerns.
Existing parking spaces:
Nuinber of parking spaces added:
Identify any possible toxic or other hazardous materials to
be transfered or stored.
r 1
L J
•
•
� •
APR-13-1999 12�21 FIRST ASSET MRNAGEMENT
7. Dust, Odors, and Noise:
Wi11 the project generate dust, odors, or noise during
construction and/or operation?
If yes, describe the sources, characteristics, duration/time
of day, quantities, intensitv, and any proposed mitigative
measures. Also identify the locations of sensitive
receptors (inclvding hvmen popvlations) in the vicinity and
estimate the impacts on these receptors.
°lq -S 3L1
Describe safety measures and procedures be taken to avoid or
• minir.:i2e hazards with regard to such materials.
Describe measures to ensure site security.
6. Vehicle-relat2d Air Emissions
Provide an estimate of the project's traffic generation on
air quality, including carbon monoxide levels, including
peak hour and seasonal levels.
Discuss the effect of traffic improvements or other
mitigation measures on air quality impacts.
•
�
�
8. Parks, Recreation Areas, and Playgrou,
Identify any designated parks, recrea
playgrounds on or in psoxi,mity to the
Describe the resource(s) and identify
impacts on the resource{s>.
612 973 1061 P.66i08
as:
ion areas, or
site.
any anticipated
Describe any measures to be taken to minimize or avoid
adverse impacts.
9_ visual Impact
will the project create adverse visual impacts?
(Exa�-nples include glare from intense lights and large
visible plumes from cooling towers or exhaust stacks.)
Describe any measures to be taken to minimize or avoid
adverse impacts.
10_ Compatibilitv With Plans:
Is the project subject to an adopted local comprehensive
land use plan or any other applicable land use, traffic,
water, or resource managemant plan of any local, regional,
state, or federal aqency?
If ves, identify the applicable plan(s), discuss the
compatibility of the project with the provisioris of the
plan(s), and explain how any conflicts between the project
and the plan(s) will be resolved.
If no, explain.
il. Impact on Infrastructure and Public Services:
wi1Z new or expanded utilities, roads, other infzastructure,
or public services be required to serve the project or
provide for public health or safety?
x
� ��
qPR-13-1999 12�21 FIRST RSSET MRNAGEMENT 612 973 1061 P.07/68
If yes, describe the new or additional
infrastructure/services needed, including any infrastructure •
that is a"connected action" with respect to the project.
12. Related Developments; Cumulative Impacts:
Are future stages of this development planned or likelv?
If yes, briefly describe future stages, their timing,
and plans for environmental review.
Ts this project a subsequent stage of an earlier project?
Zf yes, briefZy describe the past development, its
timing, and past environmental review.
Is other development anticipated on adjacent lands or
outlots? If yes, briefly describe the development and
its reZationship to the present project.
If any of the above are marked Yes, discuss any cumulative
environmental impacts resulting from this pro7ect and the
other development.
13. Other Potential Environmental Impacts:
If the project may cause any adverse environmental impacts
which were not addressed by items (1} �hrouqh (12), identify
and discuss them here, alonq with any proposed mitigation.
14. Summary of Issues:
List any impacts and issues identified above that may
require further investigation before the project is •
commenced. Discuss any alternatives or mitigative measures
that have been or may be considered for these impacts and
issues, including those that have been or may be ordered as
permit conditions.
# #
r 1
U
��$' y2.
RPR-13-1999 12�21 FIRST ASSET MRNAGEMENT
612 973 1061 P.08i08
�a -s a-y
•
\ J
•
constituce 2 taking, dimi.nishing both che peaceable enjoyment o£ our homes azd our
propercy values.
we implore the Cicy co exercise a11 cue care to see that this r.eighborhood and its
quality of life are preserved. Tne first step, we believe is for the City to
conduct a thorouqn, eomprehensive environmental/saPety assassment including a1I
cancerns a�+dressed in L'ne attached "Proposed Enviromaental Assessment.° we are
askinq that this environmental study be compleced and reviewed, includinq a public
commer.t period, before any approval is qiven or permi.ts gzanted for the develop�ent
of the proposed sice.
Please send us a copy of this report {oz any ocher envisonmental, economic, or
neighborhood impact studies) immediately upon ics release to the publie. We aze
specifically requesting also that the Cicy provide a public coa¢aent period oE at
least 30 days following p�blication of the report.
Thank you foz your atcention_
Sincerely, �
"V' � `
Ronald G. Willia s
r�d� �
Amelia Ruth xummel
Twin Cities �roup sierra Club
Attachments
1. Yroposed JL2 Tzucking Transfer Site EAW Petition
2. Proposed Environmenta2 Assessm¢nt
ec: councilmember Jzy Benanav
Couneil President Dan Sostrem
councilmember Jezry Slakey
Councilmember Chsistopher Coleman
couneilmembez Mike Harris
Councilmember Jim Reiter
Councilmember Hachy Lantry
Gladys Morton, Chair, St. Paul Planning Commission
Kathy Loue, Hamline Midway Coalition
Pastor Greg Renstrem, Hamline United Methodist Church
Pastor Tsu Ker Yang, Y.amline United Methodist church
Ginny Yingling, North Star Chapcer Sierra club
Bi11 Clap, Esq.
� y3
rnTOi a aa
�� � �5�. ��.,��
1Vorth Scar Chapcer
779 Clayland Street
Sc. Pau1, MN 55104
/�Pril I.Z 1999
Gladys Motton
Ptanning Commission
City of Sc. Paul
City Hall
St. Paut, MN SS10i
Dear Ms. Morton:
RPR-12-1999 16�24 FIRST ASSET MRNRGEMENT
612 973 1061 P.02i09
Our peciuon to thc Environmental Quality Board (EQB} regarding rhe JLT Tiucking Transfez Faciliry has
been denied by the EQB, as explained in thc auached letter to Mayor Coleman.
In its stcad, we are ccquestiag that the Ciry Planning Commission recommend that the Ciry perform thc
attached "Proposed Envtzonmental Assessment " Please advise your Neighbnrhood Commiace of this
maaer before iu'Iliesday momi�,e meeting. Alw, please send copies of this conespondence and
attachmenrs to all of your Commission members.
Thank you for your attention to tlus mattrr.
SincerclY. � .
``61,�,o.SLa.` � . C..l ,� �-�-,.�..z
Ronaid G. Williatns
Twin Ciues Group Siccra Club
cc: Mayor Narmaa Coleman
Council Presidcnt Dan Bosnom
Caunalmember Jay Benanev
Counciimember 7erry Blakey
Councilmember Christopher Coleman
Councilmemba Mike Harris
Councilmembcr Jim Reiter
COUncilRlCi6j7ei K3Lhy Tan�'S'
Kathy Loue, Hamline Midway Coalition
Pastor Crreg Rensiro� �1ine United Methodist Church
Fasror Tsu Ker Yang. Hamline United Methodist Church
Bill Klap. Esq.
•
•
•
�' Y h
MRR-3a-15.� _��57 WILDe.4 RESE�RCH oti_ �G% 4523 P.01i2:
R9 -s a`1
�
Mazch 30, 1999
Gladys Morton, Chair
Saint Paul Planning Commission
15 West Kellogg Boulevard
Saint Pau(, Minnesota 55102
Dear Ms. Morton_
I am wTiting as a concemed neighbor about the proposed truck transfer facility that 3LT would
like to build on Fairview Avenue just south of Minnehaha Avenue.
I oppose this use of the property for three main reasons: traffic, air quality and noise.
These are not new concems for our neighborhood. We aze ciose to Snelling Avenue, University
Avenue, the Burlington Northem Santa Fe �uck-�ain operation, the fairgrounds, the classic caz
gatherings on weekends. We already absorb more than our shaze of Saint Pau1's tr�c
congestion, exhaust and noise. The cumulative effect leaves us especially vulnerable to negative
effects from a siguficant increase in uvcks entering and leaving our neighborhood every day.
I understand and respect the owner's interest in getting a good value for his investment in this
properiy. The stakes aze very high far me and my neighbors as we11. Por us, this is not just a
question of increasing the retum on one profit center in a large real estate holding. We have
� poured our savings and our time and caze and pride into our homes. We work hazd to keep up
and improve our houses, yards and streetscapes.
I am just one of ihe many paople who thought our neighborhood was worth investing many,
many hours of personal time into a neighborhood planning process so that we could preserve and
improve our quality of life, making our own local contribution to the future vitality of Saint Paul.
We did this because we believed the city would support and value our neighborhood voice.
We aze not a vrealihy neighborhood but we woik hazd to be a good, strong neighborhaod. We
support local businesses, keep up our homes and yards and live respectfully alongside neighbors
who aze different from us. But these accomplishmenu aze fragile and aze under increasing
pressure.
I believe that in the long term, Saint Paul would reap greater benefits and prevent more problems
by showing support for our neighborhood on this issue, rather than by allowing this resident-
unfriendly use of an industrial property that is located where people live.
Sinc�ely, . ' ( n
C i, _.�.r�
�, �,�__.
Ginger Hop �
•
1728 Blair Avenue
Saint Paul, Minnesota 55104
REGEIVED
MAR 3 0 1999
ELANNING & ECONOMIC DEVEIAPMENT
ibiy L TOTRL P.01
TS- "I
03/29/1959 23'°0 6127211649 K�NNE�Y TR?ti5 La{E PA6c 02
t�1�R 3 0 1�99
RECE��ED
Mazch 29, 1999
�
Ms. Gladys Morton
Chsir, St. Paul Planning Commission
15 West Kellogg Blvd
$t. Paut, MTv� 55102
Dear Ms. Morcon,
��jy�i&ECONOM�C DEYELO�ti1�
It was with regret and constemation that I heard that JLT, owners of the property
at Fairview and Minnehahe Avenues are planning to lease it out as a trucking hub.
Futther, access and egress to the property is to be on Fairview Avenue due to the wishes
of the owner. although there aze residences directly aczoss the street.
I have been a resident of this neighborhood since I moved to St. Paul six years
ago. I came to this neighborhood because my son and his family ]ive here. I have
become active in local affairs and recently bought a house here. When I first moved in,
the neighborhood was not rated very well compared to other areas. I have watched it
change; people here care Many btock clubs have been formed in recent yeazs, most
people care about their property and, importandy, property prices have risen 15 percent in
the last year. 'fhic does not occcu ifthe area is not perceived as viabie.
i was unable to attend the heazing last week, but know you heard many residents
cite their concerns about the use of this property, so I'll not repeat them. I DO caze about
the quality of life here, especially as my gandchildren, and a lot of other children, live
here. t atso understand that the Pozt Authority has set certain criteria for the use of
property; which does not include tcuck uansfer areas.
Usin¢ this property for truck transfer will not add value to the neighborhood, will
not creaze many jobs, does not help the tax base, and certainly wiil creaie many problems
for the neighborhood. It is also not the hzghest and best use of the property. I am certain
that the owner can find better use for it, if he tries. Housing units for the e(derly who
wish to stay here aze certainly an option and much needed.
I do hope chat the Planning Commission arrives at a solution that is win-win, and
that the neighborhood does not lose out due to the des'ues of a single person.
i
��S'n elyc�
Iiamet J. �ednick
1783 W. Thomas Avenue
St. Paul, MN 55104 •
� Yt
From: iom M�nn^r Fw (fi51j659-91q Voica �651)fi59-911) To� Connniss�oner G�aAys Motlon at rJO Mr Tcm E¢ac� CM�e 1 oR Suntlay. Marc� 29. 1999 I:0) i9 F.0
�� -S 2-�j
•
Swida��, �farch 23. 1999
Commissioner Glad��s \forton
St. Paul Plaivun� Conuuission
1? F�'est I�ello�e Boule�'ard
St. Paul. \I\ ?�102
F_�Z: Go Tom Bzacli. 266-9099
Dear Coitunissioner \torton:
Thatilc }�uu for tha opporhmitt to spaak to flia Plamiins Connnissiou durine �•our puUlic
hearin� last Frida}�. I am sure it �ti'as oU�'iuus that I am nut accustomed to speaking Uefore
committaas such as this. I appraciata }�our patiauca as I shuubkd to m� puint.
I am ��'ritiu� to } ou to remind of the tremendotts uuportanez ti� e placa on tlia issue of the
proposed JLT dz��alopment at 625 Fain•ia�v A�e. I faal our commm�ih is 1 modal for tUe
cih of St. Paul. Tlia prassuras oY da�'elopmant in our araa ara da�radine our community to
the point �vhere ��'e arz a(1 considering li��iu� altemnti� es outside the Cih� Of St. Paul. I
aut surz t�oti t� ill agrae that tliis �4'ould Ue a loss to the cirv as a ��'(iola. \�"e solicit }'our
support attd t11z support of tl�a Pla�witlg Committaa in ancoura�ine JLT to radirzct this sitz
uito a partnersl�ip �cith our neighUorliood that w•ill beuefit SLT uid our neigiiborhuod.
Our ueiohborhood is a di� arse ueiohborhood. h1y� strzat nlona iucludas fmnilias of sevaral
• afluiic backeirounds, Eldarl�� parsons. �"atarans, a collasa professor. a Ia�F}�ar, a fork lift
operator, tnick dri�'er, euginears, tnanaeers, tneat pacl:er etc... R'e all ��ork toaather to
impru��e Uie ueiohborhood utd participlta in n�iol�borhood watch prosrlms pl:mrino
flo« ars aud maintauiiug cotmnon araas. Tha sa��ing "it takas a couuuu»ih� to rnisa a
child" is nut lost to fear iu our neiahUorhovd. �'e are a"couuuuuih'� in tlie h�aditional
sansa, ,y�at fouiid a Ualluce with modem d1y proUlzms that pl�gua uiam� cih• couunuiuties
toda�•. Cla1r1�� our communih� neads to ba nurhirad 1nd dacaloped by tha cit�.• of St. Paul.
•
Our naiol�Uarhood has ahcaJ•s eneouragad busivass dacefopment. Eaeh y�aar ��e hava a
picnic. �Va al�ca}s im'ita businassas in tl�a <uea to attaud. Thosz tliat cntutot ara trelted to
UarUecue at ���ork. In man�• cases t�'a lia��e resolved mnn} disputes ���ith busiuesses ti��ithout
tlie nonnal confi•outations that go�anuuaut nuut fi�equantl}• mediata.
I undarstnnd fliat tlie plamune committee ma` lia��e little rzcoursa «hen a dz��eloper such
as JLT entars tha areua �vith a Izoal attihida tliat say's "Let's look at the facts•" and "the
nzighhor�l�ood's espectations doii t Yit zonina la�vs". C1ear14� I am not as ncquainted �vi8i
zoning laG�'s as JLT lppears to ba. Ho�ve�•ar, I thiiili it is clzar fliat JLT is not iuterastzd ui
thz ��alua tl�is neigh6orhvod Urings our cih�, a neigliUorhood vf �vhich «e 1re cei} proud.
Should «a facz loud uoisas uutil rivah�a uiidnight, I and mmn' of my naighbors «�ill Uegiu
to look for houseiue else�vliere. The brzlkup of our neiahUahood will no douUt result ui
an incrzase ai low-income rantal housnig, rlUier d�an tlie currant tuix of locv- to moderate-
uicome o«Yier -occupaut liousntg we currently enjdy. Tha cost to thz city for 8us sluft in
housmg «�ould be suUstaurial. The benefit to JLT would also be substantial, as it clearly
� �7
crom_ioinMi�+��°r Far..(551)659-91UVOice(S51)65 ToCOnimisslooerGaAysMOrtanatdoMr.TOmBeac� Paye2oRSunday.March2&199910ASlPU
��'ould ot�ar a ereat pool of lo�v-waga ��orkars ideal for tha industn� tha� proposa far tl�is �
sitz.
I sincaral�• liopa that JLT «ill joni us in fmd'ui� an altamatica usa for this sita. I faal flia
taam «ork approacli to ecouomic dac�elopuieut ui our arza has bean profitable to our
comnlunih�, iha cin�. and thz busuiesses in our arza. I solicit tha piaminie conunissivn to
rajact Uia cun proposal and eucouraQe JLT to bruiQ a ua�v proposal to tha tabla fliat
��'ill iucluda tha support of tha uaiehUorhood of wluch tha}� ���ish to bzcome a part.
Tl�oivas �Iu�dzr
76� Tahuu Street
St. Paul. �N » 10-4
•
�
� ��
-������� �N� �,���1u�;,�v �c��}�_� �l�,l'��
\����C`tl\1�:��� �T l�:n� �):� ��1,� _ �� r \Q.1�C�1 a,�4 1 g q q
�-�
� � .
\ o� �C,or�� mt��o^�`�
�r
n
U
�
� �1 U:�o� v� ,� �G �'�l �113� � U,hC_�
a� ����� C���-��� ��.���.�� ��.���� � Q.�`�
� �,`�o„�.` ��L� o� r��� `�0�� �"��.�wv..�; , a`��
�\�4^�� 1�v��� �.�.�: �) a�.p.� \��0'`�,� �;h 55 � U�� .
��'t�1 \�.�t��.�e, �w i�'��. ���.o. ��.3�� �.).'��, oh ��fi�-ha�.�,��
�i�,,��o�� Co��.� '� `�., �\ ,�,,'�,. � �,�, ��� mo�/
Ov.� 4.,���, �\ ��u�� t� � ���� '.� �--`�� � a,��.� � �,
\>\ ���o.,�� �-..,�,ti�,�,L W v��� . -c�.��
, �
�,�.� Y ��- ?����.U.>��� , �.� �1�„� ����m U.�. ,
� �a\ �>c� � o \�1«:��k� � y �'' �1�. S ��� V.�a,\S.�
�,`��.�., �z^�� ���- � ����, . ��� _�� a,� �: � �.; 0,�12, ��
��.�� . � .ca�Cc� o`����s � wo'U� �E C�a�k
v�a`���h �,��� ��c��.wv�l��'� . �� -l�c�.,��`� ��o��.t�
v� ��� v"�`�`��,, � ,c��. c " ��\`��
� �_�L��- ��.ti.`., \�.; ���� � —
����� ��i�� '�1`. f�\`��L�lc���:i. ��� `���}�, l �, \1� C�»\����
1Lp ��.�\\��C�. � �,\ `�.� Q..� \'�. .
�, � ��o.��` � c� ��.,'�,,�nc. I�;.fi, �J
�.� ��.r ..����vJ���. ...�,�� � a����� � ���� �v��
��� ern :� � ��.�.�c��t� C ��v �c4.,�. ��� �.�.Yc. ��
�� c�.�> �L , �.i`L�C�t� .�� h,ti`�, C,'���C� e�.� �n� cl _ U�� R�1R�
n� �.�s��Y�� , �r �.���� � �� , -�,.�L �t�cx2, ���.�' ��>v.��.�,c��
l�� �.�.��tZ• , � 0.�� �r. �.�� �ta �� - � ^��
�v'V;.�C�� ���.nl ����� 0.��- � �i �U.� �U.�� �� U�k' \N--
� '��'� 'C��� � -� .,��c�..�.0 � �.,�e��' � Cu�c� .������ !�
a-0.,�� �.'���.�, v�� ��. "
S o � �, c�- . , , \C�` ��-� r� ��9;�." �A
Z�,wvC�� �� C v I� C� �� ;�C� r
hov.�..�.�c���,,,r�,���� c��� _��,� ��� ��: .'.�T,��.�. C�.`c��� ;a► �.�,�,�c���Z�.
��v�.i, ��,�5..�..ti �, �� n���� h��� �,��.z�, �;�.�.��Yb� a� g,,:,�, ��
�.�....�v.sh�. ���l� '���...D��C�L. �-��S `b� i C�ioRA�; �0 ��
�\��.y uoNT \�� <A ��� 0 C= N y ��_ � r.
qq-S�y
� 59
iv.BT'CY7 25. 177� •
?lease Consider:
Increased noise pollution
Increased traffic
Lac�c cf routes to exit area
ail of t^.e aoove exist here. In; 1997 and 1998 a
trai2er stora;e area was at the same locatior..
�rucks were enterin� and exiting a� all hours. inis
�ade mucn noise pollution, caused �y hard 'cra{ing and
loud acceleration.
If trucks use �airvzew ;oin� ��iorth; a semapnore
would be �:eeded at P�:innehaha Avenue. In 1993 this cost
was �25,000.00. If goin� east on �',innehaha to 3r.ellin�,
t'r:ey er.t°r a^ already over used intersection.
Cur residents are much closer to tha propo�ed area
than t�.e resider�ts of B:vS? i�.idway Container Yard• `iheir
corplairts to noise nave been stron� in oppositioa ior •
ma^y years.
These homes were mostly built around 1910, so tney
have bee:� around lon�er tnan this business. �
We live in a
home ow;zed by the family from the time it was built.
�espectfully
Eu�er.e and �arbara Louden
1802 BZa�r nvenue
051-644-724
� �� n -�" � � f_ l
L `! � `<"�%?�z L � �/ C`
/
�G�� � ����
•
� So
i;R-29-0� �ON 15�1°
Chri;tine E. Olsen
1833 W. Nfinnchaha
S:. Paul, itiIIv 55104
I�larch 29, 1999
•
Gladys 1�foROn
Planning Commission
c/o Jean Birkhalz
1100 Cily Hall
25 W. 4 St.
St. Paul, MN 55101
Dear Ms. Morton:
PRT DuPPRTi�::tiT
FRK ti0. 612c257co:
RECEIVED
MAR 2 6 199�
E1.fiL'(NING & ECONOMIC DEYELOPMEPII
.�
� �S a-`{
I live across the street from the proposed Dawes Truck Temvnal. I am concerned about this proposed
facility and it's impact on the neighborhood.
Cathy Lue, from the HamlinaMidway Coalition, contacted me as soon as they knew about the proposed
plan. I attended a meeting with JLT (Jerry Trooien and 7oe Meyers), Cathy Lue, and several other members
of the community on February 17 at TLT's offices. At this meeting fhe plan was presenled and concerns
fi�oin the neighbors discussed. Those conccrns includcd light, sound, air pollutioi�, a�id tralT'ic. Tl�c piaci
sliowed the use ofFairview instead ofPrior. From conversations Cathy had with Tom Beech she,knew that
JLT was told not to use Fairview. The ne'sghbor5 asked JLT to not use Fairview and to consider soma
other use for ilus site. Mr. Trooien's response to al1 of this was that he was the owner and, since it was
zoned industrial, he could do as he wanted. He also totd us he had a signed contrad with Dawes for the
trucking facility and that this was a done deal.
Dawes would be doing for the community.
A second mce[ing, at Dawes reqaest, was held on March 16 at the Hamline Library. At that meeting John
McDaniels was questioned about Dawes operations. Many of the same issues were covered. Mr. McDaniels
was also asked wha.t Dawes would be bringing to the neighbothood and St. Paul.
None of thejobs would be newjobs coming into the community. It was unclear what other positive things
A tnird cornmunity meeting was held on March 22 at Iv'ewell Park. At this meeting approximately 45
neiglzbors expressed tltcir concerns for a trucking faciIity in the neighborhood. The neighbors voted
overwhelmingly to oppose the truCking facility.
I reafize that thece will be some kind of development on this site and understand why this would happen.
What I don't understand is why something more compatib(e with the neighborhood and community
couidn't be found.
I am cvilling to work with 7LT in further development of their property to fit the needs ands
concerns of the community.
• erely, ._}..
� Lti.,,�.a
Christine E. Olsen
� �-�'�"` �
� S/
i
779 C1ayland Street
Saint Pau1, MN 55104
March 26, 1999
Saint Paul Planning Commission
City Ha11
Saint Paul, N�i7 55101
RE: Proposed Truck Transfer Site
Fairview & Minnehaha Avenues
Gentlepersons:
My husband and I are homeowners 2 short blocks north and one
short block west of the proposed truck transfer site. I work as a
customer service representative for an insurance coinpany. We
bought our 1-1/2 story home 3 years ago with a VA loan and $0
down.
�
Just this past Wednesday, I heard Mayor Coleman on the radio, •
proclaiming renewed concern about the extreme shortage of
affordable housing in Saint Paul. Our Hamline-Midway neighborhood
consists largely of this scarce commodity!
Hamline-Midway is also a unique model of diversity and
stability in the Twin Cities. We are old and young, with lots of
children as we11 as retirees. We are blue collar, middle class,
and professionals. We are also white and black and Hmong and
Native American; the neighborhood church we belong to is bilingual
and bicultural--English and Hmong. We have parks, rec centers,
playgrounds, schools, churches, libraries, a nationally ]cnown
university, and neighborhood stores. We have active block clubs.
We maintain and update and improve our homes, and the government
shows its appreciation by raising our tax-assessed value every
year...
If you were trying to plan a modern urban neighborhood, it
would be very much like ours!
But the proposed truck transfer site bordered by Fairview and
Minnehaha Avenues--two old residential streets--is not
neighborhood-friendly! •
�t S Z
�q -S2-y
�
z
The "anticipaLed" hours of operatio� at the p site
extend from 7 a.m. ti11 9 p.m. on some wee;cnig=cs and ti11
midnight on others, plus some weekend hours, wi:n no stated
closing or "cxuiet hours." Neighbors on Fairview, N'_nnehaha, and
nearby streets wi11 have at most 7 hours of respite on selected
wee;cnights from the repeated high-decibel backup signals. And
those who work graveyard shift will have little if a�y rest.
The site wi11 also bring increased air pollution, in an area
that already has among the highest levels of air pollution in the
Twin Cities. Other environmental concerns inclua2 runoff and
visual pollution, which are both cited in the Planning Commission
Staff Report.
But the environmental damage to our neighborhood is not as
important as the threat to neighborhood safety. Semi's and all
the smaller trucks turning onto and off of Fairview to access this
site--opposite our newly reopened neighborhood store--would pose a
grav2 hazard, especially for children.
• OK, let's look at the "big picture": Per2aps, as the
Plann�ng Commission's Sta£f Report advises, the entrance and exit
could be on Prior instead of Fairview. The proposed truck
transfer site could be toned down and prettied up, behind
landscaping and some noise-barrier wa11s, as recommended by the
Staff Report.
Let's ca11 a spade a spade--this is the typical fig-leaf
solution to unsuitable development! The noise, even if somewhat
muffled, would still be a big problem for neighbors during the
facility's long and late hours of operation. The bia picture also
includes the additional facilities that the owner has planned for
other portions of this site, entailing sti11 more traffic and
pollution.
The planned truck transfer site wi11 not confer any benefits
at all on our neighborhood! Even under optimal conditions, it
will have a deleterious effect on our quality of life. Approval
of this particularly unsuitable project would therefore constitute
a"taking" from neighborhood residents, diminishing both our
peaceable enjoyment of our homes and our property values. This
• project would also compromise Hamline-Midway as a safe,
affordable, multicultural modern urban neighborhood. The Planning
Commission must exercise all due care to see that this
� 53
3
neighborhood and its quality of life are preserved.
Thank you for your attention.
Sincerely,
Amelia R. Hummel
cc: Mayor Norman Coleman
Councilmember Jay Benanav
Council President Dan Bostrom
Councilmember Jerry Blakey
Councilmember Christopher Coleman
Councilmember Mike Harris
Councilmember Jim Reiter
Councilmember Kathy Lantry
�
•
•
'�' Sy
, ni.To�aMinrl?r Fz�:(nit)659-910VO1ce.�65�)659�910TO'COmmrsslnnxGUCysNnrtontloAlr.TOmBearhatSCPaWNannmgCoinmisson Frg+tnf3StturdayMarc�2].199A3:dn;epy
�Q �J � t
• Corrunissioner Gladrs \iorton
St. Paul Planning Cemmission
1� R'est I�el1o� Eoulecard
5[. Paul, bL\ »102
F.�Z: C,/o Tom Beach, 266-9099
Dear Coaunissioner \Lorton:
I ain �nateE�il tor tlie opporauiin• aEforded U}• die coaunission to state m}• opia�oiis regarding
the proposed necr taick [ransker kacilite- [oc G2� Fairc Arenue. I hac-e li� in the
nei�hbochood adjacent to this proposed facility� for ten �•eats, and « � z: en the opporhinitf
to �cork c d7e H:unline �Iid�ca} Coalition Yor die past inondt eonceming et�s site.
\iy husband and I purchased a house on Tatum Stree[ ten }�zacs ago this mend�. \�'e, like
odiers in eur neighborhood, chose to li� in an inner-city neighborhood, c�illingl�• ttading
highec noise lzcels a�id trafdc for afTordable housing, a caciallt mited area, economically
diverse neia green parks fer eur children, pcozimity m Haml�ne lini� and
Hancock Elementar}•, and thricing businesses along Snelling:lcenue. The Ae�cell Park
neighborhood still oEters all diose d�ings to a great miE of people, including lo�cer-income,
ieorking class, and pcofessional people of all races and ages. R'e hace created secernl block
clubs, Ccime R�atclies, and m�� neighbor and I organize a nei��rhbothood-�vide P�g Roast in
our local pla}•�round each summer ���hich im hundreds oEcesidents. \�'e do no[ have a
horrible crime rate, trouble u-i[h daigs, or gangs.
• \�'e luie� ��heti �.e purchasrd a hoine in the ciry that �ce coutd not e�pect die quiet of a
suburb, the clean air of the counhy, but on 6alance our needs �cere met. At the tm1e, ece did
I,now that the site comered by Dlmnehaha and Fai:ciew �cas zoned I-1, or lib t industry.
T7ic site, ichidt has had industrial uses for ocei si�t�r years, c.as a facility Eor a computer
compan�� at the time. �f e did not a ce it much consideration, because �ce, reasonably,
assumed that industrial sites adjoining residential sites must make reasonable
accommodations. A distinction must be make betc �chat neighbors could reasonably
espect for decelopment on this site, and evhat is happening no�c. A computer faciliry is a faz
ccZ� from a trucking tieet �chich intends to operate hea��� tn�cks unTil 12 midnight, and,
indeed, the ciry's adopted land use plan itselt saps the cit} should consider altematices such
as special resttictions on lar�e micking firms. Thus, having a large tnickuig hcm move in
doccn the street «�as, in my opinien, neither foreseeable nor reasonaUle.
IS THIS SITE PL_-L� StiITABLE FOR CO3IPATIBLE bIISED tiSE I\
ACCORD iVCE ��TTH THE CIT�'S L_S:\D USE PLrL� � At present, it is not. Planning
Corrunittee staft cecommend that it can be made so bj• mo�-ing its entcance and using sound
baniers. I su�est that an}' comp:uiy opetating nois}' [iucks, unloading eyuipment such as
forklifts and hydraulic lifts, from secen in the moming ttntil midnight is not compatible with
a residential area. Period. No amount c+F sound restrictions �cilt cempletel�� muffle out these
sounds. L� addition, die lights used bp JLT have consistentl� cteated a peoblein and haee
not been remedied (despite empty promises by JL"� since JLT bought the site. In some
cases the lights shining into adjoining houses remain so bright, all night, that one can read at
night with no intcmal lights on. Such use deprives adjacent properties oE sleep, enjoyment of
u
X� ,ss
f�om: icn M�mler Fa: (651)6549IR Vome. (fi51)fi59-5111 To Cnn:missloner GIZN's Morton rlo Alr.TOm Beach zt SL Pa:J �lann•r.g Ccmmisson �a9? 7 0' 3 SaturAay. MarcA 27. 1999 3'd' FU
land, and creates a nuisance. � cemprehensice zoning plan e�ists ro stabdize pmpeet;,• uses.
Ligh[ industrial acti�-in' such as computer assembly, ottice or edier 8-�, ltbhtec n�ise and
trtftic use is �vi[hin the intent of the zoning, and also allows neighbors to continue to live
and enio5�, ecen impro�e, their homes. ?. nuisance use �cill, rathec, destaUilize the adjacent
residential area, as dap care centers ma5• (ose business, prepertc values mac c•,-ell decrease, and
diosr of us «ho lia� worked hard ro keep die neigliborhood clean and decent look for
other ptaces to lis-e.
DOES THE ECONObIIC INTE£.EST OF JLT L� DE�"ELOPI��G THIS SITE FOR A
TRIICI�TG F�CILITI OUTI�'EIGH THE INT'ERESTS OF I`TEIGHP>ORS ��TD THE
CITl OF ST. P�UL? �s die o�cnec o£ [he site, TLT has the nght to decelep tt and make a
pcota. Eut its interests do not ounceigh those of the citc and its neighborheoc. In this
instance, TLT might lose profi[ in not deceloping [his site Eor the pcesent pu:pose, but that
�ci11 be minga[ed bp its abiliq' to de� e(op it for more suitabte ptojec[s. The cin has an
inrerest in m:iintaining affordable heusinb fer its cesidents, and that �cill not be mitib red by
any addicional propecty' taties, etc. realized b�� rhis development. ��'i11 urban spra�cl rzsulting
from residen[s fleeing [his area beneti[ the citf? Nor �vill d�e increased ttaTTlc en Faircie�v
and Unicersits result in anydiing but increased maintenance costs. Similarl�, tne
hemee« and pcopertp o�cnecs cannot mitigate the loss of the value o[ eu� pr�pecty �vith
a neisp facility opeca[ing from secen untii midni�ht, keeping us accake, �: akmg oue children,
�:-idz hea�-�• traEYic cempeting ter scheol buses and leacin� us onlc one majoc outlet,
DIuinefiaha, Erom �cliidi to entu or lea�-e our neigftUorhood d�at is not ria� eled 6-r hea�
trucks.
�C�L3T IS THE TREND I'OR ZONIN G I�i �' T�IIS ARL' _'.:' The \lidc Hei�itts
nei�bochood esisted before the industrial use. \Ianp homes �cere buil� in late 1390s, or
earl}• 1900s--homes «ith historical and architectucat value. But, clearl}, flze are�a has become
home to industrial decelopmrnt. But not e�clusirely. ��'e have seen thc cih• impro�-e our
NeR Park corcununit�� building and playground, and open rno nec� scheols in the
iinmediate aces of this trucl;ing site. Sucely it is not in the best interest oFancone to
deliberatel}- locate large b oups of childcen neac such a site. The cit}• has not indicated that
residential use in this area �z'ill wane until it becomes so(elc industrial. Theretere, this site
cnust be deceloped in a caa�- that �cil1 centimie to be compaCble and not hacmLul io the
residential decelopment.
��"e are not asking that jLT tum this area into a park,. Of mucse as a neighborhood a�e must
be espected to enduce seme incon�enience rather than cur[aiI jLTs fceedom te use its site to
inake a pcofit, Uut TLT must also use this pcoperty ui a cFa}' ��at causes no un:easonable
haan to us. �Iodem societp requires Eactories, smelters, and taickin� Elee[s, and such
acti��icies are not nuisances if carned on in suitable lecalities and the adce�se impact on
neighbocutg localities is onlc acoida6le at pcohibitive cost. �C e suggest dtat using dzis site fot
a diEEerent, more suitable and respectful pucpose, does net censtimte prohibitice cost ro JLT.
��`hat �cill be prohibiti�e is the cost to us—these actic�des �cill interfere substantiallp and
Luzteasonably R-ith the interest oE substan[ial numbers oE landholders in the usc of enjopmrnt
of our land, interfere with our health, comfort and concenience by emission oE unpleasant
odors, fumes, loud noises, etcessive light, and much additional and dangerous heavy traffic.
•
•
•
� ,� `
Frmn:TOm�ninrix Fm:(651)659-911]VOice:(651�55491BTa'COmm�ssinnerGlatlySMOrtontloMr.TOmBeachat Pa9n3ot3SaNr�ay.Marc�2].19993a859Fnf
�q_sa`I
�
•
•
The old masim One \tust Use His Propertc So ds tiot To Injure That of �lnothec is deeplF
imbedded in rlmecican laR-. This should also applc to industrial sites that are bordered on
ta sides, closelS•, b5• houses. EceR- industrial anno}•ance cannot be addressed, of course, noc
erers thing that burdens the peace and ttanquillitc of a neighborhood. But in a
neib berhood that is alread5• burdened to the bteaking point bc encroaching industrial
anno}•ances, it is necessar�� for the ci�t� to look at its compzehensice plan and detemvne
�chether a trucking facilitq is reasonable to be placed in this site. Should the ciri of St. Paul
sacrifice an ethnicalls dicerse, economicallj• miszd, histocicallz' significani neigltborhood for
die sake e[ a particular h�e ok de� Should the cin• favor this deF cather
than nurture and support a neighborho�d that is a benefit to the cin'� Is this sitz reall}
appropriate �chen the lack of aEfocdable housin� has reached a crisis, �chen ucban spca�vl has
beceme au issue addressed bp dze Goccnzor of Dlinnesota, c•hen di� bIa} oT St. Paul
openlc reiteraces his support Eor inneo-ciR� neighborhoods+
I respectfiilly subcnit to this conunittee that it is not.
Thank pou for j•our consideration of these cemarks.
Sincerely,
Tulie Grifhn
7G�4 Tatum
TahiarChelton Block Club Leadre
� s�
MRR.13.1999 6�43PM HFlMLIIJEihiIDWAY N0.280 P.2
AY
HAMLINE M�DWAY CQA.LIT�ON
Ham4ne Park Plsp;round I3uildiug � t5G4 LaFoad Avenue, Saint Paul, D9�'i 55104 � 612-646•14S6 � 61Z-641-G I23
March 13,1999
Ms. Gladys 1Vlorton, Chair
St. Paul Planning Commission
15 W. Kelloag Blvd.
St. PauJ, MN 557.02
Dear Ms. Morton:
I am writing on behalf of the Hamline Midway Coalirion Board of Directors. �t its
NIarch 16th meeting, the '6oard of Directors voted ++na.��mously to oppose JL'I'
Company's proposal £or a truck transfer facility on Fairview and 1�tinnehalla
Avenues in St. Paul.
We want to thanlc you for � anfing a publzc heazing on this si�nificant issue, �vhich
we underst is scheduled for March 26th. � The HNIC Eoard of Directors x�quests
that, if possible, the heazing Ue held after usual business daytime hours, so tl�1t
constituents who would be affected by fliis proposed operation would be ablc• tu
paTti.cipate in the hearina,
T# you have questions, please contact zne or Jodi Bantley, HNIC Executive T7ireccor.
Thantc you. -
Sincerely,
/�/�. ,� �
L
Cath�rine Lue, Community Organizer
tr. Councilmember Jay Benanav
Steve IvlcKeown, HYi IC President
Pat Teiken, HMC Treasuzer and Sub-distxict A Representative
Dedicated to snaking t�e Hamlirae dtitfwaY s2e{gbbo-rhood a befler ptate to tiae asu! rWrk.
��a�, ��w���
\ J
�J
•
�F S�
�
h1tiR. �.1Sy'3 S�1�Phl HAt�LiNEihlI�b1HY
!�
,1 �
�
HAMLINE MID�V
N0.45E_P.1_
Post-it' F2x Note 7671 � 3_ ¢
To��M �[l�CFI From �.�l'f'N
c���c=_Ft �.1.G.P. co.
Pt+cne * Pror:e d i . ..
Z6G- qo9R
Ii3mline Park Placground Bwidin, � 1i64 L�fond �venue, Saint Paul, hiV �i I04 � 612•64G-19sG + 61:•641-6123
•
�s-ch 4, 1994
�-5. GLdys Mortoz
C1Lirpe:son
St Paul Planning Cou~�:-xtission
15 W Kello� Blvd.
St. Pau11V�' 557.02 "
Dezr �4s. iVlorton:
Lu E
� _ �-y
On UehalE of the TiamL-�e �2zdw av Coailition (FLy1C�.Board of DirecEors, T am requesting that the
St. Pau� Planning Comnussion hold a puUlic hearing JLT Cumpany-'s pzoposed freight transfer
facility on Fairvievv and W.est �riinnehaha'A.venues. This request is based on the unanimously
shared eonceir�s oE Ulock chtb 3eaders and other neighbors li�•ing close to the proposed sit�e, who
met with Coalition zepresentatives on Febn�ai�• 24. These consfituenis and T�C w to
pGblicl;�� sllare the follo�ain; cox�cems:
1; The residential area adjacent to JLT's propexEy is alzeadp satvrated with aix and noise
pollu�on from the entire industrial corridoY in,ihe westernportion of District 11.
2) Such a Eacility would necessarily generaEe additional noise polluiion irom increased fruck
traffic, indudin� the possibiLty of noise fzom id.l�nj hucks.
3) Lil:e�vise, flt� proposed facility would incsease ai: pollurion, par�cularly the unileallhy
diesel fimles from i�ucl<s. ,Several area residenis aze alze2dy aftlicted cvitn respiratory
pxoUlems• . ,
4) The siee plan sug�zsts that'izuc�: txaffic w'ould entex/eo ess on'Fairview Avenue, dizectly
across the sireet from a ro�nT of homes. Ineseased traffic rn1 Fain West IvSinnehaha and
Prior Avezuies, consideruzg their heavy cunent use in conjvnction wiCh the industrial corridor
and Suzlino on Northem-Santa Fe Railroad T-TuU Site, is hi�hly tutiwelcome.
5) Questions about the pruposed facility's hovrs of opera�on and daily volume of txaffie hace
not been satisfacEorily answezed.
HtiiC is IZOpeful that the Plaruung Co�ruivssion r,cill d ant tivs request for a public hearing on flie
JLT proposal. Please conEact me or Cathy Lus, 651-6�10-19S6 wifh youz decision. Thanlc you
fer y our considerafion.
Sincerzly,
��� m���
Jodi \�f. SantIey
Executive Director
• /jmU
cc: Steve 2vicl�eocvn, I�vIC Board Presidene
Cath}r Lue, I3MC Community Ozgaz�izez
Council��e� �is��y�,$��Fp�E Hamlina �tlzdioay neighborbood a belter place to lue and work.
sr, ��: � i•;� � ,��:..;.
� 3 5�
Feb-22-99 05:23P JLT
u_�2�:98 1G:1: td.t ootoaiace.
651 641 1244 P_02
���GR�UF 1�lC.
�„,��� �
738 Yandai4e Stre4i •� 4 'auE, µ� `�"`�tia (sst� 64s-St1 S�(fi51)
�eb�uazy 2?. 1499
41F- �l utit Bc;OLEi
7Qlllil�, S�CtiL:l�]SL
City af 5�.1'v+il
i7t�icr uf Lfcen�c, [nspccEiocr aud £nYironmental
3_+0 S�. Pcccr Surci. Su=�z J��
S�-I':�ui,htN 551Ur-ISIO
Dcu bi:. F3ca:.i::
l4`� vruu3.i li�� tn ga befacc dte Piaaeli�� Comiwssioti w;t':i uiu ptans f�ar I}swes
` Tt3wax��R o�� FebrwrS i�, 19w9.
n�1r- Bci1r T will be sLhenitting the plans yau requestccl u socro s� tfr�y srn
pcirued; eitheF li�ay or wnlor•e��'.
'�luuii you.
ti:ne�rtl}.
��"'-��-� ���
fiurc Wiitiam��n
31�5 Gcoup, ��-
t`A
u
�
� � `O
�
�� ,�vo,
- l�r wirt�
��
� �v
•
@
e�
�
��� '
dc7=l �``''>s
� � {�'�� . t
�,
�����
i .i9�.� �iv's �n`�.
� T'( �V.
��,
�
�
� ���vt.
�'i v �r i r�f
-- :��.�
�����
U��n r�n,��
�-I
�o
f O '• �O r��n� �ta
1���o�n
� l�( � ��
_;
;
;
�
�
'�] � /�V � �� ;
��. �`����t �� �;�
t�
- I � 1°U
�
� �
�, �o��� �..�v�..� f ��i ��� �.�,��►
55 No t,�.R� :
t ls Vdt i�t G�1�7
4�iVJ t 1'P"/�V.;
�N._�.�
!°
� ��
�� v,t'. GAR�
� ,t ��
� I t'^Zf��Cii ��-� i'T�'
v� °
��_s ati !
a
��
�'
�''
�I:� �u�, ;
.��;,
�,�� � €1 °�(.�;
o� {
�
�� t����s
°to
�+bM,�F�� �, y �' L�s � r� J�€ t r� � ,�s � �
Examples of Sound Levels
Threshold oYPai
Rock Baad
(at 100ft)
:, ,
� x �'�
Large Gat6ering
of People
��
`� ^ 't � �\
Conversational �
Speec6
140 dB
130
120
110
� Pneumatic
1 0 o Chipper
90
8 0 E
Dawntown St Pant
7 O Street Traffic
(Daytime)
6 0 E _ . B¢s�ness Office �
5 O E _ Yrivate Of£tce
40 � �
30 � I� ;
�
2 O Library
10
0
� �Z
�
•
�
�— - —_ — �
�' �
• I T ' ~ Wfltl� ;' F
� `
I � '
I ��
I
n3B 3t�x �
I a�
� - `<1
_ wl
I = z,
z,
�Ci
�
� � 'NOfYJ.WIYbIB
� 'e �� �
d ..� •
I f� � / M �� .lMMG 1p�
�� � � � .I
�^4.p �p+,0.. J. ; �,��; n
V� rnd
� � / i �1tl43
� � e\
/i � ,
e� � �
f �9 � �
m K
I , _ N 3 � �
.
- ._ ,_..r*������� ���3SvJa ������ ��y '
I '
� ,� :
� < ♦'
� 3NAtld ✓�r' �
�e3�r�.cs�
� J y�ne}(
% �
� w� ��
s
1 ��
I � � �e�m�sLe
� 3 � �3
I � �5�$�bb�. ���9'F�'e.�"€ai W
i8 �'� s��, erw '��a
�� ��.�ad S � '...an:�R
� u
� �ire��„��� �
� J I x .nAS � 1 'gp �. y
l
'_'__' '�'_ " _'�� -.',a�
� nw ..it€9 , �
3iva
rvonm
� \���
i n
�` Y r
M31AbIOJ
��
� b
���
WOIl1'
�� /
�.�--Sa`I
_' � �
m
� � a �-. .. , �
� ��
�'
0 �� � �vx���.
A _
�� ^
� �.
.S'� _ _ >� � �
', v __ °� 43II
S 3 ---- — —_=__ �4`CIS "z� ��` �
P -- CGa'
'r^� a � � 3 LL 3 I
e��'���.� o�'�<:� " � �a �
��r � �ezc.<� i o �
, �✓ Q R �J R I � sm��m iCy�� �yI
�; Z Q _ _I 30 3?m$�yn ~ L 2
f 9 - _' "�l � m ; � �d
c* — � nl �� ��� �
_ - , '�I�� w'!!ON v z 3 W � � 8
_ ' i -
� �
_ _ e �I � w> �$
� N3153M 9 0
�. 2 � ar w � �
°_ = I o a � E ��
�� '__ w Y � � � o� '
_.����"�' "�':n�wi � � � � � - _
, i .-1 � d 8> � �' E
`; ���� e oy �" j Z - ¢ J� o €� _ �
� Z F
r � � t : _`-, P000 _ a a_- °�f w:�
;;,. � � � 3 � _
fw�. °' �s h� r w� w �
�. a �owo, z W � � �' n3
Y Q � s � �
y �� oy �'__�_'_' � m s s W'; -
��� �b i �j ._.�,�, lL � � � a � x� �
�� ���_�J � ���,,, � Y ° S� 8 0
�\ �. ��,, s %;. � j � 3 5 m ¢ � i
. 's,�� � �� '�b t U � y W w`o ''" o '" z� a
�� °�C$� ��� �d�� � t i y �"% �
i �� � _� � � � i � i • ^ � � �
i �
� �
I \ ��S
1 \ � V+
���T \ -.rba..... : e
1 �\\\ 8 rt�+ ,�f, '(Y
I � oE �s
� ; ¢ r Aa� �
i �
�
j \ �aa
1 � � , A
♦
1 ����_�__� . ...
� � � �]'!'_-#�
-� -� 1 \
AMMJ � W1JM%31 I ��� AtlMl3 1
� � 1
� SW 30M]9m �� � EP
' � ��, � ���
� �
1 � � _ � � P�
1 1 � `� ��
i 1
� I a I �,
1
� 1 § 1 �
1
� 9xn3rvs 1 I '� �1
1 � � ���
I � � ��a
I
� � � '�.w,�1
� )
� EI zl , j 30wU9v3 �/
1
dl a j L� %
1
� �12 Q /
� i' 1VEA /
� i . ' i 6Wi�P
I '
1 � ..�.�:
r 1 � `__'"_""� ' �.,, :`
P�/ `` ��ti� '�� �
� �
y3�IM tll$$ISSiry _
�3
HIGALIGATS OF THE COMMERCIAL VEAICLE ROUTE ORDINANCE
All trucks of 15,000 lbs. rated gross weight or under may travel on any
street in the city with the exception of city parks and restricted
parkways as shown on the map. The gross weight is the rated weight of the
vehicle or combination of vehicles whether or not it is loaded.
All trucks over 15,000 lbs. rated gross weight must use the routes as
designated on the reverse side map except as follows:
Trucks (9 ton) may travel on any street within industrial districts and
the central business district.
When entering or leaving a truck terminal or making a pick up or delivery,
trucks (9 ton) shall reach or leave such location by traveling over the
shortest route from the nearest truck route. Direct travel between
deliveries, without returning to truck routes, will be allowed where the
distance between delivery points does not exceed one mile.
For delivery or pick up purposes, commercial vehicles (9 ton) may travel
on designated parkways between the delivery or pick up location and
adjacent intersections.
Randolph Avenue and St.Clair Avenue between West Seventh Street and
Cleveland Avenue; and Grand Avenue between Dale Street and Cretin Avenue
are not designated truck routes. However, commercial vehicles over 15,000
lbs. rated gross weight, when making a delivery, a pick up, or when
traveling to or from a truck terminal located in the area bounded by
Mississippi River Boulevard, Marshall Avenue, Snelling Avenue, Se2by
Avenue, Summit Avenue, Kellogg Boulevard, West Seventh Street, Otto Avenue •
and Highland Parkway, shall consider Randolph Avenue between West Seventh
Street and Cleveland Avenue; St.Clair Avenue between West Seventh Street
and Cleveland Avenue; and Grand Avenue between Dale Street and Cretin
Avenue as truck routes (9 ton), and all provisions of this ordinance
applicable to truck routes shall apply.
Except for recreational vehicles (RV's), no vehicle 22 feet in length or
longer or T feet in width or wider may park on any city street or alley
for more than 30 minutes or for longer than is reasonably necessary to
load or unload.
Clearly marked commercial vehicles may, between 5:00 AM and 11:00 AM, for
purposes of loading or unloading only, park in metered spaces without
payment or in truck loading zones. After 11:00 AM, commercial vehicles
may, for purposes of loading or unloading only, park in truck loading
zones to a maximum of 30 minutes.
No provision of this ordinance shall undermine or permit violation of any
rule or order of the State Commissioner of Transportation or of any State
law or provision regarding the regulation of any aspect of trucks or any
other vehicle.
City of St. Paul
Public Works Department
Traffic Division
800 City Hall Annex
266-6200
November, 1996
•
9j�j � �
, �q -sa�l
6 � ��f 1 J.rM ` <
C p' � t ` v
�"'>a, � r
• �o� - � ` �
� � � .�
i is �y
E a .::�= cK'-� c
� � LS i3:�- ` y '� .
WT 3:.w e y� � / .
� f ; COOrI]:r � � ¢'� O` �� /)
3.� r t � �
� �, � � 3 "
+� E � C
� c � �
K G �
� � 5�37 V
m y� bs..cr � so �
� 6 �
4 ��.t
E
15 �vJ
tS LS1Af d � .
- �h
IS 3Cr�yv ' I N �
} I ! `n N t
� / W S �
� £ t:E `�
3w 3�t.' � Q+ � �� : i
� � (�,(� ��,\
LS tGtl3_G3 \�" L C C1�'t'� � f--
EE� N 15 Mfd C C� ` W � 4
� iS L`� �
� P
I 15 1t4u6Jm \ "� -
1. d95 .y`
t:- �. M`- ' Nv0 b?+
F' �
\ 4k .
C•
� ` -
• i; r..s�.r \ M - .
r 35 b0 �
C
3.'+ :�5'+ S
� " Q \ _ �
tS 3Af ; i
j c \ 3' � �
' ^ G IS '�SVn . <: �' �3.�]
! �/ 1 u
4M� � �2 i` � + ? R',� L J �
v NJ3:53u "*
: b .�.., � � o O
CTl ° q '° r �. ; —
U � � � � �> ,
. 15 3� �+ � �
1 -_' ; T � 'ry Y
-�-i �' •
cn E g �
� " , u ..�.�. (
— k � s - � i
¢-i
•� < a... �:o.Yn 3� ��-
� Z ' �,�'� y a� ` � E ca ��
� j � '3 � � � r r'� i �\
O W 3Y 31)`M� 3.`� }'IY.vv L^5 � �`
U ¢ 1 Q �" ls Q
6 S � � ` i
"` � e Qt
' ; 5 �s +
� , � �
3v ?�ti35 3v ry�n35 :S
� � r L
U � � � � �� � � !S 'tliY i
��
M3.�wf 3+ M3wrf CS �i
i � �E
� �'�� Wx M V � � St PS
� r F `c 1
� Qhl�3a M 3v Pnl.�n3L w iv Ont3�3� '�`S �•
( J � �
� �l /
♦� -y C�" 1V N13'1J N ]N M'�3�fJ P� /
C
� � � 1 r
�`M.. �
�/ E b ��
_" � �.v�+W _ �
\./ l � if1 � �
�i
��
--� i
� j i
�---' �
�
'� �
---� �
T i LLt
r I C
. J,--i' z
w
��
�
2
-0
r.
� L7 ' ' I��� `:� ���:,: 1
�` `�� '' i� �� �
5I
�- ; ,�� :, �; I I � e `� � -� '.�.� I
'_ � � u , i
�, � � o ,
� i � � � �..� —
� t
� � i� � � ' =' ;
I
� I
�rn
J
I i .� W
� ._.�� -.-.� C}
� I I
I E�.� I i � I
� i E::E3 �
�..W. I I
�
I
�.......°
;
- ; �
Y
1
1
n
— I .._,
�,_
�: - I�� r
°'---- `" ::J �:
F�`=3 '�' � ^ ;
,:::_: _ ' i�
� �
� ^ , �'^[
�_.-.'i _� , 3 -
_ `
�.` In
,�
e_� � I —
� I,
�'_
_....._........._. _ _......_..
_y_ "_........_. ... ...._........... __.
�
1
;_-:;
„
�
�-��
' GL
�O
I�
�/ /
� '
; -,,
< <;
;i
��;
i.-:._ -�
1 t :
� 6:-
�_
PR(OR _-__.. ..__... _. -
�r��.e�i:d� ��".;�"�� �y�
�� ��� �����I��
: ;,_ '="c.,.. ��!'�'.^:��:.c �
\ \ \. O J . � . � �. i/: _ �_ --
�„ ' I I 9x �:
I
� -
� I �_
_ '' I
I
v J �_
� _ � I
��
----J
��
�u-�_. - c. z:� � . _' 's�a: � � .
% i '. i �i2'
—'�—
- �:
/
•
��i
2, :C -'iY'S
: �:�s--
S "�;�=�z
a
/ i� �I uP/"�
z�� ���'9f:�u�KLS
?` '
n-vs E;
`wSY� i
� �iRe.E nw
� � Tx.^ °.u.
� �V"4' �/uv
}w:_J� 1
� J ST�'
\� SW:S�
%/`7.`; ,�
�
L. ' ' i
i%'
/%
��%1�:.%
(.' � . � i
L��
� F:(^� y
Fx aCAl -. I Wb'
re YJ �S.++E �e: E _ .
MC° W^St
�'
� ' i-:_ _3==--ya w �c-:._..� ._". ' '
ua-.: '.N:ua:w I
, 4n'.a �ao�4 � /
FR �
S�19
� �
�r..nc a.vuwc
.+.�amECr:
�� _sa-y
HOG«'�fA�
A ft C H t T E C T 5
_'-.y � :-.
' s. z
� 4i 6]C..YA
/ S C3'.'2.
��
- x'.r.+ri �
V
Bi.IlJL�Ci Ot!\fA:
JLT
� k „ K , ,„.�_.. . GROUP
_ :39�'.��D.1LLi5i
Sf. P.iC1.1L� yi la
:6l?IWbllll
�xr..cc_z.t� F.�.C:61216t1-LS.t
• —�
PftOfECT LOG1P.0�`.
� / �m.�xv-c�a
\/ F.�¢n�vnv�tE
� Si. P.ill. \C1
� wwc_ xr.- c
SAE vr�! f �� �•.
ClE fJ S�P'�-CU x
�
� � st,uL�c �`.avr:
�
01'.�ES
� ! S _ ��.�QQ.`Ci
/�y N
p � F <
S �%43 I
�4%t �
` � S�fE PL.L� � SRE 4�'�.
l�,� _ �, IPROlEG7REVlE�YSEf
� 2-t;.99)
1 ! COi�S[Al'CROY 8m SEf
scww.wr. ' 1�]99
� RE�L{O�Ji I-(&99
r.u.c ze .:e �r.,. R..R7570\ �2 422.99
I ��8� �1�1Y�.b0J
_ � o�.�v n'a��
� C2�Gl'&7 BH
�
, ��, SFffFC Ad OF 6
���
� � � �
� 3 . �. 3 ._�, S , �, j , `� 3_ �
'�-0� !'-6" 6'�fi 9'_6 . G'�fi � g'=fi '!C�
' � � ' I� YIN.
.�
'm {
000c c�c
� e'-a' s �o' o a. cCCK xca
r;xcR x.. � ;��s;
�- s' x ia' cu ec;x ccca
'.��➢CCK P4� i1P.`2�
CCGR 1LCN - ICC% �
�
'`;
, .z
z� c�ae�s ,� _
i�
.7
,.T
.7
m1
.i
i.
.T
i .�
^ .T
)Z'-0' •� a�
�T
—T __-__-_
I . n _ _ .
,,.. -
; � �,;• �
i � �� �
i I ''''�/� �=�
11Eti a -
CNLEf 'U�
rae Ccac
LG-iS
r nrau�u- so�oc�r
c_�_ s�. rs_c.
r `
�s�'c:c cec�
wai=cu5�
�m
r�c:rt ro cc:ac vzai
Y]GT i'] &VZ JCS 1d'-0� C�}i A=i
0� :..^.NC. SLY3 CY 56\p CJSFICN ,N :CC< .li}
- SE= S�I:� R'�L FJ4 :r^hSG::C'CV/C.^.�Y_ _C \ a
�IoO� P�N
o� PF•�=*�
AI�
�6" P!FE 9CL'4ip
a e+cv a.i. eccx
A
�
�
1 � .
/\ I l C'
`/ �
i
� I
�'�.
_' p + I
� v ;
�
� ,
I
�
—_ ' E .
� �
0
�I
�i
_'� F � I
. v
.,
i1 � G 1
i�
a'-a' x ia' o.r. w« ccc�
w/xu w„�;= M.(te)
WOR 1CCE - COGi iCCV �
-d �
' '—_ � q '
i
8'-e % 10' O.d. CCOC DCCQ � ��/
w/�K ie.e � tn.C2)
oac�x iaac - occx icco - �
12' % 18' O.ti. OR!F_-IH OCJR ' �j
qN�'/E rUUP m.(�) '�n�
CCOR 1CC9 I
t •� �
_a. ^
T �`i �
��
I
i;�-0
J _�
4 � /' X
i a�
f '�
.
�
.{.'���,F:n C�.
Fi O r
AP. C�E
Y _ _.
,LL-"_=" _" "-_ _
�r w_ � -.i: � � -
iT_c.^C
AC" t4 . � Y Z.
�+FC
L`�.�i =••C__
�
g�Il.l���[ n�
JLT
GROL
: 39 l".j.�DA1.
5:. P.iLL. }L�
i6!�,sti.!
F.�.'i �5:?; �
P37 `EQ LCG
F.u���,�.
ST.. P.�l �.
BULDL\G Tc
DA".� c:
��Cti
� ��
�s
�AOR Pla.ti 3 SCF:
(PFtO.iECC REV�.��' `
2-L7-991
ca�srx�cna� s¢
1-7-99
��srov = i
REti15I0ti =?
D�TE �=
DEL�t�} IR
' (}iECt�7 BH
S[�ET �-3 OF
-�
.'
.�, . , �
North Star Chapter
PUBLIC HEARING
ST. PAUL CITY COUNCIL
a� "
MAY 12, 1999
RE: JLT TRUCIC TRANSFER FACILITY SITE PLAN
Amelia R. Hummel and Ronald G. Williams
779 Clayland Street
St. Paul, MN 55104
REPRESENTING: TWIN CITIES GROUP SIERR.A CLUB
A. SITE PLAN INCONSISTfiNT WITH I-1 ZONING DISTRICT
The Zoning Code of the City of St. Paul says that the intent of
the I-1 Industrial District is "to primarily accommodate
wholesale and warehouse activities, and industrial operations
whose external, physical effects are restricted to the area of
the district and in no manner affect the surrounding districts
a detrimental way." (Sec. 60.611) The Code further states that
new buildings in I-1 must conform to specific uses, including
"(3) Warehousing and wholesale establishments, and trucking
facilities." (Sec. 60.612) The thrust of the Zoning Code here
to delineate light industrial areas to contain only activity
which has no deleterious effects on the areas surrounding such
activity. The Code sharply distinguishes I-1 from the next
industrial classification, I-2, by stating that I-2 is for
certain "industrial operations whose external effects will be
felt in surrounding districts." (Sec. 60.621)
in
is
A confused reading of the Code would focus on the second
conjunct, ��and" in the sentence which includes "wholesale and
warehouse activities, and industrial operations...in no manner
af£ect the surrounding districts in a detrimental way." (Sec.
60.611) Upon such a reading, I-1 would include wholesale and
warehouse activities, regardless of whether or not they affected
the surrounding districts. Thus, you would have some I-1
activities which detrimentally affected adjoining neighborhoods
and some which did not.
1
�
� 1313 Fifth 3tz�et 3E, Suite #323 • Menneag�otis, MN 55414 •(612) 379•3853
� ay
Such a reading would mean that the Code is incoherent in setting
I-1 parameters. You would have radically different types of
activities in areas designated as I-1, some detrimentally
affecting neighboring districts, some not.(Sec. 60.612)
Furthermore, of the numerous specified I-1 uses, there would be
no way to tell, for most of them, whether they were the type that
were allowed to detrimentally affect its surroundings or of the
type given no such allowance. One such specified use is
"trucking facilities."
The City Zoning Code's delineation of I-1 districts is coherent.
It clearly indicates that trucking facilities, among others, are
one of the specified uses o£ I-1 and thus must "in no manner
affect the surrounding districts in a detrimental way." This
means the JLT Truck Transfer Facility proposal would have
conformed to code if the proposed site had been in an I-1
district where the trucking facility would not have disturbed the
surrounding neighborhood. However, since the proposed site abuts
a residential neighborhood, the proposed site plan does not
conform to the Zoning Code of the City of St. Paul.
B. PROPOSED SITE PLAN INCONSISTENT WITH 1980 CITY LAND USE PLAN
The Zoning Code with regard to site plan review and approval
states that "the planning commission shall consider and find that
the site plan is consistent with: (1) The city's adopted
comprehensive plan and development or project plans for sub-areas
of the city." (Sec. 62.108 (c)) The pertinent part of the 1980
City Land Use Plan (1980 Plan) says:
Mixing incompatible uses will create an unsuccessful
development. For example, uses which generate large volumes
of traffic, noise or air pollution cannot be combined with
uses requiring quiet. On the other hand, traditional
separation of uses is not necessary when the uses do not
interfere with each other or do not create external problems
such as noise or air pollution.
(p. 19) Since the site plan proposes activity which is
incompatible with the adjoining residential neighborhood, the
site plan is inconsistent with the 1980 Plan. This is true of
the originally proposed site plan and of the site plan with
restrictions, approved by the Planning Commission.
2
�q -s a�
On Page 3 of the Planning Committee's Resolution (Resolution)
approving the site plan with restrictions, it quotes the 1980
Plan: "The City should encourage conditions which allow the
mixing of appropriate light industry with housing and commercial
activities." (p. 1) The Resolution then quotes 1980 Plan Policy
(1.4-3): "In cases o£ incompatible land uses, the city will use
the techniques listed above [in Policy (1.4-2)] wherever possible
to create or improve existing buffers between land uses." (p. 10)
Finally, the Resolution cites Policy (1.4-4): "The city will
ensure through its site plan review requirements that all new
development provides adequate buffering as part of its design."
The problem with the Resolution here is that, with this site
plan, buffers are not sufficiently ameliorative to make the plan
conform to either the Zoning Code or the 1980 Plan. Often
buffers between light industrial and residential neighborhoods
are in the form of significant land tracts which are occupied by
some use which does not detrimentally affect the residential
neighborhood. But that is not possible at the Fairview and
Minnehaha site, since the proposed building is on land abutting
the residential neighborhood. Though the Resolution restricts
the site plan with noise barriers, these barriers would be
insufficient to negate significant detrimental effects on the
neighborhood with regard to noise and would have absolutely no
eifect on expected rise in air pollution.
There is yet another way the site plan is inconsistent with the
1980 P1an: since it threatens a residential neighborhood, it is
inconsistent with the following 1980 Plan objective:
To determine and support the most compatible solutions for
meeting housing demands while promoting energy conservation
and neighborhood stability.
(p. 20) The 1980 Plan further expresses concern about the
"increased demand for smaller, one and two-bedroom dwelling units
for both ownership and rental purposes." There are many smaller
single-family dwellings, plus a good number of duplexes and
quadruplexes, in the Fairview and Minnehaha neighborhood which
would be adversely affected by the proposed facility. One reason
there is so much development going on in Hamline-Midway is that
it is stable and safe. If this truck terminal project is allowed
to go forward, people would move out, the neighborhood would
3
r�� -S �-�1
decline, and the outward-bound residents would contribute to
urban sprawl. It could be argued that such a fall in demand for
this neighborhood's housing would lower city housing costs; but
in £act such suburban-bound flight would be the signal indicating
that this affordable neighborhood was about to go into a neglect-
and-decline cycle, with all the associated social costs. About
half of St. Paul's property tax revenue derives from residential
use, too, which is very unusual in this day and age. So on two
levels, the City is very aware of the need for affordable
housing. The 1980 Plan's concern is with preserving the supply
of good-quality affordable housing in livable neighborhoods. The
site plan in question is inconsistent with this goal.
C. PROPOSED SITE PLAN INCONSISTENT WITH 1980 DISTRICT 11 PLAN
As stated in the above section, the Zoning Code requires site
plans to be consistent with City sub-area plans, as well as with
the City Comprehensive Plan. The District 11 Plan is the sub-
area plan which includes Fairview and Minnehaha. Some pertinent
goals of the Plan as reported in the Planning Commission
Resolution are:
• Maintain the present balance between residential and
commercial and industrial use.
• Develop buffers to separate residential areas from
commercial and industrial areas.
• Confine through traffic to relatively few streets, treat
other streets as local, resident serving streets.
• When developing major through streets, minimize detriment to
bordering land uses.
(p. 3)
The site plan contravenes the District 11 Plan in several
respects:
(1) First, it would disturb the present balance between
residential and commercial and industrial use, not because
of light industrial activity at the site, but because the
proposed activity is incompatible with the adjacent
residential neighborhood. The result would be neighborhood
deterioration, possibly to the point that residential areas
would be converted to industrial areas.
�
c�� -S a4
(2) Second, the proposed buffers are insufficient to protect the
residential neighborhood from detrimental effects.
(3) Third, in further developing Prior Avenue (a major through
street), the site plan contravenes "minimiz[ing] detriment
to bordering land uses" because the planned facility is
incompatible with the adjoining residential neighborhood.
D. SITE PLAN RESTRICTIONS IMPRACTICABLE OR INEFFECTIVE
The condition that the develope_�erform a noise studv and
present noise mitigation plans to Commission staff prior to
permitting, does not protect the neighborhood. The Commission
has failed to provide for public review and comment, to ensure
that the study is valid and the proposed mitigation measures are
adequate. This condition violates the public's right to review
and comment. Appealing this amorphous approval is like trying to
nail Jell-O to the wall!
The addition of landsca�in� and some noise-barrier walls, as
recommended in the Planning Commission's Staff Report, would have
no effect on noise from the trucks coming and going on the
street; they would also do little to effectively reduce the
impact of air brake or high-decibel backup signal noise during
the facility's long and late hours of operation.
The restriction on ogeratina hours as a way of preventing
detrimental effects on the neighborhood is ineffective, since
semi-trailer trucks from out of state will be allowed to enter
the site at the time of their arrival, day or night. The noise
of such large trucks arriving after hours, including engine
noise, air brakes, and the mandated high-decibel backup signals
as they approach the loading bays or other parking locations
within the facility, is certain to affect neighbors adversely.
The 15-minute limit on idlina is unenforceable and therefore does
not adequately protect neighborhood residents from noise or air
pollution, The drivers wi11 be independent operators, and many
from out of state, so they wi11 not be under any company's
supervisory control. Placing this burden on the site owner or
the tenant trucking company would be like tasking the fox to
protect the chickens. The burden of monitoring and enforcement
5
��'U � !
thus appears to be upon neigrborhood residents, which is thus
unfairly burdened with monitoring round-the-clock arrivals in
order to preserve quiet and air quality.
Restrictions on trucks sto�oin� or idlina on neighborhood streets
is less enforceable than the 15-minute limit on idling, for the
same reasons.
Site barriers along Minnehaha will be inePfective because the
houses are on a hill above the site.
The restriction that "truck traffic mav not use Fairview Avenue"
is ineffective because, as indicated by the developer as well as
residents, the City does not effectively patrol Fairview Avenue
with the goal of restricting through truck traffic. Even with
the truck terminal entrance and exit on Fairview, there is an
experience-based concern that yet more trucks will use Fairview
and other neighborhood streets in order to avoid traffic at major
truck route intersections. As indicated by official City maps,
Fairview Avenue north of University Avenue is not a truck route.
The Commercial Vehicle Route Ordinance states:
Al1 trucks over 15,000 lb. rated gross weight must use the
routes as designated by the reverse side except as follows:
Trucks (9 ton) may travel on any street within industrial
districts and the central business district.
When entering or leaving a truck terminal. .., trucks (9
ton) shall reach or leave such location by traveling over
the shortest route from the nearest truck route.
This ordinance is violated daily, by substantial numbers of
trucks which use Fairview and Minnehaha Avenues. These avenues
border, but are not within, an industrial district; they are both
designated as local, resident-serving streets. It is not within
the developer's power to prevent independent truckers from
traveling along neighborhood streets. Any development,
therefore, which may lead to heavier truck use of Fairview Avenue
or other neighborhood streets is contraindicated. This is a
primary neighborhood concern addressing children's safety, noise,
and air pollution hazards. This restriction fails to protect the
adjacent neighborhood in any way at all.
�
�t� -5�-`f
E. HARM FROM INEFFECTIVE RESTRICTIONS
Harm £rom Noise
One of the earliest motivations for urban planning, historically,
was the recognition that decent housing for workers is essential
for productivity. No employer would want their shift workers to
live next to a facility like the proposed truck terminal.
According to the National Institutes of Health, lack of adequate
sleep can cause or aggravate other health problems. It also
causes children and adults to experience difficulties in memory
and concentration, thus adversely affecting learning, job
performance, and safety. In addition to shift workers who must
sleep during the day or in the evening, children and the ill or
disabled require rest and sleep during the day as well.
Daytime noise and noise-induced stress constitute a serious
threat to residents' physical health and emotional well being.
It is important to note that many of this working neighborhood's
80-90 year old homes lack air conditioning, so daytime and
nighttime noise will be especially harmful during the spring,
summer and fall, when windows are open for cooling and
ventilation.
Harm from Air Pollutio
Increased air pollution wi11 affect children playing outside,
residents walking or exercising outside, and anyone doing
anything inside older homes which lack central air conditioning.
It will have greatest immediate impact upon infants, the
elderly, and those with chronic or acute respiratory problems.
When my wife was collecting petition signatures along Fairview
and Minnehaha--right after returning to work after a bout of
pneumonia--she met two residents with oxygen tanks and many
others who volunteered the information that they had emphysema,
or that they or their children had asthma. This area already has
a very high level of air pollution, and many of its residents are
clearly at risk. The ill and disabled must not be driven from
their established homes by improper development of adjacent land,
in violation of the city plan and the zoning code.
F. ENVIRONMENTALLY SENSITIVE AREA
7
��. - s a�t
This thriving working neighborhood is environmentally endangered
and already under environmental siege from surrounding traffic
and industrial activities. newell Park, the little neighborhood
which includes Fairview and Minnehaha, is vulnerable because it
is bounded on three sides by light industrial activity--the
Burlington Northern container yard off Pierce Butler Road, the
factories between Prior and Transfer Road, and the I-1 area at
Fairview and Minnehaha.
In addition, it is only about 12 blocks away from what was, in
the past, the most air polluted site in Minnesota, Snelling and
University. In the 1980's this intersection was cited several
times by the EPA for air quality non-attainment. The City has
worked hard to reduce pollution levels at this intersection and,
consequently, has been cited only once in the last couple or
years. The City has put in place an alarm system which is
triggered when air pollution is high. It then finesses the
traffic signals to discourage traffic from entering the
intersection and encourage those in the intersection to more
quickly exit. A daily timing device and the "ring round" which
takes traffic around Spruce Tree Center also reduces air
pollution.
The fact that the City has to go to so much trouble to take care
of this problem and that there is, even now, occasional air
quality non-attainment, is evidence that the air quality problem
in this area is serious and that it would be vulnerable to
significant air pollution increases. In addition, the federal
EPA is now concerned with the kind of particulates that diesels
emit to the air and is studying the matter to see how the problem
can be reduced. The introduction of the proposed truck facility
threatens the air quality of this area, a problem which should be
studied, as we suggested in our "Proposed Environmental
Assessment."
During most of the year, it is bearable for most--though not all-
-residents. During the State Fair, however, the smog is visible
to the naked eye, and exercise may be dangerous for the unwary.
This is a strong community here, but to maintain it the City must
be vigilant in shielding it from incompatible activity and
environmental threats.
G. SITE PLAN IGNORES THE 1999 CITY LAND USE PLAN
8
q,�,—.say
The 1999 City Land Use Plan (1999 Plan) of St. Paul's
Comprehensive Plan was adopted by City Council on March 3, 1999,
and is subject to review by the Twin Cities' Metropolitan
Council. It was recommended by the St. Paul City Planning
Commission on September 25, 1998. Thus this impressive forward-
looking document is solidly backed by the entire government of
the City of St. Paul. Though it does not yet have legal force as
the 1980 Plan presently does, it certainly is an important guide
£or policy judgments of the type which are critical for the
Planning Commission and for the City Council in considering site
plan reviews.
In the 1999 Plan's discussion of Equitable Metropolitan
Development, it lists several policies, two of which are:
3.3.1 Saint Paul will support an increase in the number of
jobs and housing units in the city, and will try to focus
growth along transit corridors, thereby supporting the
strategies of the Metropolitan Council's Regional
Blueprint....
3.3.5 The City should express its support and, where
appropriate, join in housing programs and projects that
contribute to balanced populations (age and income) in
communities and neighborhoods throughout the East Metro
area.
(p. 14) This says we should promote growth along transit
corridors, not deterioration as the proposed plan threatens. MTC
Bus #7 runs along Minnehaha avenue through this neighborhood and
Bus #16A (plus limited stop #SO) runs on University Avenue, only
about 5 blocks south of Minnehaha. The #16 is one of the most
frequently running buses in the Twin Cities. The other policy
above talks of supporting balanced populations (age and income).
The Fairview and Minnehaha neighborhood is such a neighborhood,
with a strong balance among ages and with low income and middle-
range income. The 1999 Plan indicates preservation and
encouragement of such neighborhoods.
In its section on "Strategy 2: Neighborhoods as Urban Villages,"
the 1999 Plan states and "Objective 5.1 Urban Villages: Theme
with Variations" with policies including:
7
��,-�a`i
5.1.1 The City neighborhood organizations, developers and
realtors should use the urban village principles listed
below, which are condensed £rom the Charter of the Congress
for the New Urbanism, for assessing neighborhoods and
promoting the advantages of city living.
• Good neighborhoods are compact and pedestrian-friendly.
• Good neighborhoods have a mixture of land uses.
• Good neighborhoods have a broad range of housing types.
• Good neighborhoods are designed to support mass transit
with appropriate land uses and densities within walking
distance of public transportation.
• Good neighborhoods have commercial, civic, and
institutional activity embedded, not isolated in
remote, single-use complexes.
• Good neighborhoods have schools within walking and
short bicycling distance, for most children.
• Good neighborhoods have a range of park facilities,
from tot-lots to village greens to ballfields to
community gardens. (Large parks and conservation areas
serve as boundaries between neighborhoods.)
• Good neighborhoods are safe and secure.
• In good neighborhoods, the architecture and landscaping
physically define the streets and public places.
(pp- 25-26)
Amazingly, the above listed characteristics beautifully define
Newell Park, the neighborhood which includes Fairview and
Minnehaha.
Newell Park, in turn, is part of the larger Hamline-Midway
neighborhood, a model of diversity and stability in St. Paul. We
are old and young, with lots of children as well as retirees. We
are blue collar, middle class, and professionals. We are also
white and black and Hmong and Native American; the neighborhood
church my wife and I belong to is bilingual and bicultural--
English and Hmong. We have parks, recreational centers,
playgrounds, schools, churches, libraries, a nationally known
university, and neighborhood stores. We have active block clubs.
We maintain and update and improve our homes, and the government
shows its appreciation by raising our tax-assessed value every
year. This is a neighborhood not to be threatened with
incompatible development, but a neighborhood to be preserved!
10
qq-say
In its discussion of "Objective 5.2 Mixed Land Uses/Mixed Use
Development," the 1999 Plan list policies including:
5.2.1 In traditional neighborhoods, the City will support
compatible mixed use within single buildings and in separate
buildings in close proximity. Mixed use reduces
transportation time and cost. National surveys show that,
on average, city residents drive only half as many miles per
year as suburban dwellers, primarily because each trip is
shorter in the city.
(p. 27) This is yet another 1999 Plan ideal already mirrored in
the Hamline Midway neighborhood. The grocery store at Fairview
and Minnehaha has apartments above. A few blocks away off
Minnehaha and Snelling are other buildings, such as a coffee
shop, a hardware store, and a restaurant which also have
apartments above. If our neighborhood deteriorates because of
the proposed truck transfer facility, people will have to move
away from the mixed use neighborhood, thus contributing to urban
sprawl. This is precisely the kind of thing the 1999 plan is
trying to avoid. The City must promote compatible mixed
development, and preserve it where it already exists.
The 1999 Plan's Appendix C says:
10. Study alternatives and propose amendment to the zoning
code which would distinguish between small and large
trucking operation,s. Consider alternatives such as special
restrictions on large trucking firms and propose an
amendment so that wi11 limit large low-employee-density
trucking use of industrial land. The proposed amendment
should act to make consistent, with regard to trucking uses,
the zoning code and high density employment requirements
outlined in Appendix A of the Land Use Plan and Policy 24 of
the Summary and General Plan addressing intensive use of
industrial land.
(p. 71) It is my understanding that, in this regard, the City
intends to prohibit additional truck transfer facilities in St.
Paul, just as Roseville did some years ago and as other area
municipalities have done. It makes no sense for the City to
establish a policy like this and then squeeze in one more
development of the sort that this policy prohibits.
11
�q-say
H. SITE PLAN ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT NECESSARY
It is critical that City Council have adequate environmental
information in deciding on this site plan with serious possible
effects on its adjoining neighborhood. That is why we attached a
three page "Proposed Environmental Assessment" to our April 13,
1999 letter to Mayor Coleman requesting the City to do a serious
environmental study of the site plan's environmental effects on
the neighborhood. (I also said that the Environmental Equality
Board had denied our petition to do an Environmental Assessment
Worksheet on the grounds that the proposed building was less than
100,000 sq. ft. The petition was signed by 400 citizens, almost
all from our neighborhood.) In response to our request of the
Planning Commission to recommend that the City Council initiate
such a study, the Planning Commission declined to recommend the
study on the grounds that it "was advised.._that the City does
not have legal authority to undertake extraordinary environmental
review under a different process or name."
The City not only has the authority to order the environmental
study we suggested, it has the duty to do it. It is unhelpful to
label a suggested environmental study "extraordinary�� and then
contend that it need not be done. Here is what the State of
Minnesota's Environmental Rights Act says about environmental
protection:
The legislature finds and declares that each person is
entitled by right to the protection, preservation, and
enhancement of air, water, land, and other natural resources
located with in the state and that each person has the
responsibility to contribute to the protection,
preservation, and enhancement thereof.... Accordingly, it
is in the public interest to provide an adequate civil
remedy to protect air, water, land and other natural
resources located within the state from pollution,
impairment, or destruction.
(Minnesota Statutes 116B.01) The vehicle for the environmental
protection remedy is the state government, and by extension, city
government. A critical way the city is to effect environmental
protection is to gather sufficient information to make a
reasonable environmental assessment. An excellent way for the
City to gather information with regard to this site plan would be
12
`C�-Say
to do our "Proposed
the neighborhood a
protection.
Environmental Assessment." This would give
reasonable chance for its environmental
Accordingly, we again request that the City do the "Proposed
Environmental Assessment" and "that the City provide a pub2ic
comment period of at least 30 days following publication of the
report."
2. LACR OF ADEQUATE PUBLIC REVIEW OF SITE PLAN NOISE STUDY
The City is to be given credit for doing at least part of the
environmental study we recommended. At the March 26, 1999
Planning Commission Hearing, the City staff recommended that a
site plan noise study be done. For some reason this study was
long delayed and not made public until, Monday, May 10, 1999, the
very day we write these words. But this is only two days away
from the City Council public hearing! It is an extreme,
unreasonable and almost impossible burden for us to attempt to
find an expert who can interpret a noise study in the eleventh
hour like this.
We nevertheless offer a few hurried observations about the noise
study. The study addresses only truck engine noise at Dawes
Trucking anticipated operating levels from slow moving and idling
trucks. It ignores piercing back-up truck signals and air
brakes, the most bothersome of truck noises. It also ignores
opening and closing of dock doors. Even during hours when the
noise ordinance is not exceeded as an hour-long average of engine
noise levels, the instantaneous noise levels from air brakes and
repeated back-up beepers wi11 disturb neighborhoods peace and
quietude and will disrupt sleep.
A rather puzzling part of the study reports that the �'Number of
truck operations permitted per hour to remain below L10 55 dBa
[the highest night noise level allowed by the St. Paul noise
ordnance]" is 26. This apparently means that the amount of noise
at night created by 26 trucks in an hour is acceptable in
neighborhoods of Highland Park, Macalaster Groveland, and St.
Anthony Park, as well as Newe11 Park. However, it is difficult
to believe that any residential neighborhood in St. Paul would
tolerate such noise.
13
��l -S a�\
The noise study also ignores the affect of the proposed study on
daytime noise. We cannot tell from the study if the truck
facility would violate the ncise ordinance during the day. In
addition, the study does not indicate the present noise level in
the Fairview and Minnehaha neighborhood.
At this point it is important to bring to bear here our earlier
discussion of the Zoning Code. The zoning requirement states
that the neighborhood must not be adversely affected in any way
by I-1 activity. This is stricter than simply requiring that the
proposed activity not violate noise ordinances.
Finally, since the permit request relates to a building with 26
bays, it is imperative that any comprehensive study consider
noise impact at maximum operating capacity, not just presently
anticipated operating levels.
Out of due process concerns, our April 13th letter to Mayor
Coleman specifically requested "that the City provide a public
comment period of at least 30 days following publication of the
report tthe "Proposed Environmental Assessment"]. It is very
important that citizens have the opportunity to assess and
comment upon environmental assessments which so critically bear
upon their neighborhood preservation. Accordingly, we request
minimally, that a 30 day public comment period be allowed for the
noise study and a public hearing at the end of that period.
J. PROJECTED CAPACITY OF PROPOSED FACILITY?
The Resolution reports that 45 semi-trailer trucks and 40 smaller
trucks would use this facility weekly. (p. 2) However, it also
reports that the building would consist of 26 docks. With
optimal scheduling, such a building could accommodate over 100
trucks a day! The proposed site plan and its presently
anticipated levels of operation are seriously incompatible with
the residential neighborhood. But if the building were to
realize its capacity, the facility would violate the neighborhood
in spectacular fashion! Even the noise ordnance would be
radically exceeded. Air pollution also would dramatically rise.
One has to wonder, why is such a facility being built with that
kind of capacity? What is to stop the owner from allowing the
building to reach its capacity? It is a serious concern that
14
q`t
the proposed building would have a much more serious detrimental
e£fect on the neighborhood than the site plan suggests because
the site plan fails to address the building's capacity.
IC. ECONOMIC IMPACT UPON NEIGABORHOOD
The Planning Commission failed to address the financial impact of
the proposed facility upon neighborhood homeowners. Such an
incompatible industrial development would decrease their property
values and discourage lending institutions from financing home
improvement loans, second mortgages, or mortgages for prospective
purchasers of homes.
L. CONNECTION WITH AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT
The Planning Commission failed to give special consideration
under the Americans With Disabilities Act for neighbors with
respiratory and other disabilities, including asthmatic children
and adults, who are at high risk from increased air pollution;
from stress during the 2ong operating hours from noise of the
truck engines, backup beepers, and air brakes, and from loss of
sleep due to noise and aggravated respiratory problems.
Residents with chronic or disabling health problems should not be
forced out of an established affordable neighborhood by
incompatible adjacent development.
M. ALTERNATIVES TO TRUCK TRANSFER FACILITY
There are many reasonable development alternatives for this site
which would be compatible with the neighborhood. These would
include low polluting light industries which were not open in the
evening hours. The bus line on Minnehaha flat lancl make this
site perfect for disabled and elderly housing. Such a development
would create less air pollution than other alternatives, since
those residents would use the bus lines to a great extent. But
even other housing would be a better air pollution-wise than
introducing a lot of trucks to the area. That is because cars
would not emit the air particulates of truck diesel engines,
particulates which now of a major concern and study by the
federal EPA.
15
V � �4,.�._.�,�. ��- a� ����,�
Council File # ��'S�
�������� � `l�� RESOLU ON �J �eenSheet# �o�b��
�
ITY OF SAINT PAUL, NIINNESOTA
� �, / �/
Presented By
I'.Z`-� -�flI1L7
Committee: Date
2 WFIEREAS, JLT Group, in Zoning File No. 99-038, applied on Februaiy 24, 1999 for a
3 site plan review pursuant to the provisions of Saint Paul Legislative Code § 62.108 in order to
4 establish a truck facility on the west side of Fairview Avenue, one-half block south of Minnehaha
5 Avenue, and legally described as Section 33, Township 29, Range 23, except avenues the North
6 561 33/100 ft of nortYteast 1/4 of northwest 1/4 of Section 33, Township 29, Range 23; and
7
8 WHEREAS, JLT Group and the Hamline Midway Coalition requested the Saint Paul
9 Planning Commission to hold a public hearing on the proposed site plan; and
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
WFIEREAS, the Saint Paul Pluuiiug Commission conducted a public hearing on the site
plan application on March 26, 1998 and referred the matter to the Commissions Neighborhood
Plamiing Committee; and
WHEREAS, the Neighborhood Planning Committee met and discussed the site plan on
March 13, 1999 and March 20, 1499 and recommended approval of the site plan with conditions;
and
WHEREAS, on Apri123, 1999, the Saint Paul Planing Commission, having received the
recommendation submitted by its Neighborhood Planning Committee, made the following
findings as set forth in its resolution number 99-27:
Dawes Trucking The truck transfer facility would be built by JLT and operated by
Dawes Trucking. Dawes would bring a variety of goods to the site from local businesses
using smaller city trucks. The goods would then be consolidated inside the building and
loaded onto semi-trailers and shipped out of state. Dawes currently operates out of a
building located in Roseviile. However, this building is too small and Dawes wants to
move to get more room
2. Proposed operation John McDaniels, the owner of Dawes Trucking, described the
proposed opexation to staff, including the hours of operation and the number of trucks:
Hours of operation
- The facility would be open Monday through Friday. It would normally be
closed on weekends although occasionaliy there would be an individual
huck on weekends.
Page 1 of 9
1 G S S Zt�
2 -
During the week the facility would open at 7AM. Tuesdays and Fridays
3 aze the busiest days and the facility would normally stay open until
4 midnight on those nights. On Monday, Wednesday and Thursday the
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
facility would close at 8 or 9 P.M..
Peak hours are late afternoon (3 to 6 P.M.)
Number and types of trucks
— There would be appro�mately 35 semi-trailer trucks a week taking freight
out and another 10 semi-trailer trucks bring freight in. (On Tuesday and
Friday when they aze busier, there would be 10 semi-trailer hucks a day.
On Monday, Wednesday and Thursday there would be fewer semi-trailer
trucks.
There would be 6 to 8 smaller local hucks a day Monday thru Friday.
These trucks would leave in the morning, pick up ar deliver goods locally,
and return in the afternoon.
The large trailers typically take 3 or 4 hours to load. However, a trailer
may site at the dock for a day or two until it is picked up. The truck
engines would be turned off and would not run while the hucks are
parked. Elechical hook-ups for engine heaters would be provided in the
winter. If trailers will be parked for more than a few hours, the tractor is
unhooked and leaues the site.
Some of the semi-trailers would have refrigerator units. However, Dawes
would not be handling perishable good such as produce and so trucks with
refrigerator units would not run them while they were at the site.
There would not be any fueling stations or maintenance shops on site.
3. Existing operation Staff visited Dawes current locafion in Roseville two times and
observed the following:
— On Thursday, March 11 at 4:00 PM there were 10 trailers pazked at dock doors
and additional trailers parked on the site away from the building. (These trailers
did not have any engines running.) There was one truck backing up to a dock and
in the next 15 minutes two more hucks arrived on site. (These trucks had their
engines rum�ing.)
— On Monday, March 25 at 8:00 the business was closed. There were
approximately 10 trailers parked at dock doors and other trailers parked on the site
away from the building. One parked truck was running and had its lights on.
4. The site plan The plan shows a 27,740 square foot building. It would be 294' long on
the side facing Fairview and 93' deep. It would be 28'-5" ta11. The building would have a
small office on the south end but most of the building would be for storing and handling
goods. The building would have 21 overhead doors for large trucks on the west side
(facing away from Fanview) and 5 doors for smaller, local trucks on the north side (these
would be visible from the street). Access would be provided using two existing
driveways on Fairview. The site also has access from an existing driveway on Prior.
Page 2 of 9
a��Z�
2 5. Required findings Section 62.108(c) of the Zoning Code says that in "order to
3 approve the site plan, the plauuing commission shall consider and fmd that the site plan is
4 consistent with" the following:
5
6 (a) 7'he ciiy's adopted comprehensive plan and development or project plans for sub-
7 areas of the ciry.
9 The 1980 Ciry Wide Land Use Plan that was in effect when ttus project was
10 submitted to the City for site plan review says:
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
�)
The City should Encourage conditions wiuch allow the mixing of
appropriate light indushy with housing and cozzuuercial activities.
In cases of incompatible land use, the City will use the techniques lasted
above wherever possible to create or nnprove exis6ng buffers between
land uses. [The techniques referred to include landscaping, bernung or
fencing perimeters and mainta.ining building exteriors to complement
adjacent land uses.)
The City will ensure through it site plan review requirements that all new
development provides adequate buffering as part of its design.
The 1980 District 11 Plan which is currently in effect lists the following goals:
— Maintain the present balance beriveen residential and commercial and
industrial use.
— Develop buffers to separate residential areas from commercial and
industrial areas.
— Confine through traffic to relatively few streets, treat others streets as
local, resident serving streets.
— When developing majar through streets, minnnize detriment to bordering
land uses.
— Fairview between Minnehaha and Pierce Butler should be de-emphasized
as a through street and access form Fairview to Pierce Butler closed. (This
pro}ect is south of the area referred to in this recommendation.)
The site plan is not consistent with this finding but can be modified so that it is
consistent:
The existing driveways on Fairview must be closed to ensure that trucks
use Prior Avenue to enter the site.
Adequate visual and sound buffers must be provided.
Applfcable ordinances ofthe City ofSaint Paul.
Although trucking facilities are a pernutted use in an I-1 zoning district, the site
plan is not consistent with this finding. However, it can be modified so that it is
consistent:
Page 3 of 9
1 �� ��-f
2 — The building setback on Fauview does not meet the min;mum required
3 setback and therefore must be increased from 6' at least 7'-5".
4 — The site plan shows two driveways to Fairview Avenue. Fauview is not a
5 truck route. The site has access to Prior Avenue, which is a designated
6 truck route. Therefore, the e�sting driveways on Fairview must be closed
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
to ensure that trucks use Prior Avenue.
(c)
— It is likely that without any noise mirigation, noise from trucks will exceed
the maximum levels permitted by the Saint Paul legislarive code.
Therefore, a noise study must be conducted to deternune whether
additional noise mitigation is needed to ensure that the facility will comply
with the noise ordinance and help determine the design and location of any
noise mitigation tUat is needed.
Preservation of unique geologic, geographic or historically sigrzificant
characteristics of the city and environmentally sensitive areas.
The site plan is consistent with this finding. The site is a paved pazking lot on
industrial property and the surrounding azea is a residential neighborhood.
(d) Protection of adjacent and neighboring properties through reasonable provision
for such matters as surface water drainage, sound and sight buffers, preservation
of views, Zight and air, and those aspects of design which may have substantial
effects on neighboring Zand uses.
The site plan is not consistent with this finding but can be modified so that it is
consistent:
The residents in the area have complained in the past about truck traffic on
Fairview. The site plan calls for using the existing driveways on Fairview.
This would increase the amount of truck traffic on Fairview. The
driveways on Fairview should be closed so that all trucks must use Prior
Avenue. There is enough room to the south of the exisring main building
for trucks to get from Prior to the new building and trucks should be
required to use this to minunize noise to the surrounding residential
neighborhood.
Noise from hucks on the site would have a substanfial effect on
neighboring residentialland uses on Fairview and Minnehaha. A noise
study by an acoustical engineer should be required to determine if noise
barriers are needed and if they aze, how big they need to be and where they
should go. JLT is talking about conshucting another building north of the
truck transfer facility and this could act as a noise barrier if it was large
enough and it was for a use that did not generate significant additional
noise.
(e)
The arrangement of buildings, uses and facilities of the proposed development in
order to assure abutting property and/or its occupants will not be unreasonably
affected.
Page 4 of 9
�� s
2
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
The site plan is not consistent with tlus fmding but can be modified so that it is
consistent:
— Traffic on Fairview Avenue is already heavy. Permitting the proposed
truck facility to use driveways on Fairview would increase the amount of
traffic and would unreasonably affect the residential neighborhood across
the street. Therefore, the e�sisting driveways on Fairview should be closed
so that trucks use Prior Avenue.
�fl
— The building is arranged so that most of the loading docks aze on the west
side of the building and the building will block most of the noise from
these docks from residents on Fairview. However, residents on
Minnehaha will be hear noise from these docks unless noise barriers aze
built. The building also has five docks on the north end of the building
close to Fairview and noise barriers are needed for these docks too.
Creation of energy-conserving design through landscaping and Zocation,
orientation and elevation ofstructures.
The site plan meets current standazds for energy conservation and is consistent
with this finding.
(g) Safety and convenience of both vehicular and pedestrian traff c both within the
site and in relation to access streets, including traffic circulation features, the
locations and design of entrances and exits and parking areas within the site.
�)
(i)
Public Works staff has reviewed the site plan and deternuned that the plan,
including use of existing the driveways on Fairview for the primary access to the
truck facility, is safe and consistent with this fmding.
The satisfactory availabiliry and capacity of storm and sanitary sewers, including
solutions to any drainage problems in the area of the development.
There is adequate sewer available. The applicant has not prepazed a detailed
storm water drainage plan yet. The site plan is consistent with this finding if a
condition is added that a drainage plan must be submitted to staff for approval.
Sufficient landscaping, fences, walls and parking necessary to meet the above
objectives.
The site plan is not consistent with this finding but can be modified so that it is
consistent:
- Additional fences or wa11s must be constructed, if a sound study shows
they are needed to block noise to neighboring houses.
— There is no landscaping on the site now. The landscaping shown on the
site plan should be increased by planting shrubs that grow at least 10' tall
along the west side of the building. Additionallandscaping should be
planted around the perimeter of the site where ever noise barriers are
Page 5 of 9
�� required. The noise barriers should be setback 10' from the property line
2
3
to provide adequate room forlandscaping.
4 (j) Site accessibility in accordance with the provisions of the Americans with
5 Disabilities Act (ADA), including parking spaces, passenger Zoading zones and
6 accessible routes.
8 The site plan is consistent with this finding if one additional handicapped
9 accessible pazking space is provided.
10
11 (k) Provision for erosion and sediment control as specified in the "Ramsey Erosion
12 Sediment and Control Handbook "
13
14 The site plan does not show erosion or sediment control measures. A condition
15 for approval of the site plan should be that an erosion and sediment control plan
16 must be submitted to staff for approval.
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
WHEI2EAS, based upon the fmdings noted above, the Commission approved the said
site plan subject to the following conditions:
2.
3.
�
Driveways. All truck traffic to this facility must use the south driveway on Prior Avenue
and proceed via the area south of the main existing building. Truck traffic may not use
Fairview Avenue. The two existing driveways on Fauview must be closed and replaced
with curb and boulevard. Curb and boulevazd work shall be by permit. If other uses are
proposed on the site that generate levels of traffic that will not negatively impact the
adjacent residential neighborhood, the City would consider permitting reopening
driveways to Fairview for these uses as long as the trucking facility did not have access to
Fairview. Reopening driveways shall be by pernut.
Hours. Hours of operation must be restricted to 7 A.M. to 10 P.M. Monday through
Friday to protect the adjacent residenrial neighborhood. The facility may not operate on
Saturdays or Sundays.
Truck idling. Truck engines must be tumed off whenever riucks aze patked at the dock
or on site waiting for more than 15 minutes to load or unload at the dock.
Truck parking. Trucks may not stop or pazk on Fairview, Minnehaha or other neazby
residential streets. (Public Warks says it can post signs where needed to help enforce
this.)
5. Noise analysis and noise mifigation. A noise analysis must be done by an acoustical
engineer. The acoustical engineer will be one agreed to by both the City and the
applicant. The analysis will deternune the level of noise that could be anticipated from
the facility. ff the noise analysis indicates that the faciliry without noise mitigation
measures will exceed levels pernvtted under City noise regulations, sound mitigation
measures must be constructed to ensure that the facility conforms to City noise
regulations. Such sound mitigation measures must be in place prior to operations. If
another building will serve as a sound barrier, the walls must be substantaally complete
prior to operations.
Page 6 of 9
1 �,��s z�{
2 6. Lighting. E�terior lighting for the facility must be auned and shielded to m;n;mi�e glare
3 light and light spill over on to adjacent residential property.
4
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
7. Setbacks and landscaping. The setback on Fauview must be increased to 10 feet to
permit enough room for landscaping to soften the appeazance of the building. The
setback shall be planted and maintaiued with plant material approved by site plan staff
and which will grow at least 10 feet tall when mature in order to form a continuous row
along the entire east side of the building.
�
r�
10.
Additional landscaping must be planted azound the perimeter of the site wherever noise
barriers or visual screens aze required. The noise barriers or visual screens must be
setback 10' from the property line to provide adequate room for landscaping. The
existing chain link fence in these azeas must be removed.
Storm water management. A storm water management plan must be submitted to staff
for approval.
Accessible parking. One addirional handicapped accessible parking space must be
provided.
Erosion control. An erosion and sediment control plan must be submitted to staff for
approval.
WHEREAS, pursuant to the provisions of Saint Paul Legislative Code § 64.206, JLT
duly filed an appeal of the site plan approval on Apri123, 1999 and requested a hearing before
the Saint Pau1 City Council for the purpose of considering the actions taken by the said
commission; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to the provisions of Saint Paul Legislative Code § 64.206 the
Aamline Midway Coalition duly filed an appeal of the site plan approval and condiUons on May
4, 1999 and requested a hearing before the Saint Paul City Council for the purpose of considering
the actions taken by the said commission; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to the provisions of Saint Paul Legislarive Code § 64.206 the
Northstar Chapter of the Sierra Club duly filed an appeal of the site plan approval and conditions
on May 7, 1999 and requested a hearing before the Saint Paul City Council for the purpose of
considering the actions taken by the said commission; and
�VHEREAS, acting pursuant to Saint Paul Legislative Code §§ 64.206 - 64.208 and upon
notice to affected parties, the Saint Paul CiTy Council d'ad on May 12, 1999, duly conduct a
public hearing on these three appeals where all anterested parties were given an opportunity to be
heard; and
WHEREAS, the Council of the City of Saint Paul, having heazd the statements made and
having considered the application, the report of staff, the record, minutes and resolution of the
Zoning Committee and of the Saint Paul Plauniug Commission, does hereby;
Page 7 of 9
i �l��Z�
2 RESOLYE, to affirni the decision of the Planning Commission in this matter in that
3 there has been no showing by any pariy appealing the decision of the Planning Commission that
4 it committed an error as to fact, finding or procedure; and be it further
6 RESOLVED, that the Council ofthe City of Saint Paul adopts as its own, the findings
7 and conditions in this matter as set forth in Planning Commission Resolution No. 99-27; and be
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
it further
RESOLVED, that the Council of the City of Saint Paul, having heazd the statements
made and having considered the application, the report of staff, the record, minutes and
resolution of the Zoning Committee and of the Saint Paul Plauning Commission and acting in the
capacity authorized in Saint Paul Legislative Code § 64.207, hereby modifies the decision of the
Saint Paul Plamiing Commission by amending condition number 5 by adding a new condition
number 5.1 (A - E) as well as adding additional conditions 11, 12, 13, 14 to conditions 1-10 as
approved by the Pla.nning Commission in its resolution 99-27 dated Apri123, 1999.
5.1 Noise mitigation. Braslau and Associates conducted a noise analysis. Based upon this
analysis, the noise analysis and noise mitigation conditions set forth under condition
number 5 aze amended to require:
(A) That construction of the "second building" contemplated by the applicant must be
undertaken and substanrially completed before truck terminal operafions may
begin. The second building is necessary to protect homes in the adjacent
residential neighborhood from nighttime noise from hucking operations and to
protect these residential azeas from direct and reflected noise from trucking
operations.
(B) That a second noise analysis conducted by an acousfical engineer agreed to by
both the City and appiicant shall be conducted after the substantial completion of
the second building and that before the truck terminal operations may begin, this
second noise analysis must be submitted to the City for review to detemune
whether any additional noise mitigation measures must be considered.
(C) That any public address systems aze constructed and configured to eliminate
public address noise from adjacent residential neighborhoods.
11
12.
(D) Than any mechanical equipment not specifically analyzed must be constructed
and configured to comply with the most restrictive applicable state or municipal
noise standard in order to protect adjacent residential areas.
(E) All other conditions imposed under condition nuxnber 5 shall remain in full force
and effect.
Mitigation on Minnehaha Sound mitigation will be incorporated into the site plan
along Minnehaha Avenue.
No entrance on Minnehaha Trucks using this facility must not enter or e�t the site
from Minnehaha Avenue.
Page 8 of 9
1 �'1 �l—�2�
2 13. Number of trucks The number of hucks entering the site must not exceed 45 per week.
4 14. Annual approval based upon site plan compliance. The site plan is approved for one
5 year. The site plan shall be renewable annually thereafter only after staff makes an
6 annual report on the operations at the facility to the plaiming commission and a finding
7 by the plauuing commission that the facility is being operated in compliance with the
8 conditions contained in the site plan.
10
11
12
13
14
15
FLTRTHER RESOLVED, that the appeals of JLT, Hamline-Midway Coatition and the
Northstar Chapter of the Sierra Club be and aze hereby denied; and be it
FINALLY RESOLVED, that the City Clerk shall mail a copy of this resolution to JLT,
the Hamline-Midway Coalition and the Northstar Chapter of the Sierra Club, the Zoning
Adtninistrator and the Saint Paul Planning Commission.
� $�.`�
�,�.rr•t.� �
�
�
�
�� l� t���
f�r�-�`-�
\
OR1GiNAL
By:
Requested by Department of:
By:
Adopted by cil: ate
Adoption ertified by Cou
By: —
Approved by Mayor: Date
Form Ap ved by City Attorney
$Y: �ffC.�� G-B-��
Approved by Mayor for Submission to Council
By:
By. � , \
���-��_ �`t � �`�°�q
AdoptedbyCouncil: Date �
Adoptio eitiSed by Council � � e '
By: ., a._ �,,,.�,_—_
--�"
Approved by Mayor: Date
�t�t S?1-t
June 8
DAiE INITipTED
GREEN SHEET
� � � f , •
Ass�cx
TOTAL # OF SIGNATURE PAGES
oe.�n�r owECron
arvwuca
� ❑ anwnowar ❑ arcctcxK
❑ nuuxa�amneFSOai ❑ n�uxw.��rc
❑YYORryRIffi4lAIiI) ❑
(CLIP ALL LOCATIONS FOR SIGNATURE)
Memorializing the decision of the City Council on May 12, 1999, denying the appeal of JLT
6roup to a decision of the Planning Commission approving a site plan for a truck facility
at approximately 630 Prior Avenue North with conditions regulating access to the site,
noise, hours of operation and other issues.
PLANNING CAMMISSION
CIB COMM{TTEE
CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION
ISSUE,
OF TRANSAMION S
Why)
Has this persoNfi�m ever xroriced under a coMrzct for fhia depaAment?
YES NO
Hasthis ye�soNfirtn evet been a dty employeeT
YES NO
Does this personlfirm possess a sldl� not iwrmallYD� M' any wrtent city emPloyee?
YES NO
is Mis perso�rm a farpetetl vendorT
YES NO
�lain all ves answers on senarate sheet and attach to areen shcet
COST/REVENUE BUDGETED (CIRCLE ONE)
YES NO
SOURCE ACTIVITY NUMBER
3
�q -s�.�{
CI'I`Y �F SAIN'I` PALJj., 390 Ciry Halt Telephone: 612d66-8510
Norm Coleman, Mayor IS West Kellogg Boulevard Facsimile: 612-266-8513
Saint Paul, MN 55102
June 29, 1999
Council President Dan Bostrom
and Members of the City Council
310 and 320 City Hall
15 West Kellogg Boulevard
Saint Paul, Minnesota 55102
RE: Veto of Council File Number 99-52�: JLT Group
Dear Council President Bostrom and Members of the City Council:
I am returnin� to you, with my veto, Council File 99-524. This resolution unnecessarily
puts the city and its taxpayers at sianificant risk of le�al liability. Some of the conditions in
the resolution arguably go beyond the city's le�al authority in limiting JLT Group's right to
develop its property. This would leave our residents on the hook to pay the costs of a'
potential lawsuit and adverse verdict.
The proposal by the JLT Group to develop industrial property at Minnehaha and Fairview
in the Midway area has under�one a great deal of scrutiny by staff, residents, the Hamline-
Midway Coalition, the Planning Commission and its Nei�hborhoods subcommittee, the
Business Review Council, the City Council and especially Councilmember Benanav and his
staff. The process has presented a challenge in balancing the ri�hts of the JLT Group to
develop its property with the nei�hborhood residents' desire to be protected from noise
and disruption. The resolution presented by the City Council is close to being a fair
balance but severai modifications need to be made.
Of the fifteen site plan conditions approved by the City Council four unreasonably restrict
the JLT Group's ri�lit to develop its properiy. Specifically the restrictions on the hours of
operation (condition 2), the limits on the number of trucks entering the facility (condition
13), and the annual approvai provision (condition 14), are too restrictive and place
unreasonable hardships on the business. In addition, condition number three (3) control(ing
truck idlin�, is not presently warranted accordin� to the noise analysis prepared by the
acoustical en�ineer. I think these site plan conditions can be modified to all concerned and
thereby eliminate any need to resort to the courts to resolve this matter.
�
�(q-Say
Councii President Dan Bostrom and Members of the City Council
7une 29, 1999
Page Two
I urge the Council to pass an effective compromise that will allow this important
development to proceed while maintaining essential protections for the adjacent
neighborhood.
Sincerely,
�JA- ��II�U�
Norm Coleman
Mayor
NC:drm
c: Saint Paul Plannin� Commission Members
Business Review Council Members
Robert Kessler, Director, License, Inspection and Environmental Protection (LIEP)
Brian Sweeney, Director, Plannin� and Economic Development (PED)
OFFICE OF Tf� CITY ATTORNEY
Clayton M. Robinson, Jr., CiryAttorrsey
�R -Sa.�
CITY OF SAINT PAUL
Narm Coleman, Mayor
Civil Division
400 Ciry Hal(
I S West Ke[logg Blvd
Saint PauT, Minnesota 55702
Telephone: 651266�710
Facsimile: 657 298-5679
CiOEdPk.n �9."�,°: i��? t':�;'?or
June 8, 1999
Nancy Anderson
Council Secretary
310 City Hall
15 West Kellogg Blvd.
St. Paul, MN 55102
;,. + ..r.ar
Re: Appeals by JLT, Inc., Siena Club - Northstar Chapter, Hamline-Midway Coalition.
Zoning File No. 99-038
Council Action Date: May 12, 1999
Dear Nancy:
Attached please fmd the signed original of a resolution memorializing the decision of the Saint
Paul City Council to deny all the appeals in the above-entitled matter. Please place this mattei
on the Council's consent agenda at your earliest convenience.
If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to call.
Very ly yours,
� " ���'!✓��
Peter W. Warner
Assistant City Attomey
PWW/rmb
Enclosure
OFFICE OF LICENSE, TNSPECTTONS AND
ENVIItONMENTALPROTECTION
Robert Kets[er, Direc[or
q�, -s ay
CITY OF SAINT PAUL
Norm Coleman, Mayor
B UII DING INSPECI70N AND
DESIGN
350 St Peter Srreet
Suite 310
Saint Paut, Minnesota SSIO2-I510
Te[ephone: 612-266900]
Facsimile: 612-266-9099
Apri127, 1999
Ms. Nancy Anderson
City Council Reseazch Office
Room 310 City Hall
Saint Paul, MN 55102
Dear Ms. Anderson:
I would like to confirm that a public heazing before the City Council is scheduled for Wednesday, May
12, 1999 for the following zoning case:
Appellant: JLT Group
File Number: 99-101
Purpose: Appeal of a decision by the Planning Commission to approve a site pian for a
uucking faciliry with conditions regulating access to the site, noise, hours of
operation and other issues.
Location: Approxunately 630 Prior Avenue North
I have confirmed this date with the o�ce of Counciimember Benanav. My understanding is that this
public hearing request wili appeaz on the agenda of the City Council at your earliest convenience and
that you will publish notice of the hearing in the Saint Paul I.egal I,edger.
Please call me at 651-266-9086 if you have any questions.
Sincerely,
/ !�-�✓✓�
Tom Beach
Zoning Section
Vi':aiia:s � .. ^ -t
������'�
� FmsrRUn� •
MOTICEAF PUBLIC HEARIIVG
The Saint Paul City Counci] wi7l conduct
a public hearing on Wednesday, May 12,
"1999, at 5:30 p.m. in the City Council
Chambers, Third Floor, City Hall-
Courthouse, to consider the appea] of JLT
Group to a decision of the Planning
Commission approving a site plan for a
iruelflng facility at approximately 630 Prior
Avenue North with conditions regulating
�access to the site, noise, hourspf operaUon
and other issues.
Dated: Apri128, 1999
NANCYANDERSON '
Assistant City Council Secretary
, - (Apr.3a) �
s=====' ST. PAIIL LLGAL LEDGER'==s'==
OFFICE OF LICENSE, INSPECTIONS AND
FvWII20N�lEN'I'AL PROTECTiON
Rabert Kessler, Director
Qg -S a-�\
• � CITY OF SAINT PAUL
'�� Norm Caleman, Mayor
May 5, 1999
Ms. Nancy Anderson
Secretary to the City Council
Room 310 City Hall
Saint Paul, Minnesota 55102
ZAFRY PROFESSIONAL
BUIIDING
Suite 300
350 St. Peter Srreet
Sent Pau1, Minnesota SSIO2-I570
Telephone: 612-2669090
Facsr,ti[e: 672-266-9099
6I2-2669124
RE: Appeal of the Planning Commissions decision to approve with conditions a site plan review
for the JLT/Dawes Trucking facility proposed for the southwest corner of Minnehaha and
Fairview
Public hearing at City Council scheduled for Wednesday, May 12, 1999
Zoning Files #99-101 and 99-107
Deaz Ms. Anderson:
• PLANNING COMI'IISSION APPROVED THE STTE PLAN WITH CONDTTIONS
On Apri123 the Planning Commission approved the site plan for a trucking facility at the southwest
corner of Minnehaha and Fairview. The approval is subject to 10 conditions intended to minimize the
impact of truck noise and tr�c on the residential neighborhood located across the street, including
conditions that:
— Prohibit truck access from Fairview Avenue and require them to use Prior Avenue
— Limit hours of operation
�
— Limit truck idling
— Prohibit truck parking on neazby streets
— Require that the applicant pay for a noise study to help determine if noise barriers aze needed. (JLT
hopes to have the noise study completed before the City Council meets.)
The Neighborhood and Current Planning Commission and LIEP staff recommended approval with
conditions.
At the public hearing 17 people spoke in opposition and 10 letters in opposition were received.
APPEALS HAVE BEEN FILED BY THE APPLICANT AND T'HE DISTRICT COUNCIL
The applicant, JLT Group, has appealed rivo of the conditions attached by the Planning Commission.
One of these conditions limits the hours of operations to between 7 AM and 10 PM Monday through
Friday with no operations on Saturday or Sunday. The other condition requires that trucks must be
turned off when they aze parked at the dock or when they aze on site for more than 15 minutes waiting to
go to a dock to load or unload.. JLT says that trucking facilities aze a permitted use and that the nature of
the trucking industry make tltese conditions impractical.
The Hamline Midway Coalition has appealed the Plannina Commission's decision to approve the site
plan. They say tha[ even with all of the required conditions, a trucking faciliry at this location will have a •
negative impact on the residential property across Fairview and Minnehaha. They aze concemed about
noise and air pollution from the facility. They feel that the conditions limiting hours and truck idling aze
not enforceable. They are afraid that noise wilt be a problem even if the noise study being done says the
facility will not violate City noise standazds.
Please notify me if any member of the City Councit wishes to have slides of the site presented at the
public hearing.
Sincerely,
,
Tom Beach
ATTACHNIENTS
page 1 Appeals from JLT Group and Hamline Midway Coalition
page 4 Planning Commission resolution
page 10 Planning Commission minutes
page 28 Staff report and recommendations
page 33 Letters to the Planning Commission
page 61 Noise information
page 63 Truck route information
page 65 Location map and site plan
�
r �
L.J
_Apr-26-99 10:54A Constructors and Assoc. 651 848-0783
SAIKT
s�di
�
��AA
APPLICATION fOR APPEAL
Departmenl ujPlarsning a1�d Economic Develnpmertl
Zoxii�g Section
1100 Cily Ha11 AnxeY
ZS 6'es1 Fourdt Street
Saint Pau7,14f.�'SSIPZ
266-5589
APPELLANT ►Yame 3 '+-� G
Address `: Q V�--'�`'"" �'a ��' V�.�._.-�
CityS� 3�- �Q St.�Zip paytime phone
t�RQPERTY Zoning File Name_^�-� �� /�M'Rj � ""'� -
LOCAT{oN A���ess/LOCation �iwh�'.��s � �►SQr
TYPE OF APP�AL: Application is hereby made for an appeal to the:
CJ Board oS Zoning Appeals �City Caunci!
u�der the provisions of Chapter 64, Section ��. Paragraph of #he Zoning Code, to
appeal a decision made by the_ ��tM� '-��•��'��"`
+��27� q , 19 File number. � ��
on --
(dafe of dQCision)
GftOl]NDS FOft APPEAL: �xplain why you feel there ha5 been an error in any requirement,
pErmit, decision or refusaf made by an ad a o the Plan n Comm ssion fact, procedure of
finding made by the Board of Zoning App 9
�.�: � �-�� � �"�� �"�� �
c���
Attach additional sheet if
P_02
���'�
•
•
Applicani's signaturs� — Pate `E' City agent •
�
•
n
U
rwr. �.is��� ic�:�sar•i
HHIILIMEiMIDb1HY
�
���
t�'0.237 P.1
a��s��
q���d7
HA.MLINE 1V��DWAY CQA�,IT�QI�.�
Ham�utePazkPlaygroundBwldi¢g � 1564L�iondAcenue,SaintPaul,DiY551Q4 • -6?G-i9sG • -641-6t23
May?,1999 —� — — — �--- —
Councilmember Daniel Bosirom
St. Paul Ciry Covnci?
1� W, Kelloga Blvd.
St. Paul, Iv1�i 155102
Dear Councilmember Bos�rom:
On behalf of the neighbors Iiving in tlte area surroundina F.airview and �
iviinnehaha Avenues, the Hamline IvTidway Coalitiori Board of birectors wishes to
appeal the Planning Cominission's April 23, 1999 appro�al of the jI,T/T)awes
Truckinb faality siCe plan. The proposed truck transfer fariiity is an incompatible
land use with respect to the residential area direcfly east and north of the siEe.
In approvulg Ehe site plazt, tIze Planning Commission was mandated to follow St.
Paul Zoniag Code �62.103 (c) conceming Site Plan review and approval, Said Code
staee5: •
"In order to approve the site plan, Ehe Plazu Contu'ussion sltell consider
and fznd that the sit� plan is consiseent with... (4) Protection of adjacent and
neighbocing properties through reasonable provision for suclt maEters as
surface tivater drainage, sotuld and sight btiffezs, preservafion of views, light
ai�d air, and those aspec�.s of design which may have suUstan�ial effect on
nei�hboring land uses."
The Planning CommiSSion recoo ized rhe significant ad�erse impact of the
proposed truck transfer facility on tlie neighborhood and placed ten (10) candiEions
on its resolution of approval to easz these effects. However, it erred in approving
tfie plan because neighboring properties and residents wili not Ue protecEed and wiIl
be negaHvely impacted �vith regard to these important factors.
1) 'I'he area arowld Ivinlnehalla and �airvzew curren1y has an elevated air
pollurion index as a result of: a) uldustry to the immediaEe south, west, and
northwest; b) �eavy truck and other vehicular tra`8c bn several nearby major
streees and thoroujhfares; and, c) the Burlin,o-,ton Vorthem-Santa Fe Railroad
Intermodal facility, located five (5) b1oc1<s nortll of tne site. The proposed facility
will generate considerable smaIl truck and semi-tiuck traffic and idling. Both Ehe
gasoline and the diesel fuel will increase the air poIIu!ion index and,
consequently, presenE more of a healtlz hazard Htian the present air quaIity. In its
resolution, the Commission placed a 15-minute lir_ut on t�uck idling, but #his
condition is not consistently enforceaUle.
Dedicate�lla muwin� ll�e Nuntlane daidmc�y ne��hborbeoct a 6e.Ke�• plrrce to ln�e ancl wark,
�.�m
2
iHf. �.1:55 1���2EPM Hr+MLINEihIIuW�IY
No.237 P.2
•
Councii Pmsident Dan Bo<_hom
�1ay 4,1999
Pa�e 2
Fe: 2F �99a3S
2) Accordin� Ya the manager oF Dawes Tzucldng, semi-trucks from aut-of-state wili
arrice at all �nes oE day and ni;11e and be allowed to enter the sitz at anytime,
including night-time. The noise of trucks arriving a#ter the approved hours of
operation--between 7:00 a.m. and 1d:Od p.m.—and the possible running of their
motors, is certain to affect neighbors. xhe testimony of Dawes Trucking
representatives and the impossibility of canstanh enforcement defies the viability
of this condition.
3) Durino the approved hours of operaf�an (7:00 a,m. - lO:QQ p.m.), noise from truck
traffic, engine idling, back-up beepers and air brakes is of great concexn to fhe
neighborhood. The Plaruung Commission required the applicant to conduct a
noise study to deterr.une if JLT w-ill Ue requixed to build a sound barrier.
Residents are concerned fihaE if the sfudy does not proc� concl¢sivety that noise
miHgation measures must be tal<en, the noise will necerLheless be an on-going
nuisance to the nei�hbors. I�1 passing the site plan, the Plannin� Commission
failed to ensure compatibiliEy of this plan tivith neighboring residents.
For the above reasons, we ask that the City Council accept and hear our appeal. We
oppose the site plan because we Uelieve that the operation of the JLT/Dawes truck
h�ansfer facilifiy is incompatiUle with the residential neighborhood to the immediate
north and east of the siEe.
4�%e Iook forward to hearing from pou conceming our request. Please conEact me or
Cathy Lue, I�MC commtuuty organizer, at (651) 646-1986—phone; (651) 641-67.23—fa.�c.
Sincerely,
��� ��
Jod.i M. BanClep
Executice Director
/jmU
cc:
Councilmembet Jay Benanav
Councilmember Jerzy Blal<ey
Tom Beach, LIEP
Gladys Morton, Planninb Commission
��
u
3
�q ,sa�
�
city of saint paul
planning commission resolution
fite number 99-27
date Apri1 23, 199
�VF�REAS, JLT GROUP, file �99038, has submitted a Site Pian for review under the provisions of
Section 62.103 of the Saint Paul Le�islative Code, to allow a trucking facility on the west side of
Fairviecv Avenue, % block south of Ivfinnehaha Avenue, le�ally described as Section 33 To�vnship 29
Range 23 except avenues the norch 561 33/100 feet of northeast I!4 of northwest 1/4 of Section 33,
Township 29 Range 23; and
`VHEREAS, the Saint Paul Planning Commission, on 03/26/99, held a public hearing at �vhich all
persons present were given an oppoRunity to be heard pursuant to said application in accordance with the
requirements of Section 62.103 of the Saint Paul Legisfative Code; and
`VHEREAS, the Saint Paul Planning Commission, based on the evidence presznted at the public hearin�
as substantially reflected in the minutes, made the foltowin� findin�s of fact:
• l. Dawes Trucl:ina The truck transfec faciliry would be built by JLT and operated by Dawes
Tnickin�. Dawes would brin� a variety of goods to the site from local businesses using smaller city
trucks. The goods �vould then be consolidated inside the building and toadzd onto semi-trailers and
shipped out of state. Da�ves currently operates out of a buildin� located in Roseville. Ho�vever, this
building is too small and Da�ves �vants to move to get more room
2. Proposed operatio❑ John McDaniels, the owner of Dawes Trucking, described the proposed
operation to staff, includina the hours of operation and thz number of trucks:
Hours of operation
- The facility would be open Monday throueh Friday. It would normally be closed on
weekends although occasionally there would be an individual truck on weekends.
- During the week the facility woufd open at 7A�1. Tuesdays and Fridays are the busiest days
and the facility would normally stay open until midni�ht on those niehts. On Monday,
Wednesday and Thursday the facility wou(d cfose at 8 or 9 P.M.. y
- Peak hours are late afternoon (3 to 6 P.MJ
•
moved bv Faricy
seconded bv
in favor 14 (2 abstentions
Dandrea, Donnelly-Cohen)
against
�
ZF �99038
Pa�e 2 of Resolution
Number and types of trucl:s
— There wou(d be approsimately 35 semi-trailer trucks a�veek takin� frei�ht out and another
10 semi-trailer trucks brin� frei�ht in. (On Tuesday and Friday when they are busier, there
«�oufd be 10 semi-trailer trucks a day. On bfonday, �Vednesday and Thursday there would
be fe�ver semi-trailer trucks.
— There would be 6 to 8 smaller local trucks a day Ivlonday thru Friday. These trucks would
[eave in the morning, pick up or de[iver goods [oca(ly, and retum in the afrernoon.
— The lar�e traifers rypically take 3 or 4 hours to toad. However, a traiter may site at the dock
for a day or tw�o until it is picked up. The truck engines would be tumed off and would not
run whi[e the trucks are parked. Electrica( hook-ups for engine heaters would be provided in
the winter. If trailers wi(I be parked for more than a few hours, the tractor is unhooked and
leaves the site.
— Some of the semi-trailers wouid have refri�erator units. However, Dawes wou[d not 6e
handlin� perishable good such as produce and so tucks with refri�erator units would not run
them while they were at the site.
— There would not be any fuelin� stations or main[znance shops on site.
•
Existing operation Staff visited Dawes current location in Roseville rivo times and observed the
FOI IOR7Ro:
— On Thursday, March 11 at 4:00 PM there �vere 10 trailers parked at dock doors and additional
trailers parked on the site away from the buildin�. (These trailers did not have any engines •
ranniag.) There was oae tr¢ck backina up to a dock and in the aext 15 minutes nvo more trucks
arrived on site. (These trucks had their en�ines runnin�.)
— On Monday, March 2� at 8:00 thz business �vas closed. There were approximately 10 trailers
parked at dock doors and other trailers parked oa the site away frorri ihe buildin�. One parked
truck was runnin� and had its li�hts on.
4. The site plan The plan shotivs a 27,740 square foot building. Ii tivould be 294' long oa the side
facin� Fairview and 93' deep. It woufd be 28'-5" talL The buitdin� would have a small ofFice on the
south end but most of the building �vould be for storin� and handling goods. The building would
have 21 overhead doors for laroe trucks on the west side (facin� ativay from Fairview) and 5 doors for
smalfer, local trucks on the north side (these woufd be visible from the street). Access would be
provided using rivo existin� driveways on Fairview. The site also has access from an existing
driveway on Prior.
Reqnired findinas Sec[ion 62.108(c) of the Zonin� Code says that in "order to approve the site
plan, the plannin� commission sltalf consider and find [hat the site plan is consistent with" the
fol(owin�:
(a) The city's aclopted comprehensive p1ar: and developmznt or project plans for sub-areas of the
city.
Thz 1930 Ciry' �Vide Land Use Plan that �vas in effec[ «hen this project was submitted to the
City for site plan revie�v says:
.
s
�� - s a'
ZF �99038
• Pa�e 3 of Resolution
- The City should Encoura�e conditions which allow the mixing of appropriate light industry
with housin� and commercial activities.
- In cases of incompatible land use, the City will use the techniques listed above wherever
possible to create or improve existin� buffers behveen land uses. [The techniques referred to
include landscapin�, berming or fencin� perimeters and maintainin� buildin� exteriors to
comp(ement adjacent land uses.)
— The City will ensure throu�h it site plan review requirements that all new development
provides adzquate bufferin� as part of its design.
The 1930 District 11 Plan which is currently in effect lists the followin� goats:
— bfaintain [he present balance beriveen residential and commerciaf and industrial use.
— Develop buffers to separate residential areas from commercia( and industrial areas.
— Confine through traffic to relativefy few streets, treat others streets as local, resident serving
streets.
— �Vhen developing major throu?h streets, minimize dztriment to borderin� land uses.
— Fairview behveen Minnehaha and Pierce Butler should be de-emphasized as a through street
and access form Fairvietiv to Pierce Butler c(osed. (This project is south of the area referred
to in this recommendation.)
The sire plan is not consistent with this findins but can be modified so that it is consistent:
• — The esisting driveways on Fairview must be ctosed to ensure that trucks use Prior Avenue to
en[er the site.
— Adequate visual and sound buffers must be provided.
(b) Applicable ardinances of the City of Saint Patrl.
Althou�h truckin� facilities are a permitted use in an I-I zoning district, the site plan is not
consistent with this findin�. However, it can be modified so that it is consistent:
— The building setback on Fairview does not meet the minimum required setback and therefore
must be increased from 6' at least 7'-5".
— The site plan shows hvo drive�vays to Fairview Avenue. Fairview is not a truck route. The
site has access to Prior Avenue, �vhich is a designated truck route. Therefore, the existing
driveways on Fairview must be closed to ensure that trucks use Prior Avenue.
— It is likely that without any noise miti�ation, noise from trucks �vill exceed the maximum
feve(s permitted by the Saint Paul Iegislative code. Therefore, a noise study must be
conducted to determine whether additional noise miti�ation is needed to ensure that the
faciliry will compfy �vith the noise ordinance and help detertnine the design and location of
any noise miti�ation that is needed.
(c) Preszrvation of unique geologiq geographic or historically signrftcant characteristics of the city
and environmentally sensitive areas.
The sitz plan is consistent with this findin�. The site is a paved parkin� tot on industrial
• ZF 99038
�
ZF #99033
Page 4 of Resolution
property and the surrounding area is a residen[ial neighborhood.
(d) Protectian of adjacent and neighboring properties through reasonable pravi,rion for such
matters as surface water drainage, soz�nd and sight buffers, preservation of views, light and air,
and thase aspects of clesign which may hme substantia! effects on neighbaring land uses.
The site plan is not consistent �vith thi; findin� but can be modified so that it is consistent:
— The residznts in the area have complained in the past about truck tra�c on Fairview. The
site plan calls for using the existiag driveways on Fairview. This uoald increase the amount
of truck traffic on Fairview. The driveways on Fairview should be closed so that all trucks
must use Prior Avenue. There is enou�h room to the south of the existin� main building for
trucks to get from Prior to the ne�v buifdin� and trucks should be required to use this to
minimize noise to the surroundin� residential neighborhood.
— Noise from trucks on the site �vould have a substantial effect on neighboring residential land
uses_on Fairview and Minnehaha. A noise study by an acoustical en�ineer should be
reqaired to determine if noise barriers are needed and if they are, hocv big they need to be
and where they should go. JLT is talking about constructing another building north of the
truck transfer facitity and this could act as a noise barrier if it �vas (arae enough and it was
for a use that did not generate significant additional noise. �
•
(e) The arrangement of bc�ildings, :�ses and facilities of the proposed development in order to assure �
nbutting property ancUor its occ:rpants tivi11 nat be zmrecr,ronably affected
The site plan is not consistent �vith this findina but can be modified so that it is consistent:
— Traffic on Fairview Avenue is already hear,y. Permittin� the proposed truck facility to use
driveways on Fairview would incrzase the amount of traffic and would unreasonably affect
tlie residential neighborhood across the street. Therefore, the existing driveways on Fairview
should be cfosed so that trucks use Prior Avenue.
— The buildins is arranged so that most of the loading docks are on the ��est side of the
baildin� and the buiidin� will block most of the noise from these docks from residents on
Fairview. However, residents on Minnehaha will be hear noise from these docks unless
noise barriers are built. The buildin� afso has fice docks on the north end of the building
close to Fairview and noise barriers are needed for these docks too.
(� Creation of energy-eonserving design through landscaping ancf location, orientation and
elevation ofstruch�res.
The site plan meets current standards for eneray conservation and is consisten[ with this finding.
(g) Safety nnd com�enience of both vehiczrlar and pedestrian traffic bath within the site and in
relntiof: to access streets, including traffic circulation features, the locations ancf design of
entrances and exits ar:d parkir:g areas within the site.
Public l�,'orks staff has revie�ved t(�e site plan and dztermined that the pfan, inc[uding use of
existing the driveways on Fairview for the primary access to the truck facility, is safe and •
consistent with ihis findin�.
7
q g�- sa�
ZF k99038
• Pa�e 5 of Resolution
(h) The satisfactory availability and capacity ofstorm and sanitary sewers, incZuding solutions to
any drainage problems in the area of the development.
There is adequaie sewer available. The applicant has not prepared a detailed storm water
draina�e plan yet. The site plan is consistent with this finding if a condition is added that a
draina�e plan must be submitted to staff for approval.
(i) Sz�cient landscaping, fences, walls and parking necessary to meet the above objectives.
The site plan is not consistent with this findin� but can be modified so that it is consistent:
- Additional fences or walls must be constructed, if a sound study shows they are needed to
block noise to neighboring houses.
— There is no landscaping on the site now. The landscaping shown on the site plan should be
increased by plantin� shrubs that grow at least 10' tall along the west side of the building.
Additional landscaping should be planted around the perimeter of the site where ever noise
barriers are required. The noise barriers should be setback 10' from the property line to
provide adequate room for landscaping.
Q) Site accessibility in accordance with the provisions of the Americans with Disabilities Act
(ADA), inclt�ding parking spaces, passenger loading zones and accessible rozrtes.
• The site plan is consistent �vith this finding if one additional handicapped accessible parking
space is provided.
(k) Provision for erosion and sediment control ns specified in the "Ramsey Erosion Sediment and
Control Handbook. "
The site plan does not show erosion or sediment control measures. A condition for approval of
the site plan should be that an erosion and sediment control pfan must be submitted to staff for
approval.
NOW, THEREFQRE, BE IT RESOLV ED, by the Saint Paul Planning Commission, that under the
authority of the City's Le�islative Code, the appfication for Site Pfan Review to establish a trucking
facility on the west side of Fairview Avenue,'/: block south of Minnehaha Avenue is hereby approved,
subject to the following conditions:
I. Ariveways All truck traffic to this facility must use the south driveway on Prior Avenue and
proceed via the area south of the main existing buildin�. Truck tra�c may not use Fairview Avenue.
The two esistin� driveways on Fairview must be closed and replaced with curb and boulevard. Curb
and boulevard work shall be by permit. If other uses are proposed on the site that generate levels of
traffic that will not ne�atively impact the adjacent residentia( neighborhood, the City would consider
pzrmittin� reopenin� driveways to Fairview for these uses as lon� as the trucking facility did not
• have access to Fairvietiv. Reopening driveways shall be by permit.
��
ZF #99038
Page 6 of Resolution
2. Hours Hours of operation must be restricted to 7 AM to 10 PM Monday through Friday to protect
the adjacent residential neighborhood. The facility may not operate on Saturdays or Sundays.
3. Truck idling Truck en�ines must be turned aff �vhenever trucks are parked at the dock or on site
waitina for more than 15 minutes to load or unload at the dock.
4. Truck parking Trucks may not stop or park on Fairview, Minnehaha or other nearby residential
streets. (Pubfic Works says it can post signs cvhere needed to help enforce this.)
5. Noise analysis and noise mitigation A noise analysis must be done by an acousticat engineer.
The acoustical engineer will be one agreed to by both the City and the applicant. The analysis will
determine the [evel of noise that could be anticipated from the facility. If The noise analysis indicates
that the facility without noise mitigation measures will exceed leve(s permitted under City noise
regulations, sound miti�ation measures must be constructed to ensure that the facility conforms to
City noise regulations. Such sound mitigation measures must be in place prior to operations
beginning at the facility. If walls or fences will act as sound barriers they must be in place prior to
operations. If another buildin� wilf serve as a sound barrier, the walls must be substantially complete
prior to operations.
•
6. Lighfina Exterior ti�htia� for the faciliry must be aimed and shielded to minimize glaze light and
li�ht spill over on to adjacent residential property.
7. Setbacl:s and landscaping The setback on Fairview must be increased to 10 feet to permit enou�h •
room for landscaping to soften the appearance of the buildin�. The setback shall be planted and
maintained with plant material approved by site plan staff and which will grow at least 10 feet tall
when mature in order to focm a continuous row alon� the entire east side of the building.
Addi[ional landscapiag must be planted around the perimeter of the site where ever noise barriers or
visual screens are required. The noise barriers or visual screens must be setback 10' from the
property line to provide adequate room for landscaping. The esisting chain link fence in these areas
must be removed.
8. Storm water management A storm water management plan must be submitted to staff for
approval..
9. Accessible parl:ing Oae additional handicapped accessible parking space must be provided.
10. Erosion control An erosion and sediment control plan must be su6mitted to staff for approval.
1\Pedlsys2\SHA RE DIBIRKHOLZ�PLANN ING\RES O LU"C�ILTResolution.wpd
�
0
�� -�a�
Saint Paul Planning Commission
Ciri' Hall Conference Center
15 Kellogg Boulevard West
A meeting of the Plannin� Commission of the City of Saint Paul was held Friday, Apri123, 1999, at 830
a.m, in the Conference Center of City Hall.
Commissionen
Present:
Commissioners
Absent:
Mmes. Donnelly-Cohen, Duarte, Engh, Faricy, Geisser, McCall, Morton, Nordin
and Messrs. Corbey, Dandrea, Field, Fotsch, Kramer, Mardell, Nowlin and Shakir.
Messrs. Gervais, *Gordon, *Johnson, Kon„ and *Margulies
*Excused
VI. Neighborhood and Current Plannine Committee
JLT Group Site Plan for a truckin� facility on the west side of Fairview Avenue, % block
south of Minnehaha Avenue -(Tom Beach, 2b6-9086, LIEP)
Commissioner Faricy reported that the committee met last Tuesday to review the site plan for
Dawes Trucking Company, located on JLT property in the Midway. The Committee came up
with a unanimous recommendation for the Planning Commission.
MOTION: Commissioner Faricy moved approval ojthe requesred sire plan, subject to the
fol[owing ten conditions:
Drivewavs Al! truck traffiC to this jacility must use the south driveway on Prior Avenue
and proceed via the area south of the main existing building. Truck traffic may not use
Fairview Avenue. The !wo existing driveways on Fairview must be closed and replaced
with curb and bou[evard Curb and boulevard work shall be by permit Ijother uses are
proposed on the site that generate leve[s of traJfic that wi11 not negatively impact the
adjacent residential neighborhood, the Ciry wou[d consider permitting reopening
driveways to Fairview jor these uses as long as the trucking facility did not have access to
Fairview. Reopening driveways shal! be by permit.
2. Hours Hours of operation must be restricted to 7A��1 to 10 PMMonday through
Friday to protect tlee adjacent residential neighbo�hood Thefacility may not operate on
Saturdays or Sundays.
3. Truck idling Truck engines must be turned off whenever trucks are parked at the dock
or on site waiting for more than 15 minutes to load or unload at rhe dock.
4. Truck parking Trucks may not stop or park on Fairview, Minnehaha or other nearby
�
7
•
•
�0
�
t
ct � - �S �-�i
. residential streets. (Public Works says it can post signs where needed to help enforce
this.)
5. Noise analysis and noise mitigation A noise analysis must be done by an acoustical
engineer. The acoustical engineer wi!! be one agreed to by both the City and the
applicant The anaZysis wi!! determine the level of noise that cou[d be anticipated from
the facility. If the noise analysis indicates that the facility without noise mitigation
measures will exceed levels permitted under City noise regulations, sound mitigation
measures must be consiructed to ensure that the faci[iry conforms to Ciry noise
regulations. Such sound mitigation measures must be in p[ace prior to operations
beginning at the facility. If walls or fences wi!! act ar sound barriers they must be in
place prior to operations. If another building wi[I serve as a sound barrier, the walls
must be substantially complete prior to operations.
6. Lighting Exterior lighting for the facility must be aimed and shie[ded to minimiZe glare
light and light spill over on to adjacent residenlial praperty.
7. Setbacks and landscaping The setback on Fairview must be increased to IO feet to
permit enough room for landscaping to soften the appearance of the building. The
setback shall be p[anted and maintained with plant material approved by site plan staff
and which wi!! grow at least IO feet tall when mature in order to jorm a continuous row
along the entire east side of the building.
• Additional landscaping must be planted around t/te perimeter ojthe site where ever noise
barriers ar visual screens are required The noise barriers or visual screens must be
setback 10'jrom the property line to provide adequate room for landscaping. The
existing chain link jence in these areas must be removed
8. Storm water management A storm water management plan must be submitted to staJf
for approval.
9. Accessible parking One additional handicapped accessible parking space must be
provided
10. Erosion control An erosion and sediment contral plan must be submitted to staffjor
approval.
Commissioner Nordin asked if the City would require JLT Group to come back for another site
plan review if they decide to build the other building somewhere else on the site. Mr. Beach
responded that they would. Commissioner Nordin commented that it is very difficult to control
where the trucks park when they arrive afrer the site closes at 10 p.m. She asked if it might be
possible to ask the truckers to park in a designated area in the rear of the site to idle their trucks.
Ivir. Beach stated that it is his understandin� that the applicant would be a�reeable to
desionatin� some spots down by Prior behind an existing buildin�.
NIOTIOti Commissioner Nordin moved to add under the 4"' condition that the owners
• establish an area of truck parking in the secluded southwest corner of the site jor early truck
�
I1
�
,ii
r%
;i
:�
arrival; Commissioner Geisser seconded the motion.
Commissioner Faricy informed the Commission that such a discussion took p(ace at the
committee meeting and it was her recollection that they decided to leave that issue to ttte
discretion of the Departmeat of License, Inspection and Environmental Protection and the
owner to figure out a legitimate, logical place for them to park.
Commissioner Geisser encouraged other commissioners to add their ideas.
Commissioner Faricy added that some of these trucks will be coming in al( ni�ht long. Talking
with a trucker, she found out that truckers must keep a log. They can drive for 10 hours
strai�ht; then they have to be ofFthe road for 8 hours. If they drive 70 hours in seven days, they
have to take 24 hours off: There is no question that these trucks will come and go at different
hours. Many of these truckers are individual corporations. We will need to do something about
these trucks or they will be lined-up on Prior, idling. Perhaps, afrer the noise analysis,
something can be set up.
Commissioner Fotsch realizes that if these trucks come in at different times, they will need to
go somewhere. His concem is that if any of them aze allowed to come in, the hour requiremeni
is eliminated. Once they get to the site, iYs another intrusion into the neighborhood. There aze
many truck stops around the Interstate. He thinks they should be required to time their arrival
into the site when it's open. He does not support the amendment.
Commissioner Nordin stated that the reason why she is bringing pazking on-site to the table is
because of her experience of living in the city. In the Northwest Quadrant where she lives there
is a �Vards Distribution Center on the southwest comer of Snelling and Como. The owners of a
handful of houses near there have done everything possible to try to get the City to help them,
but there is no way to control the truckers. They come and go as they p]ease. The diesel's need
to run in our cold climate. All the streets around the Wazds azea aze signed for no pazking after
10 p.m. and before 6 a.m., but the residents are constantly calling the police tellin� them that
there are trucks pazked violating the law.
Commissioner Faricy asked if Commissioner Nordin would go along with aliowing LIEP to
make that decision with Dawes Trucking. Commissioner Nordin agreed to add that to the
amendment.
Commissioner Corbey asked Mr. Beach if the truckers will be empioyees of Dawes Trucking or
independent operators in order to establish responsibility. Mr. Beach believes the truckers aze
not employed by Dawes Truckin�. Commissioner Corbey thinks the Commission needs to
adopt some type of motion that will cover these truckers, because if they're not employees of
Dawes, they will be running wild.
Commissioner Kramer appreciated the intent of the motion, but he feels that the Committee has
put together a good resolution and he doesdt want to further complicate the issue. The
nei�hborhood hasn't talked about the issue of a designated place for the truckers to idIe and the
committee didn't address it. He said he was uncomfortable with trying to craft a statement
today, about where the trucks wiil be allowed to id(e on-site without havine the appropriate
�
•
•
•
)2
a�-Sa�t
discussions. He sTated he is a�ainst adopting this amendment. If that decision is delegated to
staff (LIEP), it eliminates any public involvement in that decision. Ma} be that's something the
Commission wants to do, but that issue has not been addressed, and Commissioner ICr
• not comfortable with inserting ii in as a condition.
amer is
Mr. Beach responded about the comment that if LIEP handled this issue, there would not be any
chance for neighborhood input. He suggested that the amendment could be
would detennine the truck idling area in consultation with the district co¢ncit. He added
LIEP did phrased that LIEP
make a decision about where the trucks could park and someone didn't ao �at if
the decision could be appealed.
o ree with it,
Commissioner Nordin suggested different Ianguage for the amendment: The owr�er shall
coordinate with LIEP and the district councii to establish a designated idfe area for afrer hour
truck parking. The idle area shall be marked with adequate signage. Commissioner Geisser
accepted the change in language.
Commissioner Now]in stated that he wil( go along with the Committee recommendation, but he
is still troubled by the bigger picture here. It is his understanding that the Commission is
looking only at the site plan review because the zoning authorizes this use. This property is
located on the edge of an industrial area that has had many trucking concems. It is a big chunk
of land, and this is a very Iow intensity use, in his opinion. It's obvious that this use could
create a problem. He wonders if the Committee got assurance that this use was " �� •
area or did they make the assumption that, based upon zoning, they had to 0o with it.
OK m this
Commissioner Faricy responded that the Committee did look at the situation and the did
the decision based upon the zoning because this site is zoned I-1.
Y make
• Commissioner Kramer asked for clarification on the amendment. Was it that there shall be this
facility for parking on the site or that it wili exist if they can work it out? Commissioner Nordin
replied that the amendment is intended to say that LIEP, the owner, and the district council shall
discuss and determi�e whether ihere would be a designated "idle" area. If they agree to put one
on-site, then the idle area shall be marked with adequate si�nage.
Mr. Warner stated that it's good to invo(ve the district planning counci! if this altows for closer
contact with the neighbors and their concerns. He asked Commissioner Nordin if, impl;c�t;n
her motion, she was g�ving the district counci! some sort of veto authori
Nordin replied that he is giving the neighborhood the option of having the trucks park
ty. Commissioner
anywhere they want on the street and having residents make phone calis to the police because
the truckers are not followin� the signage or settling for the trucks to park on a certain
of the site that would be the least disruptive to their residential neighborhood.
respoaded that, with respect to zoning, the authority to zone is vested in the City and the ortion
Planning Commission in their advisory capacity. It can't o an Mr� Warner
exclusively, has the authority to decide the conditions, etcg If the mot on s t make sur t at the
❑eighborhood district council is involved in the process, thars great. If it is anythin�
that, it would be an improper delegation of the City's zonin� authoritv.
o more than
CommissionerNordin asked ifthis issae coWd be delayed fortwo weeks, The Commission
b'
•
��
�
responded that it could not.
Commissioner En�h spoke against the motion because: 1) it undoes the conditions in #3, #4 and
#5; 2) there are a host of conditions already imposed; and 3) there's a dirth of knowiedge on •
what the noise mitigation is going to be. She appreciates the motion because it's seems to be
trying to contemplate some practical reality, but on the other hand, there's a gap of information
the Commission is not even going to know. She also feels the motion is micro mana�ing what
the staff is going to have to determine at a later date. Staff needs to have the leeway to
implement all of these conditions, which she thinks are fairly restrictive and should be,
considering where the property is.
Commissioner Faricy called the question.
Commissioner Nordin withdrew her motion to amend.
Commissioner Faricy withdrew calling the question.
Commissioner Field asked if the Commission acts today on the motion as it stands, can it come
back at a later time, if the problem exists, and modify the site plan to permit such an "idling"
area, if there's a human cry. Mr. Wamer replied that the Commission could do that. Certainly,
if it appears in the future that the conditions are not being abided with, the City has a number of
legal tools that it could take advantage of to bring a cause of action. Commissioner Field asked
if, afrer the City undertook some type of enforcement proceedin�, could the Planning
Commission modify the site plan to accomplish what Commissioner Nordin su��ested. Mr.
Wamer replied that it all depends on the outcome of the enforcement action that City brings.
Commissioner Field asked if the applicant, in this particulaz case, determined, that in light of
police calls, it would make more sense to estab(ish a parking spot on their property for truckers •
to park, could they then apply for a revision of their site pIan, which woald then be subject to
staff and eventually, Planning Commission review. Mr. Wamer replied thac they probably
could not. It is their property; it's a permitted use. If they wanted to establish a parking azea, it
probably wouldn't require any City review.
Commissioner Nordin asked if a legal recourse was the only recourse the neighborhood might
have if there is a probtem in the future. Mr. Wamer responded that the City has a variety of
tools that it could exercise, legaliy, to address the problem on-site, if there are problems and
complaints are made. The nei�hbors have the option of a number of legal theories they could
apply.
Commissioner Corbey, referrin� to the letter received from the JLT Group, stated that they
proudly say that they own approximately 2 squaze feet in the Midway area. He asked if
the Planning Commission could suggest that they allow the truck parking for Dawes on other
property owned by JLT, perhaps at 739 Vandalia Street, in order to sett(e this situation. Mr.
Warner replied that it could.
Commissioners Dandrea and Donnelly-Cohen abstained from the discussion and also from the
vote.
�
�
!'f
�g - s a`t
The motion on the floor to approve Ihe requested site plan with conditions carried on a roll
ca!! vote (Dand�ea ¢nd Donnelly-Cohen ¢bstaining),
• �• Communications Commitfee
Commissioner ICrar�er reported that the Committee is waiting for the first draft of
report from the City desi�er.
the annual
�- Task Force Repo�
Advertisina Si n Committee Prelimina
n' Re ort -(La�, Soderholm, 266-6575)
Commissioner Field reported that the task force held a
it was moved to lay the matter over in its entire
meeting one week ago, Thursday, where
known, regarding the use of amortization. � until the outco
me of pe�ding legislation is
Commissioner Engh, referr�ng
resolution to adopt the Saint to the following provision in the recentl
on it vis-a-vis state law that wou d�o err r e an ecial District Si y p�sed City Council
gn Plan, asked what is the timing
y sort of study on the use of amortization:
RESOLVED, that the Council requests that the Plannino
back to the City Council within six months as to the use of amortiz 4on for e
bi(Iboards in the Saint Anthon Park, and report
Specia( Sign Districts and as to the a Grand Avenue, Smith Avenue and mOVal of
ppropriate amortization eriod Hl°h�a�d Village
Mr. Ford res p for such uses;
• ponded that in the City Council's adoption of that the amorti2ation provision was
eliminated. Mr. Ford asked Mr. Soderholm if there was an
Mr. Soderholm replied that the Planning Commission's report wili consist of hvo sentences if
the law is y��er clarification on the study.
with regards to nd make rts ci�ement for the Plannin�
Counci( approved the resolution to have a s o Commissio to finish its work
ty-wide rec ommendations. He added that the City
following up with an ordinance amendmentth k,;i�n district for District 12, M W
the four readings, and also requires a public hearin go before the Ci rner is
already says the g but it will do exactly�vhatithe�re ol � nugh
y are on record as S�pporting. Mr, W�er believes that ordinance
next Wednesday's agenda for third reading,
wi11 be on
Commissioner Field elaborated that there is a petition circulating involvin
nuisance as reflects bi(Iboards to go onto the ballet. He added that his understandino
that special sig� districts were to g some theory of
voted in opposition to the Saint Antho y gpe�a�ls� 9°ality ofa a h� been
of the Saint Anthon area. p� area. He noted that he
the use of a special sign district on an entire area � on District because it was all enco
if it were possible, that the Advertising Task Force ook at
special area, e.g., Grand Avenue. In the case of Saint Anthon o res ect ce
tooi to accomplish an objective that Saint Anthon p � 4ua(ities of a
with the intent of the s ecial si� Y he found it was used more as a
Y Pazk wanted, but he didn't see it in keeping
districts in eve P an district. He thinks the Commission wi(! be seeine
ry planning district of the city, and he doesn't think that w
legislation. o Special sign
as the intent of the
•
�
��
Saint Paul Planning Commission
City Hall Conference Center
15 Kellogg Boulevard West
A meeting of the Planning Commission of the City of Saint Paul was held Friday, March 26, 1999, at
8:30 a.m. in the Conference Center of City Hall.
Commissioners
Present:
Commissioners
Absent:
Mmes. Duarte, Engh, Geisser, McCall, MoROn, and Messrs. Corbey, Dandrea, Field,
Fotsch, Gervais, Gordon, Johnson, Kramer, Mardell, Margulies, and Shakir.
Mmes. *Donnelly-Cohen, *Faricy *Nordin and Messrs. Kong and *Nowlin
*Excused
Also Preseat: Ken Ford, Planning Administrator, Jean Birkholz, Martha Faust, Tom Harren, Nancy
Homans, Larry Soderholm, Jim Zdon, Department of Planning and Economic
Development staff; Tom Beach and Bob Kessler from the Department of License,
Inspection and Environmental Protection.
IV. PUBLIC HEARING: Site Plan Review for a trucl:ing facility on the west side of Fairview
Avenue,'/z block south of Aiinnehaha Avenue, JLT Group (Tom Beach, 266,9086, LIEP).
Chair Morcon read the rules and procedures for pubiic hearin�.
Mr. Tom Beach eave a short presentation before testimony w�as taken. JLT Group submitted a
site plan in February for a new truck transfer faciiity. Eazlier this month the Hamline-Midway
Coalition asked the Plannine Commission to hold a public heazing. Mr. Beach noted that since
the staff report was written, there have been more discussions with JLT. There are some
chanees to the written staff report; a sheet has been passed out reflecting those changes.
The properry at 625 Fairview Avenue is owned by JLT Group; the wcking facility will go on a
eastern portion of the property, next to Fairview Avenue. JLT will build the building and the
facility wilf be operated by Da�ves Trucking. Most of their business involves bringing in a
variety of goods from local businesses using smaller city trucks. Those goods aze brought inio
the building, consotidated into packa�es by location and loaded onto semi-trucks that make the
deliveries. Dawes Truckine is currently located in Roseville. They are relocating because they
need more room.
Mr. Beach show�ed stides of the site.
�
\J
�
u
��
� � -S �-�
John MacDaniels, owner of Dawes Truckin�, informed Mc Beach about their operation. 11te
• facility will be open Monday through Friday; it's normally closed on weekends, but an
occasional truck will come in. Durin� the week, they open about 7 a.m. Tuesdays and Fridays
are generally the busiest days and they stay open unti] midnight. On Mondays, Wednesdays
and Thursdays, the facility is open until 8 or 9 p.m. The peak hours are in the late aftemoon
from 3 to 6 p.m. Right now they have 35 semi-trailers a week taking freight out; and about 10
semi-trailers a week bringing frei�ht in. They also have from six to ei�ht local trucks coming
and going each day, Monday throu�h Friday. Typically, the semi-trailers take three or four
hours to load or unload. Sometimes trucks leave their engines on while they are loading or
unloadin�, but they don't leave them on overnieht. There will be electrical heaters provided in
the winter so that they won't need to run their heaters all night. Some of the trucks will have
refrigerator uniu, but they will not need to be running. There will be no fuelin� stations or
maintenance facilities on the site.
The Board of Directors of the Hamline-Midway Coalition voted unanimously to oppose this
project. Two letters were received from the neighborhood; one was in opposition; the other was
in support.
Next, Mr. Beach went through the required findings. The first one states that the Planning
Commission shall consider and find that the site plan is consistent with the city's adopted
comprehensive plan and development or project plans for sub-areas of the ciry. Since the City's
recently adopted comprehensive plan was not in effect when this application came in, the
fortner plan must be used. The plan says that in cases of incompatible land uses, the City wi(I
use techniques such as landscaping, berming, or fencing site perimeters in maintaining building
• exteriors to create buffers bern-een ]and uses. The District 1 I Plan also talks about creating
buffers to separate residentia! areas from commercial and industrial areas. It also talks about
traffic concems. Staff thinks that the site plan can be consistent with these policies if noise
barriers are erected. The exact design of these noise barriers hasn't been worked out yet. 3LT
Group is talking about putting another buifdins alon� Minnehaha for something like mini-
storage that wouldn't create much noise, which might act like a noise barrier, if it is built. If the
building is not built, perhaps some walled fences will need to be built along Fairview.
The earlier staff report also recommended closing all the driveways on Fairview so that trucks
would need to come in off Prior. Afrer talking with JLT, staff has modified its recommendation
on this. JLT says they need access on Fairview because they glan to su6divide the property.
Now, staff recommends that the northem most driveway is closed and JLT has agreed.
The next finding is that the site plan must be consistent with the applicable ordinances of the
City of Saint Paul. Trucking facilities are a permitted use on this property since it is zoned I-1.
A question that came up here is whether or not Fairview is a truck route. The City Attorney
said that Fairview is not a truck route, however, the regulations say that trucks can use a non-
truck route "when necessary in entering or leaving a truck terminal" and then they must use the
shoRest route to get to a truck route. JLT says they won't have access to Prior Avenue (a truck
route), so staff is recommending they have at least one driveway out to Fairview. Staff
originally recommended that there be a sound study done to see if the City's noise ordinance
would be exceeded, but since has decided that would not be necessary. A reasonable solution
might be attained if they decide to erect the other building. There's a small discrepancy as faz
as the setback from Fairview Avenue. It needs to be a little bigger than shown. StafF is
• recommendin� that the setback be increased.
�
��
The next finding has to do with preservation of unique geological, geographic or historically
significant characteristics of the city and environmentally sensitive areas. The site doesn't fall
into those categories. The were some concems raised by the neighborhood concerning .
environmental issues, particularly, air quality. Mr. Beach said he called the Minnesota
Pollution Control Agency and the Environment Quality Board about the issues. Both said that
this faciliry was quite a bit smaller Than anything that would trigger any formai environmental
review. Both also said that a situation may cause irritable odors without violating any
ordinance. Perhaps, there may be a restriction on when wcks tum off their engines.
The next f nding deals with protection of adjacent and neighboring properties. Staff is now
recommending that it will meet that finding if they close one driveway on Fairview Avenue and
put up the noise barriers.
The next finding has to do with the arrangement of building and uses. Staff is recommending
that the plan is consistent with that finding, if the changes are made.
Re�arding energy conservation, the plan is consistent with the current practices.
Regardino safety and convenience of both vehicular and pedestrian traffic, Public Works
reviewed this site plan and determined that the plan, induding the use of the existing driveways
on Fairview for the primary access to the truck faciliry, is safe and consistent with this fmding.
Drainaae. The site plan doesn't deal with that yet, but can be added on if these other things aze
approved.
Landscaping, fencing, wails, and parking. There witl be some kind of requirement for either •
walls or buildin�s to block sound. Staff recommends that there be at least 10 feet between the
building and the sidewalk to plant vegetation.
Site accessibility. They need to provide one more handicapped parking spot.
Erosion and sediment control. They don't yet have a plan.
Staff recommends approva( of the site plan subject to the following conditions:
1. Driveways. The north driveway on Fairview must be c[osed and the south driveway must
be widened as determined by Public Works to handle lazge trucks.
2. Souad barriers. Sound mitigation measures must be designed and constructed to ensure
that the development conforms to City noise regulations. If walls are required for sound
barriers, they must be in place before the building is occupied. If another new buiIding will
act as a sound banier, work must begin on that building before the trucking building is
occupied.
3. Truck idling. Truck engines must be tumed offwhenever trucks are at the docks or aze
standing on the site waiting to get to a dock. More discussion on that this moming leaves
this up to staff, the neighborhood and JLT to work out.
4. Parking on adjacent streets. Trucks using this site may not pazk on Fairview or
Minnehaha.
5. Hours of operation. Hours of operation must be timited to between 6 a.m. and 12
midni�ht. .
6. Setbacks and lattdscaping. The setback on Fairview must be increased to 10 feet to permit
�
��
�g-S�y
enou�h room for landscaping to soften the appearance of the buildina. The setback must be
• planted with shrubs that will get at least ] 0 feet tall when mature to form a continuous row
alon� the entire east side ofthe building.
Additional ]andscaping must be planted around the perimeter of the site wherever noise
barriers are required. Noise barriers or other new buildings must be setback 10' from the
property line to provide adequate room for landscaping.
7. Storm water plan. A storm water management plan must be submitted to staff for
approval.
8. Accessible parlting. One additional handicapped accessible parkin� space must be
provided.
9. Erosion and sediment control. An erosion and sediment control plan must be submitted
to staff for approval.
Commissioner Field sfiated he is distressed by Mr. Beach's comment that we just pass over the
issue of truck idlin�. He noted he would be interested in the discussions that took place this
mornin� and how it's possible to come up with a recommendation like that. Mr. Beach replied
that the discussion was with the o�vmer who said that there are times, especiafly during the
winter, when truckers don't want to shut off their engines. Commissioner Field asked if the
nei�hborhood was involved. Mr. Beach responded it was not.
Commissioner Gordon asked what noise mitigation efforts Mr. Beach recommend. Mr. Beach
noted that they would depend on whether the other building goes up. If the building is e�ected
and if it's a use that doesn't generate additional traffic, it should take care of much of the
• problem witli noise bouncin� up to Ivfinnehaha. In addition, he thinks there should be a wal( or
fence along Fairview Avenue. If the buildin� doesn't get built, then the City would require
more noise barriers. Commissioner Gordon asked how high those would be. Mr. Beach replied
that hasn't been worked out yet. It would be a solid barrier. Commissioner Gordon asked if
JLT just needs to begin work on the other building in order for Dawes to occupy the truck
building. Mr. Beach stated that was reasonable. Commissioner Gordon asked if Mr. Beach is
satisfied that the other building or solid barriers will adequately mitigate the noise emanating
from this operation. Mr. Beach replied that he was because the people who wouid be affected
most are those east along Fairview, they are dosest to the trucks. He is confident they will not
hear anything because the docks are on the opposite side of the buildin=. A wall can be placed
north alon� Fairview to help on that side, and if the building is erected, it should take care of the
noise problem. If the building is not built, then perhaps a wing wall coming out of the north
end of the building may need to be built. Commissioner Gordon asked about the noise from the
trucks ingressing and egressing from the building. Mr. Beach stated there witl be noise from
trucks. Commissioner Gordon asked how Mr. Beach knew that the noise from the lrucks
entering and exiting wouldn't be excessive. Mr. Beach stated that he knew for sure that the
noise would not violate the City's noise ordinance based on past experience with other cases.
Mr. Beach added that there was no formal testing done in this case, but the architect did check
w ith a noise meter. Commissioner Gordon stated that he is concemed about the fact that the
initial recommendation included a noise study and the revised recommendation does not. He
asked why that requirement was dropped; it would indicate, with an acceptable level of
confidence, whether the noise is going to be unacceptable or not. Mr. Beach replied that staff is
confident they will be able to evaluate whether the proposal will meet the standard or not.
� Commissioner Gordon asked who would select the company or individual to perform the noise
study. Mr. Beach said that in the past, the applicant has selected the person and the City has
`��
)9
either accepted the person or su�gested ano[her. Commissioner Gordon asked if there was a
down side for requirin� the noise study before approvins an application. Mr. Beach responded
it is primarily the cost to the developer and about a two week delay of the project. •
Commissioner Geisser asked Mr. Beach what the decision was on how these added trucks
would affect the level of air quality of the neighborhood. Mr. Beach replied that staff at the
Minnesota Pollution Control Agency and the Environmental Quality Board indicated that this
would not require an environmentai assessment worksheet (EAW) or an indirect source permit.
Their professional judgment was that in terms of air quality tha[ can be measured, this would
not violate standards that they have; there might, however, be a problem w�ith odor.
Commissioner Geisser was concerned about their making these judgtnents without doing any
type of study. Mr. Beach stated that this is a case that is far below what they would normally be
concerned with. He asked the Environmental Quality Boazd what their threshold was and they
answered that with a trucking facility, it needs to be 600,000 squaze feet; this is 25,000 squaze
feet. Commissioner Geisser asked if the City has any ordinances that are separate from these in
terms of level of noise or air quality, where abutting a residential neighborhood. Mr. Beach
replied that the City has a noise ordinance, but not an air quatity ordinance.
h1r. Bob Kessler, Director for the Department ofLicense, Inspection and Environmentai
Protection addressed the Commission. He stated that the reason he did not feel that a noise
study was necessary because there are often noise studies done where they rarely show that the
new use will be in violation of the City's noise ordinance. Sometimes ho�vever, there aze
complaints about noise whether or not the facility meets the threshold in the ordinance. Then
the department needs to do whatever it can to mitigate the noise even thou�h it doesn't violate
the ordinance.
Commissioner Corbey asked how many decibels is estimated a truck emit; entering and leaving •
the premises, and what does the ordinance call for. Mr. Beach rep[ied that he doesn't have a
figure on decibels when a truck enters or leaves a facilit} or drivin� by. The ordinance deals
with a more lon�-term noise, e.g., a truck idling. Accordina to the ordinance, the noise has to
be present more than 10% of the time in a given hour. In this case, you can't exceed 75
decibels during the day (measured at the residential zoning line) and from 11 p.m. to 7 a.m.,
that drops down to 5� decibels. There is a graph on page 16 of the staff repoR that helps to
define those levels. The level that you'd find in a private office is 55 decibels; 75 decibels is a
large gathering of people or downtown Saint Paul.
Commissioner Mardell asked where other truck terminals are located in the City of Saint Paul,
and if there are any other truck terminals that are located in close proximity to residential
neighborhoods. Mr. Beach listed: 1) the Burlington-Northern facility on Pierce-Butler (noise
within the site); 2) a trucking facility on West Minnehaha near Dale (some problems); 3) a
trucking facility on Petham Avenue, soaYh of University Avenue thaY are similar types of
facilities in the City. There are complaints from time to time.
Commissioner Corbey asked if it woutd make a difference if the docks on the north end of the
building were moved to the south side of the building so the noise and pollution wouldn't spill
into the neighborhood on Minnehaha. Mr. Beach repiied that if the docks were on the south
side, they would interfere with the Fairview driveway. Commissioner Corbey asked why the
entrance to the facility could not be along Prior Avenue, a truck route. He noted that the
buildings along there are old and di(apidated and wondered if there would be a comprehensive •
plan in the future to redevelop that wfiole iayout of buildines. Mr. Beach responded that the
�'
0
aq -�S ��I
drive�vays alona Fairview have been there for years, and the applicant has objections to closing
• those driveways because of possible fumre plans for the property.
Commissioner Gordon asked if the noise study would be of help in determinina what the noise
miti�ation efforts should be. Mr. Kessler replied that Mr. Beach is the expert on that and coutd
provide advise on what types of walls or barriers or miti�ation measures might be employed.
He has done that in many cases in the pazt, so the City would not necessazily need a consuitant
for that. When there is noise disturbing a neighborhood and it doesn't violate the City's
ordinance, which is usually the case, it is di�cult to come up with measures to do what is
necessary to help eliminate the noise. Commissioner Gordon asked if the noise study would be
of help in deciding issues like whether an operation should not run until midniaht, but only until
10 p.m. Mr. Kessler replied that it is possible that a professionally done study could provide
information that staff could not gathec. In this case, Mr. Kessler didn't think it was a likely
possibility and he didn't think that there was enough unknown information to require a study to
be done. Because this facility has not been fully used for a long time, it is naturally going to be
disruptive to the neighborhood.
Mr. KuR Williams, JLT Group, gave a short presentation. This formerNavy and Unysis
facility was purchased by JLT Group three years ago. A substantial amount of that property has
already been re-developed. They hope to build four more buildings on this site. Under this
proposal there are two buildings (the second one will take 60 days to confirm). The site is
zoned industrial and JLT knows that this is a good project. Dawes Transport has a July move-in
timetable.
• Commissioner Field asked what types of use the additiona( buildings at this site will be. Mr.
Williams replied that as a developer, he doesn't kno�v the answer to that question. The second
building on this site wif] be a mini-gara�e. The other buildings probably wil] be office
buildin�s.
Commissioner Gordon asked if working out the noise issue might include doin� a noise study.
Mr. Wifliams replied that he is not sure how to do a noise study. Commissioner Gordon asked
if he had a problem with hiring a consultant who knows how to do noise studies. Mr. Williams
responded that a noise study is a matter of timing and cost. Commissioner Gordon asked what
it would cost to have a noise study done. Mr. Williams answered that he did not know.
Public testimony began.
John Van De Weghe, 1807 Blair Avenue, addressed the Commission in opposition. He was
the lead speaker for the neighborhood delegation who a�e opposed to the facility altogether.
His concerns are noise, air qua(ity, safety, etc. On Tuesday, he sat in his car from 4:55-5:10
p.m. on Minnehaha and Fairview. He counted 200 cars or vehicles that came through the
intersection in fifreen minutes. Mr. Van De Weghe also submitted written testimony from a
neighbor.
2. Thomas Minder, 764 Tatum Street, addressed the Commission in opposition. He stated that
his community is a socioeconomic diverse neighborhood and a benefit to Saint Paul.
Already existing in the neighborhood is an industrial corridor (Pierce Butler Route),
carrying a lot of truck traffic. It is four-five blocks from his house, yet they heaz the traffic
• on it all day long. Burlington-Northen, to the north is the same situation. To the west is the
Amtrak Station, with trains arriving at midnight and at 7 a.m. To the east, they have the
x
21
hiehest pollution area in the Twin Cities, the Snelling-University intersection. Further to
the north is the Saint Paul Stadium, a great benefit to the city, and in the summer months •
the neighborhood listens to the crowd cheering. To the south is University Avenue and all
summer long, hot rods travel up and down University oa Friday and Saturday nights, which
makes a lot of racket. The neighborhood is overtvn with noise and air pollution. His
children are awakened every moming now at 7 a.m. without the truck transfer facility. He
feels this truck facility will break the community, an asset, a model of community activiry.
The community has worked with landowners in the past to resolve problems. Economic
development is obviously, a very important issue in the community. It's important to the
Ciry of Saint Paut; iYs important for JLT to make a profit and the community invites them
into the community to do so. Clearly, JLT has not invited the neighborhood to the table to
discuss iT. He inveTed JLT to come up wiYh a business plan that makes the money, provides
jobs for the neighborhood and the Ciry of Saint Paul, and becomes a partner with the
community, not a detriment to it.
Commissioner Gordon asked if there have been no meetings between JLT and the community.
Mc Minder replied there have been two meetings; he was unable to be present at the meetings.
3. Michael Samuelson, 17�8 Hewitt Avenue, addressed the Commission in opposition. He
referred to finding 62.108 of the Zonin� Code in regard to the site plan. This type of firm, a
trucking firm, is not appropriate under the Comprehensive Plan: The Land Use Chapter.
These types (truckins facility) of uses should be considered to be restricted. There is an
issue of concern hare about the best use of this land. The neighborhood appreciates the
oppoRUnity for JLT to move into the neighborhood and provide for appropriate job
producing businesses. Under the Port Authority's rule of assistance programs is "per 1,000 •
square feet of building space there is a minimum of one job on a site coverage of 30% per
site." This plan does not even come close to this. This will not provide livin� wage jobs
for the community. Fifteen years ago, this site was projected as an opportuniTy to provide
living wage jobs in light industrial work that would employ the residents of our community.
That �vould be welcomed, but a trucking ftrm that brings noise, disturbance, complaints,
pollution, etc., is not appropriate under the Saint Paul Comprehensive Plan: the Land Use
Chapter, and specifically, in the goals and objectives of the City to bring firms that provide
jobs. This will not provide jobs for Saint Paul. In addition, he echoed the concems of the
previous speaker, Thomas Minder, by sayin� that this use will force people out of the
neighborhood, the community they have chosen to live in. The community already lives
with noise on all four sides. This use will bring trucks up and dowm Fairview Avenue (not a
truck route) because JLT wants tfie entrances there. They shouldn't be allowed to do that.
If you allow them to do that, how and where does the community go to respond? Mr.
Samuelson noted that if he were to add a third story to his home, which is not allowed, he
would be in trouble. This is an incompatible use with the Land Use Plan and with the long
range vision of this community. He asked the Commission to oppose this site plan and
recommend that JLT work with the community to find a compatible use. The community
woutd be willing to a(so work with the Port Authority and the Plannina and Economic
Development staff to come with a re-development plan. He asked that the Commission put
a moratorium on this site altogether in order to work on a coraprehensive pian for this siYe.
Chair Morton asked Mr. Beach to clarify whether this site plan complies with the
Comprehensive Plan. He stated that a new Land Use Plan was just adopted and he originally •
cited that in the staff report. The City Attomey advised, however, that the o]d Land Use Plan be
referred to because the new one w�as not in effect when this plan was submitted. This use is in
A'
qt
a�-sa�
conformance with the earlier Land Use Plan.
• 4. Joe Potraski, 1636 Minnehaha Avenue West, addressed the Commission in opposition. He
stated that he is very disappointed with Mr. Beach's stance because he is basically, asking
the snake not to eat the mouse and then lea�ing it up to the snake to make sure he doesn't
eat the mouse. There are too many questions about the noise and pollution that he is
leaving up to JLT. The proposed semi-truck transfer station is not a proper use for this site
in this neighborhood. The zoning of this lot allows for many uses, but the proposed use is
not a proper use in the community now. Semi-trucks aze already illegally using the
community's side streets. JLT has already admitted, previously, that it can have no
influence or control over the semi-truck drivers once they leave their property. The City of
Saint Paul cannot now protect the community from the illegal use of iu sides streets by the
j semi-truck drivers. Everyone existing in the community has a responsibility to not cause
� damage to the community, which the semi-truck uansfer station certainly would. The very
loud beep, beep, beep that is required by law when the trucks back up can be heazd from
Burlington Northem on a day when the wind is not blowing in the opposite direction, one-
half mile from his house, as the crow flies. With the transfer station just right across the
street from many homes, the loud beep, beep, beep will be a constant disturbance. The
level of the beep cannot be lowered because of OCHA's standards. T'he pollution caused by
semi's running, not only in the winter, but also in the summer for the air conditioning, will
be a problem. There are many decisions which Mr. Beach has lefr the community out of.
He has bowed to JLT and JLT's architect. He is glad that the Commission has noticed these
failures and encouraged the Commission to tum dow�n this project. He noted that he has
worked with the MPCA for 2%z years to try to get them just to notice the smell coming
from the factory on Minnehaha and Fairview and Minnehaha and Fryer. lfiey have failed
• to find it. They have failed to stand up for the community. He stated that he is very
uncomfortable in leaving anything to JLT because once they are there, iYs going to be ev8n
harder to enforce. He added that he is happy with what he has experienced here today. He
thought he would come here and experience peopte who really didn't have much interest or
questions, but he was pleased to hear the wise questions that were asked by the
Commission.
5. Ron Williams, 779 Clayland Street, three blocks from Minnehaha and Fairview, addressed
the Commission in opposition. Three years ago he and his wife bought their house with 0
dollars down in an area with busing and one they could afford. They aze very concemed
that the JLT proposal could mean that they will be stuck in a deteriorating neighborhood.
Mr. Williams is representing the Sierra Club this morning whose goals include "to protect
the quality of the namral and human environment." The focus of his concem today is the
protection of kids. In a couple of days, the Sierra Club intends to submit an Environmental
Assessment Worksheet petition. This petition stresses that there are certain envuonmental
problems that need to be addressed by the City conceming the JLT proposal: 1) safety; 2)
noise; 3) air quality; 4) visual quality; 5) light pollution; and 6) water. The JLT proposal
brings a very serious safety concern to the children of the community, especially to
Fairview Avenue children. For this reason, it is imperative that the JLT be prohibited from
using Fairview Avenue for their trucks. Twenty trucks per day running until midnight will
bring a serious noise issue. It dcesn't have to be this way. There is no reason why a facility
that is compatible with the residential neighborhood cannot be placed on this property. An
additional twenty trucks per day will have a serious air poilution impact on an azea that is
• now only 12 blocks away from Snel(ing and University, the most air polluted point in the
State of Minnesota. He encouraged the Planning Commission to recommend doing and
�
2Z
EAW for this proposal. He noted that the developer is threatening the City with deadlines,
hopin� that the City will rubber-stamp their request. This is very inappropriate; the City •
must reasonably consider the developer's request.
6. Ken Schuba, 179� Blair, addressed the Commission in opposition. He asked the
Commission to wnsider what impact this facifity will have on some of the community's
sources of income. His wife is a licensed day-care provider, located less than'/z block from
Fairview Avenue. Some of her clients have aiready expressed a concern about the idea of a
warehouse being so close to the day-care. Their concems are the same as he and his wife:
1) heavy traffic; 2) noise; 3) lazge trucks; 4) unsafe driving habits; etc. Ifthese clients aze
lost, it will be increasingly more di�cult to find new clients with these less than appealing
aspects in the neighborhood. There are several home day-cares in the neighborhood. One
is located directly across the street from the proposed site. This will definitely affect their
ability to find and keep clients. The facility will not only affect the community's quality of
life, but it will also affect its sources of income. If their income suffers, it has a ripple
affect that affects more than just his family. They will not have the financial resources to
maintain their property, their house value will fall, their neighbors' house value will fall,
they may wind up on public assistance, and the pressures of financial instability affect ali
members of a household. This financia( impact is of great concern to Mr. Schuba and his
family. This neighborhood is on the up-swing. House values are going up. People aze
takinL pride in their homes, doing work to update and remodel, all in an efFort to raise the
qualit}• of living for everyone in the neighborhood. This nei�borhood has a home gazden
show; a neighborhood that fights to have gun shops removed for safety's sake; a
nei�hborhood that is concemed about the trucking facility that will decrease the aesthetics,
increase the pollution, increase the noise, increase the crime, and in rurn, decrease the •
values of their homes. The people who own this land do not need to worry about the issues
that the neighborhood has. They will never be confronted with the likes of a trucking
warehouse being built across the street from their homes. They will never need to worry
about semi-trucks cruising down the streets that their kids will be riding their bikes on,
diesel engines starting up at 5 a.m., or trucks runnin� all night long so that the drivers can
sleep in their cabs. We do, and we are concemed; and we do not think that we should be
affected by a big company getting big�er, especiatly at the expense of people trying to
improve a wonderful part of our city. Obviously, this company is not trying to be a good
nei�hbor. They, obviously, have no regard for the people who live here. How can we allow
someone with so little concern for the community to start a business that will only cause
more and more problems down the road.
Last week the Roseville City Council, in their wisdom, stopped Cub Foods plans because
"they fear the store will disrupt their ►ives around the clock with noise, fumes, trucks,
loadin„ lights, and all the extra traffic." Mayor pon Wall stated, "My concern is that this a
shopping center next to a residential area; it involves the wider community."
Francine Panioa, 1800 Blair, addressed the Commission in opposition. She and her family
also run the comer grocery store of the community at Minnehaha and Fairview. They
purchased the building, approximately one year aso, to renovate it and bring it back to its
old quality, its old look, and to keep the neighborhood a neighborhood, a store for people to
go with their children and to send their children to. She is concemed for the safety of these
children and their parents with their strollers. Another issue is the invasion of the lights this •
company already has on the people who live on Minnehaha. The three tenants who live in
her business buildin� have had the same privacy complaints. In the evening, the lights are
�
2 '1
� a -sa �{
so imasive that they cannot just close their shades and be alone. The neighborhood expects
� that this +nvasion will be mukiplied by a great amount. Already, they have had io invest in
new shades and draperies in order to keep both the noise and lighu out of their own living
rooms. There are some seventy plus children running around the blocks in a six block
radius. More trucks travelin� in this community will make it even more dangerous than it
already is with trucks using the side streets. The community would like to keep it a nice
nei�hborhood for famities to feel safe.
8. Jim Twembold, 1762 Blair, addressed the Commission in opposition. He tives one block
from the proposed site. He is concemed about security and safety issues. Within four
blocks of this siie, there are two schools, several churches, several family services, and four
parks. The buildings are primarily family-owned and occupied buildin�s. The
neighborhood is full of kids. When the truckers deliver late at night, they will run their
trucks all night. Just as one's house is maintained at a 70 degree temperature, they will
maintain their truck at a 70 degree temperature so they can relax and sleep. There's also the
issue of them spending the night there with no bathrooms; the issue of them storing empty
trailers which can invite others to spend the night out of the rain or kids Iooking for a piace
to cause trouble. There is no way of policing that. Locks only keep honest people honest.
Any given day, you can see trucks going up and down the side streets. It was said that
Fairview is not a designated truck route, but to the truckers, their time is money and they're
going to take the shortest route from A to B. We don't need any more trucks going up and
down the side streets. This company's busiest time is from 3- 6 p.m.; thaYs when the
schools are getting out; that's when parents are either dropping off or picking up their kids
from the local day cares.
• The first tape ended here; the second tape was blank.
9. Maz�orie Schma]z, 1829 West Minnehaha, addressed the Commission in opposition. Ms.
Schmalz lives right across the street from this proposal and is emotionally affected by
blankness, e.g., the view of a close blank neighbor's house from their dining room window
was remedied by the addition of a deck. Now, this proposal talks about putting up a long,
high barrier along Fairview. She is also concerned about the air quality and odors the new
use will cause.
]0. Bob Molden, 1817 Van Buren, addressed the Commission in opposition. Mr. Molden lives
right across the street from the north gate on the proposed site. During the State Fair one
year, there were 200 school buses that used this site to park. The noise and the stench were
nearly unbearable, and that was just an indication to him of what they will face with this
facility. He expects that twenty trucks is not the actual figure; there will be more and more.
Eventually, the facility will turn into a monster. He feels that JLT needs help to find an
alternative use and the community is willing to help him. Since Govemor Ventura is
courting the movie industry, perhaps this facility could be used for that.
I 1. Cheryf Hammerlindl, 672 NoRh Fairview, addressed the Commission in opposition. She
and her husband live directly across the street from this proposed facility. Her fust concern
is the safety of the children of the community. There have been six serious accidents at the
gates on Fairview involving trucks. There are forty-two children on the block they live and
• thirty-five children on the next block. The peak hours for Dawes is from 3- 6 p.m.; those
are also the peak hours for children being outside. Another concem is that her husband
works at night, so he sleeps during the day. With all the extra noise created by the trucks,
fi�
2S
he will have more difficulty sleepin�.
12. Steven Wilson, 680 Fairview Avenue North, addressed the Commission in opposition. He
thinks that to keep the ingress and egress of this facility along Fairview is a very poorly
thought-out decision. The added truck traffic will further endanger the children, shake
houses, decrease air quality, and increase noise and light pollution. There aze other uses
that woutd be rrtore appropriate for this site.
13. Roberta Mach, 1804 Englewood Avenue, addressed the Commission in opposition. Ms.
Mach lives one block north of Fairview and Minnehaha and is concerned about home
values goinL down and Fairview Avenue becoming a truck route.
I4. Sara Oxten, 1798 Blair Avenue, addressed the Commission in opposition. Ms. Oxten has
been impressed with the neighborhood, but is dismayed by the odors already there
emanating from businesses. She was surprised to hear that Fairview was not a truck route.
She thought it was because of all the truck tra�c. She thinks that JLT should be able to
make money, but not at her and the neighborhood's expense.
I5. Carol Minogue, 1846 Englewood, addressed the Commission in opposition. Ms. Minogue
expressed concem about the property values of the community's homes going down if this
faciliry is al(owed to locate on Fairview. She also submitted a letter from a neighbor.
16. Paul LaBelle, 1895 Tatum, addressed the Commission in opposition. His home is a day
care and he is concerned, primarily, about safety.
17. K. Nighten�ale, ] 689 Van Buren Avenue, addressed the Commission in opposition. She
mentioned that there are 54 block clubs in the neighborhood; there is great community
involvement. If this proposed facility moves in, her family is moving out.
Mr. Brian Houmann, JLT Group's architect, addressed the Commission, commenting that the
Planning Commission should be concerning itse(f with site plan issues. The proposed facility is
within its rights to be there. He explained that they will be taking down the pole lights and
putting up building lights that shine into the site.
Commissioner Geisser stated that the Planning Commission has a Comprehensive Plan that
they expect people to respect. They also expect people to respect the health and safety issues of
the community, a community that pays taxes. It is the intention of the Land Use Chapter to
place more intense uses outward; less intense uses towazd residentiat neighborhoods. She noted
that is apparent from the testimony that there is not a good understanding between the
neighborhood and JLT. There aze other issues beside zoning that should be taken into
consideration regarding this decision.
Mr. Houmann stated that 7LT is bringing this use before the CiTy because this is what they have.
Commissioner Geisser pointed out that discussions with the neighborhood are very important.
Mr. Houmann said that JLT had two meetings with the neighborhood.
Commissioner Kramer asked what specific changes resulted from the meetings with the
community. Mr. Houmann noted the possibie erection of noise barriers.
Commissioner Corbey asked if any consideration was given to locate this facility on the
r1
LJ
•
•
�
2L
�a-��.y
northwest comer of the site, and asked why they chose this section of the site. Mr. Houmann
. answered that this facility would not fit as well on the northwest corner. Commissioner Mazdell
added that the northwest site probably would not be as eas}' to access with the trucks.
bIOTION: Commissioner Gordon moved to close the public hearing and refer the matter to
the Neighborhood and Current Planning Committee; the motion was seconded by
Commissioner Geisser and carried unanimously on a voice vnte.
Commissioner Gordon urged the applicant to meet with the local community.
V. Zonine Committee
#99-030 Jonathan E. Waaner - Rezone from RT-1 to B2-C to allow for a therapeutic massage,
rehabilitation and chronic pain center at 366 West King, between Smith and Manomin (Martha
Faust, 266-6572).
Commissioner Gervais reported that this case was laid over until the next Zoning Committee
meeting, Tuesday, March 30.
#99-031 Tena Lv - Special condition use permit to allow for on-site auto zepair at 1047
University Avenue, beriveen Oxford and Lesington Parkway, in conjunction with the vehicle
warranties the applicant offers customers (Nancy Homans, 266-6557).
bIOTION: Commissioner Gervais maved approval ojthe requested specia! cnndition use
permit to a!!ow jor on-site auto repair at 1047 University Avenue, befween Oxford and
• Lexington Parkway, in conjunction with the vehicle wurtanties fhe applicani offers
custamers.
Commissioner Geisser noted that this applicant came before the Commission in the past and the
Commission allowed no repairs to be done on-site. The Commission recently had an extensive
discussion about whether the proposed Ryder Truck rental facility was an appropriate use on the
site directly to the west, given current plans calling for higher density uses on University
Avenue. Why should University Avenue be allowed to have all these "interim" uses.
Commissioner Gervais replied that all ofthose things were discussed at the Zoning Committee
meeting, but fett Mr. Ly should be allowed to fulfil warranties he offers on used cazs.
Commissioner Gordon added that Mr. Ly has just one bay for repair. He doesn't think this will
afFect too much.
Commissioner Shakir asked if the resolution will meet the district council's concerns. Ms.
Homans replied that District 7 has raised issues related both to the previous prohibition of
repairs on-site and to the large signs that were erected for a previous car dealer. She said that
the district council is likely to be disappointed in the Zoning Committee's recommendation.
Commissioner Kramer noted that there is no condition that limits repair work. He reported that
the SCUP permitted for Ryder has been appealed to the Ciry Council. He asked if there was
any prudence in waiting to hear what the City Council does in that case.
• Mr. Ford stated that he thought each case should be considered on its own merits and this
applicant should not have to wait for Ciry Council action on someone else's case.
�
i7
PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
1. APPLICANT: JLT Group
2. CLASSIFICATION: Site Plan Review
3. LOCATION: 625 Fairview Avenue ('/: block souih of Minnehaha)
4. PLANNING DISTRICT: Hamline Midway Coalition (District 11)
5. LEGAL DESCRIPTION: See file
6. PRESENTZONING: I-1
7. STAFF INVESTIGATION AND REPORT:
DATE OF HEARING: 3/26198
ZONING CODE REFERENCE: 62.708(c)
DATE: 3/19/99 BY: Tom Beach
8. DATE RECEIVED: 2/23l99 DEADLINE FOR ACTION: 4/25/99
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A. PURPOSE: Site plan review for a new truck transfer facility.
B. PARCEL SIZE: The proposed building and the paved area around it for trucks would be cover 2.5
acres. It wouid be located at the east end of a larger piece of industrial property that runs from
Fairview to Prior on the south side of Minnehaha and covers 14.5 acres
C. EXISTING LAND USE: The area where the truck Vansfer facility would be built is currently a parking
lot. There are two driveways on Fairview Avenue. (These driveways have gates which are currently
locked and have snow in front of them indicating that they have not been used recently).
The rest of the property has a variety of offices and industrial uses and more parking. The main
building on the site has approximately 15 loading docks on the south (back) side.
D. SURROUNDING LAND USE:
The area to the east (across Fairview) and to the north (across Minnehaha) is residential. (Zoned
R-4, RT-1 and RM-2)
The area to the west and south is industrial. (Zoned I-1)
E. ZONING CODE CITATION: Section 62.108(c) lists a number of findings that the Planning
Commission must make in order to approve a site plan. These are listed and discussed in Section H
below.
F. HISTORY: The site has been had industrial uses for over 60 years. At one time Controi Data was a
major tenant. JLT bought the property about 3 years ago and has been renovating the existing
buildings.
� DISTRICT COUNCIL RECOMMENDATION: The Hamfine Midway Coalifion requested a public
hearing on this site plan. They have concems about truck traffic, noise and air pollution. Their Board
of Directors voted unanimously to oppose the project. (See attached letters.)
•
•
H. FINDINGS:
1. Dawes Trucking The truck transfer facility would be built by JLT and operated by Dawes
Trucking. Dawes would bring a variety of goods to the site from local businesses using smaller �
city trucks. The goods would then be consolidated inside the building and loaded onto semi-
trailers and shipped out of state. Dawes currently operates out of a building located in Roseville.
However, this buiiding is too small and Dawes wants to move to get more room
��
�a-sa�{
2. Proposed operation John McDaniels, the owner of Dawes Trucking, described the proposed
operation to staff, including the hours of operation and the number ot trucks:
Hours of operation
• - The facility would be open Monday through Friday. It would normally be closed on
weekends although occasionally there would be an individual truck on weekends.
- During the week the facility would open at 7AM. Tuesdays and Fridays are the busiest
days and the facility would normally stay open until midnight on those nights. On
Monday, Wednesday and Thursdey the facifity would ciose at 8 or 9 P.M..
- Peak hours are late afternoon (3 to 6 P.M.)
Number and types of trucks
— There would be approximately 35 semi-trailer trucks a week taking freight out and another
10 semi-trailer trucks bring freight in. (On Tuesday and Friday when they are busier,
there would be 10 semi-trailer trucks a day. On Monday, Wednesday and Thursday
there wouid be fewer semi-trailer trucks.
— There would be 6 to 8 smailer local trucks a day Monday thru Friday. These trucks would
leave in the morning, pick up or deliver goods locally, and return in the afternoon.
— The large trailers typically take 3 or 4 hours to load. However, a trailer may site at the
dock for a day or two until it is picked up. The truck engines would be turned off and
would not run while the trucks are parked. Electrical hook-ups for engine heaters would
be provided in the winter. If traiters will be parked for more than a few hours, the tractor
is unhooked and leaves the site.
— Some of the semi-trailers would have refrigerator units. However, Dawes wouid not be
handling perishable good such as produce and so tucks with refrigerator units would not
run them while they were at the site.
— There would not be any fueling stations or maintenance shops on site.
3. Existing operation Staff visited Dawes current location in Roseville two times and observed
the following:
• — On Thursday, March 11 at 4:00 PM there were 10 trailers parked at dock doors and additional
trailers parked on the site away from the building. (These trailers did not have any engines
running.) There was one truck backing up to a dock and in the next 15 minutes two more
trucks arrived on site. (These trucks had their engines running.)
— On Monday, March 25 at 8:00 the business was closed. There were approximately 10 trailers
parked at dock doors and other trailers parked on the site away from the building. One
parked truck was running and had its lights on.
4. The site plan The pian shows a 27,740 square foot buiiding. It would be 294' long on the side
facing Fairview and 93' deep. It wouid be 28'-5" tall. The building would have a small office on
the south end but most of the building would be for storing and handling goods. The building
would have 21 overhead doors for large trucks on the west side (facing away from Fairview) and 5
doors for smaller, local trucks on the north side (these wouid be visible from the street). Access
would be provided using rivo existing driveways on Fairview. The site also has access from an
existing driveway on Prior.
5. Required findings Section 62.108(c) of the Zoning Code says that in "order to approve the
site plan, the planning commission shall consider and find that the site plan is consistent with" the
following:
(a) The city's adopted comprehensive plan and development or project plans for sub-areas of the
city.
The City's recently adopted Land Use Plan supports "compatible mixed use". The site plan is
not compatible with the adjacent residential neighborhood. The plan could be made more
• compatible by closing the existing driveways on Fairview so that trucks must use Prior and
installing sound barriers.
The Land Use Plan also says the City should "consider alternatives such as special
restrictions on large trucking firms."
� G
The draft District 11 Plan supports steps to mitigate the impact of the Burlington NoRhen
intermodal freight yard which is located '/z mile to the north. Taking steps to mitigate the
impact of this site would be consistent with that.
(b) Applicable ordinances of the City of Saint Paul. •
The site plan does not meet the minimum required setback along Fairview: the required
setback for the buiiding is 7'-5" and the proposed site plan shows a setback of 6'.
There is a question about whether Fairview Avenue can be used as a truck route. Staff is
reviewing this with Public Works and the City Attorney's office and will have more information
at the public hearing.
There is a question about whether the noise from trucks wouid exceed the maximum levels
established in the City's noise ordinance. Staff is recommending that a noise study be done
to determine if mitigation, such as noise barriers, is needed to meet these noise limits.
"fruckirtg facilities are a permitted use in an I-1 zoning district and the site plan meets all other
applicable ordinances.
(c) Preservation of unique geologic, geographic or historically sign�cant cha�acterisfics of the city
and environmentally sensitive areas.
The site plan is consistent with this finding. The site is a paved parking lot on industrial
property and the surrounding area is a residentiai neighborhood.
The neighborhood has environmental concerns about air pollution from existing truck traffic
on the site and the additional fra�c that this facifify woufd generate. Staff is not aware that the
site is in violation of any air quality regulations but is contacting the MPCA to confirm this.
(d) Protection of adjacent and neighboring properties through reasonable provision for such •
matters as surface water drainage, sound and sighf buffers, preservation of views, light and
air, and those aspects of design which may have substanfial effecfs on neighboring land uses.
The site pian is not consistent with this finding but can be modified so that it is consistent
— The residents in the area have complained in the past about truck traffic on Fairview. The
site plan calis for using the exisUng driveways on Fairview. This would increase the
amount of truck traffic on Fairview. The driveways on Fairview should be closed so tfiat
all trucks must use Prior Avenue. There is enough room behind the existing main building
for Wcks to get from Prior to the new building.
— Noise from trucks on the site would have a substantial effect on neighboring residential
land uses on Fairview and Minnehaha. A noise study by an acoustical engineer should
be required to determine if noise barriers are needed and if they are, how big they need to
be and where they should go. JLT is taiking about constructing another buiiding north ot
the truck transfer facility and this could act as a noise barrier if it was large enough and it
was for a use that did not generate a lot of additional noise.
(e) The arrangement of buildings, uses and facilities of the proposed development in order to
assure abutting property and/or its occupants will not be unreasonably affected.
The site plan is not consistent with this finding but can be modified so that it is consistent
— The arrangement of the driveways wiU increase traffic on Fairview Avenue. The existing
driveways shouid be closed so that trucks use Prior Avenue.
— The building is arranged so that most of the loading docks are on the west side of the
building and the building wili biock most of the noise from these docks from residents on •
Fairview. However, residents on Minnehaha will be hear noise from these docks unless
noise barriers are built. The building also has five docks on the north end of the building
close to Fairview and noise barriers are needed for these docks too.
30
(� Creation of energy-conserving design through landscaping and location, orientation and aq 'S a �
elevation of structures.
• The site plan meets current standards for energy conservation and is consistent with this
finding.
(g) Safefy and convenience of both vehicular and pedesfian traffic both within the site and in
relation to access streets, including tra�c circulafion features, the locations and design of
entrances and exits and parking areas within the site.
Public Works staff has reviewed the site plan and determined that the plan, including use of
existing the driveways on Fairview for the primary access to the truck facility, is safe and
consistent with this finding.
(h) The satisfactory availability and capacity of siorm and sanitary sewers, including soiutions to
any drainage problems in fhe area of the development.
There is adequate sewer available. The applicant has not prepared a detailed storm water
drainage plan yet. The site plan is consistent with this finding if a condition is added that a
drainage plan must be submitted to staff for approval.
(i) Suffcient landscaping, fences, walls and parking necessary to meet the above objectives.
The site plan is not consistent with this finding but can be modified so that it is consistent:
— Additional fences or walls should be constructed, if needed, to block noise to neighboring
houses.
— There is no iandscaping on the site now. The landscaping shown on the site plan should
• be increased by planting shrubs that grow at least 10' tali along the west side of the
building. Additional landscaping should be planted around the perimeter of the site where
ever noise barriers are required. The noise barriers should be setback 10' from the
property line to provide adequate room for landscaping.
Q) Site accessibi�ity in accordance with the provisions of the Americans with Disabilities Act
(ADA), including parking spaces, passenger loading zones and accessible routes.
The site plan is consistent with this finding if one additional handicapped accessible parking
space is provided.
(k) Provision for erosion and sediment control as specified in the "Ramsey Erosion Sediment
and Control Handbook."
The site pian does not show erosion or sediment control measures. A condition for approvai
of the site pian should be that an erosion and sediment control pian must be submitted to staff
forapprovai
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Based on findings 1-5, staff recommends that the site plan be
approved subject to the following conditions:
1. The property owner must close the two existing driveways on Fairview at his expense and
repiace with them with curb and boulevard so that all trucks coming to the trucking facility wouid
have to use Prior Avenue. in the future, if other uses are proposed on the site that would
generate Ievels of traffic consistent with the adjacent neighborhood, the City would consider
• permitting driveways on Fairview for these uses as long as the trucking facility did not have
access to Fairview.
2. The property owner must pay an acoustical engineer to do a noise study. The purpose of this
study would be to determine the ievels of noise that could be anticipated from the truck transfer
� �)
facility and to propose options for mitigating the noise.
3. Based ort ihe resulis ot the noise sur*rey, sound mitigation measures must be designed and
—constructed to ensure that the development conforms to City noise regulatio�s. .
4. The setback on Fairview must be increased to 10 feet to permit enough room for landscaping to
soften the appearance of the building. The setback must be pianted with shrubs that wiil get at
least 10 feet tall when mature to form a continuous row along the entire east side of the building.
5. Additional landscaping must be planted around the perimeter of the site where ever noise barriers
are required. The noise barriers must be setback 10' from the property line to provide adequate
room for landscaping.
6. A storm water management plan must be submitted to staff tor approval.
7. One additional handicapped accessibie parking space must be provided.
8. An erosion and sediment control plan must be submitted to staff for approval.
! '
•
r1
U
�1C
J'� i M r. wu��- re t e,., � J � k �c
'�Gsc re�ee� r eesvr"r`'`' ` h..�,�4 2�
PLfMN�� Ct71MlKtttiG�'� cr�'
STAFF RECOMMENDATION FOR JLT/DAWES TRUCK FACILITY �� P «'� t�
Revised 3/26/99 j-{ cs�� ��] c+ - S�
• `l
Staf� r2commends that the site plan be approv=d subject to th� foilowing condiYions:
1. Driveways The nortn drivewa/ on Fairview must be clos°d and the south drive�aay must be
wid=ned as d2termined by Public Works to handle large trucks.
2. Sound barriers Sound mitigation measures must be designzd and construct2d to ensure that-the
dev=lopment conforms to City noise regulations. If wails ara rzquired for sound barriers, they must be
in place before the building is occupied. If another new building wilt act as a sound barrier, work mus!
begin on that buiiding beforz the trucking building is occuoied.
3. Truck idling Truck engines must be turned ofi wfienever trucks are at the docks or on standing on
the site waiting to get to a dock.
4. Parking on adjacent streets Trucks using this site may not park on Fairvew or Minnehaha.
5. Hours of operetion Hours of operation must be limited to between 6 AM and 12 midnight.
6. Setbacks and landscaping The setback on Fairview must be increased to 10 feet to permit
enough room for landscaping to soften the appearance of the building. The setback must be planted
with shrubs that wiil get at least 10 feet tail when mature to form a continuous row along the entire
east side of the building.
Additional landscaping must be planted around the perimeter of the site where ever noise barriers are
required. Noise barriers or other new bui4dings must be setback 10' from the property line fo provide
• adequate room for landscaping.
7. Storm water plan A storm wat2r management plan must b2 submitted to staff for approval.
8. Accessible park+ng One additiona4 handicapped accessib(e parking space must be provided.
9. Erosion and sediment control An erosion and sediment control pian must be submitted to staff for
approval.
\ J
33
�LTGROUP INC.
739 Vandalia Street • St. Paui, MN 55114 (651) 641-1111 •(651) 641-1244 Fa•
����
April 19, 1999
Peter W. Wazner
Assistant City Attorney
City of Saint Paul
400 City Hall & Court House
15 W. Ketlogg Boulevard
St. Paul, MN 55102
RE: Project: Dawes Trucking @ Minnehaha and Fairview Avenues
Dear Mr. Warner:
After the last committee meeting of the Plannin� Commission I thou�ht it advisable to •
share our thoughts with you in re�ard to the issues that have arisen.
It must be noted again that our plan certainly conforms with both the letter and the
spirit of the zoning of the property. We are not askin� for variance; but instead others
seem to be requesting a chan�e in the types of uses allowed on this site and in the
area.
As owner of approximately 2,000,000 sq. ft. of industrial property in the Midway, we
certainly are familiar with the kinds of activities that occur here on a daily basis.
While this particular tenant is a"trucking company", it must be noted that
distribution companies in the area often have more truck traffic than might be seen
from Dawes Truckin�.
In regard to Fairview Avenue being a truck route or not, we find it almost amusing to
observe that this particular debate can only be described as what it must have been
like to watch medieval theolo�ians arguin� about how many an�els could dance on
the head of a pin. Or, perhaps, Bill Clinton explainin� the meanin� of "it."
The fact is tnxcks drive regularly on Fairview Avenue. There are si�ns that clearly
mark it as a truck route. (We will provide the pictures if someone cares.) City of St.
Paul attorney, Mr. Matt Pfhol, has told us it is a truck route. To our knowled�e the •
City has never attempted to re�ulate the trucks on Fairview Avenue goin� north from
� �Y
c�,�,
• University Avenue. Perhaps someone can show us that attempt? Candidly, we find it
duplicitous to su�gest we cannot use Fairview Avenue for trucks. What will the plan
be for our immediate nei�hborin� businesses that re�ularly use trucks today on
Fairview Avenue?
But, someone minht say this new use will create an undesirable amount of new truck
traffic on Fairview Avenue. The truth is that with a smaller buildin� like this there is
no way an inordinate amount of new traffic could be created. There has also been a
down ri�ht misrepresentin� implication that trucks wil] be "weavin�" and "windin�°
their way through nei�hborhood streets. There is as much chance of that as there is of
having truck traffic on Summit Avenue.
As is so often the case, perhaps some people should pause, catch their breath and
rethink what their real problems are. In our view, trucks backing in perpendicular to
Fairview Avenue (as is the case on Fairview Avenue) poses a much bigger safety
hazard. In addition, a few weeks a�o we cooperated with authorities who used a
second story location in one of our buildin�s to observe and arrest suspects due to a
significant dru� violation across the street on Minnehaha. While not having heard
from the neighborhood on that score, we will say "you're welcome" in advance.
• Sound Abatement — we find it interestin� that select commission members have found
• the project Q,�v_ of violatin� sound ordinances prior to the buildin� and business
havin� yet to be open. Where is the fairness in that position? If the tenant should be
in violation of noise ordinance, they shouid be treated as any other business in St. Paul
and appropriate measures should be taken. Where does this guilty before openin�
come from? In point of fact, this business does not test jackhammers. They have a
small fleet of modern equipment and have been a law-abiding business.
• Subdivision of Parcel — we were astounded by the suggestion from one member who
said that trucks should only enter from Prior because we were out of line
(paraphrasing) in our concern over future marketing to other tenants and our ability to
spiit the parcel if need be for financin� purposes, etc.
I would ask that member if he owned a I S-acre parcel in the middle of the Twin Cities
would he want that risht taken away from him? I could believe this suggestion
coming from someone with a partisan point of view. From an appointed position of
responsibility in seein� that property rights are upheld as part of a commissioner's
duty it is astonishin�.
We have been a slight bit surprised that there has been less than full support for our
continuin� improvements to the parcel. We have spent millions and millions of dollars on
this parcel and this new buildin� follows that course. When Bob Kessler came out to
discuss the project, he did so in a professionai and rational manner. I did not say he is
• squishy cheesecake. Rather he displayed savvy and poise. I have since leazned from a
respected peer, Scott Tankenhoff of Hillcrest Development (whose company has made
sizable contributions to the improvement of St. Paul) that he also felt Mr. Kessler did a
3� �
good job on his most recent project. We were willin� to listen to Mr. Kessler's .
suggestions in order to meet time requirements of the tenant. Those timings are now in
jeopardy. We understand we had staffs' recommendation and now we are unclear as to
where we stand. We would be willing to meet one last time to brin� needed clarity if
anyone desires. This includes the issue of a sound barrier.
We stand ready to discuss these matters with any and all participants.
Thank you for your attention.
Sincerely,
Jerr�� y "Ffoo�
cc: Commission Members
Council Member Benanav
City Staff
Mayor's Office
District 11
•
u
,z�r_iur �aro��ttv
3�
RPR-13-1999 12�18 FIRST RSSET MRNRGEMENT
612 973 1061 P.02i08
/�� �� `
- t
SIERRA CLUB
North Star Chapcec
779 Clayland Street
St. Paul, MN 55109
612-973-1145 (daytime/messages)
651-69?-9303 (home/messages)
Apri1 13, 1999
Mayor Notmari COleman
City of St. Paul
15 west Kellogg Boulevard
St. Paul, MN 55101
RE: RequAat to MaYOr'� Office for Environmental Assessment
JL'f Truck Trans£er Site Proposal (Minnehaha e Faizview
Av¢niles )
Dear Mayor Coleman:
ihe JT.2 Truck i:ansfer Site Proposal fails four of your most important and often-
stated development tests:
• 11 job creation
2) tax base
3) affordable housing
4) neighboshood preservation
•
and rejuvenation.
The Eocus of the Sierra Club's concern, o£ couzse, is #9--the neighborhood
environmental and a.uality-of-life issues.
In an eEfott to ensure thac the City cbtains sufficient information to make an
appropriate decision on the truck t=ansfer site proposal, the Sie=ra Club recently
sponsozed a neighbozhood-based petition effo=t. The petition (co v attached)
requested the Minnesota Environmental Quality Board (EQS) to initiate an Environment
Assessment Wozksheee (EAw) with tegard to the proposed site.
The EQB rejected the EAw petition on the basis of the exemption for structures
measuzing less than 100,000 square feet of intezioz sguare Eootage. The pzoposed
£acility consists of outdoor loading platforms and paved truck bays in conjunction
with intetior temporary scoraqe spaee. Most of the environmental and neighborkood
issues, however, revolve around the proposed facility's outdoor activities_ Since
this project falls outside the Minnesota EQB's jurisdiction, we are bringing this
maCter to the City's attention-
The 393 petition siGnatures, obtained by neighborhood volunteers, cleaxly indicate
the neighborhood's overwhelming endorsement of the need for such an environmental
assessment addressing the following issue�:
a1 Safety concerns because the truck entrance and exit driveways on Faizview vill
cau5e a significantly increasad traffic hazard £or neigkborhood childzen and
Fairview auto traffic;
b) Ext=eme noise pollution caused by truck engines and backup signals dusing the
"anticipated" operating hours of 'I a.m. to midnight two weeknights and 7 a.m. to 9
p.m• three weeknights, plus some weekend hours;
c) ziaht eollution due to powerful bzight lights shining f=om the site into Faizvie*.r
a.venue bedrooms at night;
d) Pollution of the visual environment in this residential neiqhborhood;
e) Water pollution Prom runo££ of hydrocarbons and detergents used to clean
pavements;
� 37
APR-13-1999 12�19 FIRST ASSET MRNAGEMENT 612 973 1061 P.93i08
f) Increased air pollutioa caused by additional tzuck tra£Eic to a site wichin 12
blocks of Snelling � University, the most polluted site in Minnesota, and running of
diesel tzuck eagines while parked at the sice_
The petition siynatuses also teetify to the signezs' belief that the City wi11 be
responsive to their concerns. In fact, many of the 343 adult siqners also siqned
sepatate, unofficial petition sheets liscing their minor children! It is czitieally
important to the future of this unique neighborhood, and 'to ouz childzen, that the
City be provided with the requested envizonmencal data.
We are therefore now askina that Your of£iee perform an environmental aa3essment
of the p=oposed truck tsansfer site develonmene pro�ect• Specifically, we are
asking the City to perEoxm an envizonmencal assasssene, to inc2ude the in£ormation
speei£ied on the attached YROPOSED ENVIIiONb�L7Tl�L ASSESSMENT.
The Twin Cizies Gioup of the Sierra Club also understands "the bigqer pictuse"--the
economic and political and economic context Within which developmenL issaes must be
decided. we wou2d therefo:e also like to present our views regarding the £irst
three -- eeonomic -- issues in the lisc at the beginning of thi� letter: 1) job
creation; 2) cax base; and 3) afforflable housing.
We be2ieve the proposed truck trans£er sice has litcle economic vaS.ue for St. Paul
in tezms of eichet tas base enhancement o= job ereation, and threatens both public
safety and the survival of this valuable affordable-houeinq neiqhk�orhood.
Although chis Rropezty is not wzder port Authority jurisdiction and is not
requesting Cicy Pundinq, nonetheless ue would like Lo compare the Authority's
Sxownfields Neiqhborhood Redevelopment Criteria'S economic quidelines. FirSt,
add=essing enhancement of the tax base, the Port Authozity iequires that the
facility constitute a•'value-added liyhz mznufacturing" use. TI:is truck ZransEer
site is a freiqhti transportation faeility to be used Dy independenc truckers, aot a
manufacturing facilicy. Second, the pozt Authority's guideline for iob creaiion ie
"at leasc one job per 1,000 squa=e feec of buildirg spaee," with "wage rates ac
least S9 pe: hour," With 7D5 of nev hires consiszing of St. Paul residents.
Although loadir.g and unloading freighc is labor intenszve, such work is mose likely
to be hired on a casual basis through "tmmp" ager.cies. Tke proposed truck freight
trans£er site wi11 not gene:ate anywhere near the 27 new, full-time, living-crage
sta£f jobs chat the Port Authority would require iP this pzopezty were a zeclaimed
brownfield.
The legally apalicable City developmenc critezia, of course, are set fozth in the
St. Paul Comprehensive Land Use P2an. both the new city plan (approved by the Cicy
Council and pending approval by the Mecropolican council), and the preceding plan
c,hich is still in effect, requite developm.ent to be compatible witk the euiroundinq
neighborhood. The new city Land Use Y1an prohibics che constnzction of any new
truck traasfer sites anywhere in St. Paul. It is thu3 obvious that City land use
policy t:nequivocallY requires compacibilitV with the existinq nei4�orhood.
ih¢ Sierra Club has a sincere concern £os preeesvinq the quality of life in this
extraordinary urban residentia2 neiqhborhood. This established residential
neighborhood, in the Neue21 Park area o£ Hamline-Miduay, is a striking exam�le of a
safe, stable, multizacial neighbozhood with a mix of economi-c level3 and housing
types, plus many of the resources and amenities that urban planz:ers vould plan in an
urban neighborhood iE they Were p2anning a neighbozhood zoday: _public and private
elementary 9CI100�9� churches, parks, playgrounds, zecreation centers, bus routes,
and locally-owned teLail stores and eatinq establishments, plus a public 2ibraty and
nationally known university, 2nd czicically scazce af£ordable housinq.
Two days before the Planninq Cemmission hearinq, we were excited and encouzaqed by
your public statemenc emphasizing that maYntaining and expanding the supply of
affordable housing in St. Paul is a top iiayoral priority. The vast 7najo=ity of
homes are owner-occupied, and the vasc majority are we11 saintained. We know the
r;r..t,�� t,;nr .an�rA fnr nvr nr;nfihorh�nd. 'oeeause it Lewazds us Lesidents each year
estate ta:c¢s, howevet, many smalle.c ot olfler homes s:ill fall into the "a£fo=dable
categoty for blue-collar wotkers, veterans, younq families, and empty nestess who
appzeciace che many advantaqes of living in Sc. Paul.
i
•
•
�
� IQ
APR-13-1999 12�19 FIRST ASSET MANRGEMENT
612 973 1061 P.04i08
�q -S2 `-�
The �roposed tzuck transEer sice, bordered by £a:rviem ar.d Minnehaha Avenues--CWo
• o1d resicential streets--is inLrinsically not r.eiqh'corhood-friendly. Noise, air
pollution, and pu'alic sa£ety issues together eoastitute a serious, i�i.nent threac
to the health of neighbors and the ecoaomic h¢alth of the neighborhood.
Noise: The "anticipated" houzs of operation aL :he proposed site estend £roia 7 a.m.
till 9 p.m. on so:,�e weeknights and ti12 :cidr.ig�t on oeh¢rs, plus some weekead hours,
raith no scaced closing or "quiet hour�." Neighbors on Fair+iew, Minaehaha, and
nearby streets will have at most 7 hours o: res�ice on seleetez weel:nights from the
zepeated high-decibel backuo signals; those who vork gsaveyard shift xill have
little if any rest. Many homes lack air co.^.ditioaing ar.d must leave vindovs open
durinq warm weathe=.
Accordinq to the National Instituces of Health, lack of adequace sleec can cause oz
aggravate ocher health problems. ic also causee children and adults to experience
difficulties in memory and concencration, thus zdr•ersely affecting learninq, job
performance, and safecy. The addition o£ lancseaping and some noise-baxziet walls,
as recommended in the Planning cecsnis>ion's Staf` tteport, would have no ePfect on
noise £rom the trucks coming and going on the street; they would also do little to
eff2ctively reduce the impact of hiq%�-decibel backup signal noise during the
facility's long and lace hours of operation.
Air Pollution: The sice will also brinq increased air pollucion, in an area that
already has the highesti level of air pollution in the 'hrin Cities. Othe=
environmental concerns include runo£f and visual pollucion, which are both cized in
the Planning Conmiseion Scaff Feport. The '•big picture" also includes add.itional,
unspecified facilities that zhe ownEr has planned for other porcior.s of this site,
entailing siill more traffic and pollution.
Safetv, however, is our primary concern. It is one thing to say "Not in my
backyard," and quite another to say "DOn'i zun over our chiLdren!"
•
•
As many residents reminded the Plannir.g Commission ac itis Mazch 26 public hearing,
the proposed truck freight trans£er site is directly onposite 2 overwhelminqly
T-nT'
worse,
The safety issue is paramountl Peak hours of ooeration--in the a£ternoon--eoincide
danqerously wish after-school child pedestrian traffic to and £rom zhe neighborhood
grocery store at Minnehaha and Fairview, homes and in-home daycare centers in
adjacent and nearby blocks, Newe11 Park Recreation Center at Fairview and HewiCt,
the public playqround ac Clayland and Chelton Streets, and the public library at
Minnehaha and 5nelling Avenues. Even if the child's route does not cross Fairview,
we all know that chi.ldren may unexpectedly rur:, skate, skateboard or zide bicycles
or tricycles into the street.
Neighboss voiced concezns chae the pro�osed sem:.tzailes truck entxazce and exit
driveways on Fairview would soon necessitate the widening of Fairview Avenue and
consewent loss of the boulevazd ("ttee-lawn"), making such danqer to children even
more likely. Residents also testifiec' that evea nov, many trucks are illegaily
using Fairview Avenue north o£ Minnehaha--past Nevell Park, going into Pierce-Butler
Route--and residential sice-streets as tzuck through xoutes. 2his illegal practice
can only be expected co increase if a czuck fze;.qhc cransfer facility is built at
Fairview and Minnehaha Avenues.
Tn conclusion, neighborhood residents and the 1oca1 5ierra Club believe that the
planned cruck transfer site will not confer ar.y signifieant economic oz fiscal
benefits on St. Paul, and that 7.ts a�proval vould spe11 danger and neighborhood
detezioration, cempromising Hamline-A?idway as a i:nique, sa£e, af£ordable,
multiculLUra1 urban neiqhborhood. Even under optimal conditions, with the Planning
Cemmission Staf£ Report's recommended mzti.gat:r.g improvements, che approval of this
particularly unsuitable project by the City vould threaten public safety and
�
� 35
qPR-13-1999 12�20 FIRST RSSET MRNRGEMENT
PROPOSED ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESMENT
JLT Truck Transfer Si�e
Minnehaha and FairvieW Avenues
1. Description:
Give a complete description of the proposed
ancillarv facilities.
Emphasize construction and operation methods
that wi11 cause physical manipulation of the
produce wastes.
612 973 1061
project and
P.05i08
and features
environment or
Indicate the timing and duration of construction activities,
2. Permits and Approvals Required_
List all known local, state, and federal permits, approvals,
and funding required.
3. Land Use:
Describe current and recent past land use and development on
the site and on adjacent laads.
Discuss the compatibility of the project with adjacent and
nearby land uses; indicate whether any potential conflicts
involve envirorunental natters.
Identify any potential environmental hazard due to past land
uses, such as soil contamination or abaadoned storage tanks.
4. Water Quality - Surface Water Runof£:
Compare the quantity and quality of the site runoff before
and after the project.
Describe methods to be used Lo manage and/or treat runoff.
Identify the route(s) and receiving water bodies for runoff
from the site; estimate the impact of the runofz on the
quality of the receiving waters.
5. Tra£fic and Public Sa£ety:
Estimated total Average Dai1y Traffic (ADT) qenerated:
Hours oP operation: w2ekdays
Weekend
Estimated maximun peak hour traffic:
Timing/Hours of peak hour operation:
For each affected road, indicate the ADT and the
directional distribution of traffic with and without the
project.
Provide an estimate of the imgact on traffic congestion on
the affected roads and describe any traffic improvements
which wi11 be necessary.
?�ddress any traffic-related public safety concerns.
Existing parking spaces:
Nuinber of parking spaces added:
Identify any possible toxic or other hazardous materials to
be transfered or stored.
r 1
L J
•
•
� •
APR-13-1999 12�21 FIRST ASSET MRNAGEMENT
7. Dust, Odors, and Noise:
Wi11 the project generate dust, odors, or noise during
construction and/or operation?
If yes, describe the sources, characteristics, duration/time
of day, quantities, intensitv, and any proposed mitigative
measures. Also identify the locations of sensitive
receptors (inclvding hvmen popvlations) in the vicinity and
estimate the impacts on these receptors.
°lq -S 3L1
Describe safety measures and procedures be taken to avoid or
• minir.:i2e hazards with regard to such materials.
Describe measures to ensure site security.
6. Vehicle-relat2d Air Emissions
Provide an estimate of the project's traffic generation on
air quality, including carbon monoxide levels, including
peak hour and seasonal levels.
Discuss the effect of traffic improvements or other
mitigation measures on air quality impacts.
•
�
�
8. Parks, Recreation Areas, and Playgrou,
Identify any designated parks, recrea
playgrounds on or in psoxi,mity to the
Describe the resource(s) and identify
impacts on the resource{s>.
612 973 1061 P.66i08
as:
ion areas, or
site.
any anticipated
Describe any measures to be taken to minimize or avoid
adverse impacts.
9_ visual Impact
will the project create adverse visual impacts?
(Exa�-nples include glare from intense lights and large
visible plumes from cooling towers or exhaust stacks.)
Describe any measures to be taken to minimize or avoid
adverse impacts.
10_ Compatibilitv With Plans:
Is the project subject to an adopted local comprehensive
land use plan or any other applicable land use, traffic,
water, or resource managemant plan of any local, regional,
state, or federal aqency?
If ves, identify the applicable plan(s), discuss the
compatibility of the project with the provisioris of the
plan(s), and explain how any conflicts between the project
and the plan(s) will be resolved.
If no, explain.
il. Impact on Infrastructure and Public Services:
wi1Z new or expanded utilities, roads, other infzastructure,
or public services be required to serve the project or
provide for public health or safety?
x
� ��
qPR-13-1999 12�21 FIRST RSSET MRNAGEMENT 612 973 1061 P.07/68
If yes, describe the new or additional
infrastructure/services needed, including any infrastructure •
that is a"connected action" with respect to the project.
12. Related Developments; Cumulative Impacts:
Are future stages of this development planned or likelv?
If yes, briefly describe future stages, their timing,
and plans for environmental review.
Ts this project a subsequent stage of an earlier project?
Zf yes, briefZy describe the past development, its
timing, and past environmental review.
Is other development anticipated on adjacent lands or
outlots? If yes, briefly describe the development and
its reZationship to the present project.
If any of the above are marked Yes, discuss any cumulative
environmental impacts resulting from this pro7ect and the
other development.
13. Other Potential Environmental Impacts:
If the project may cause any adverse environmental impacts
which were not addressed by items (1} �hrouqh (12), identify
and discuss them here, alonq with any proposed mitigation.
14. Summary of Issues:
List any impacts and issues identified above that may
require further investigation before the project is •
commenced. Discuss any alternatives or mitigative measures
that have been or may be considered for these impacts and
issues, including those that have been or may be ordered as
permit conditions.
# #
r 1
U
��$' y2.
RPR-13-1999 12�21 FIRST ASSET MRNAGEMENT
612 973 1061 P.08i08
�a -s a-y
•
\ J
•
constituce 2 taking, dimi.nishing both che peaceable enjoyment o£ our homes azd our
propercy values.
we implore the Cicy co exercise a11 cue care to see that this r.eighborhood and its
quality of life are preserved. Tne first step, we believe is for the City to
conduct a thorouqn, eomprehensive environmental/saPety assassment including a1I
cancerns a�+dressed in L'ne attached "Proposed Enviromaental Assessment.° we are
askinq that this environmental study be compleced and reviewed, includinq a public
commer.t period, before any approval is qiven or permi.ts gzanted for the develop�ent
of the proposed sice.
Please send us a copy of this report {oz any ocher envisonmental, economic, or
neighborhood impact studies) immediately upon ics release to the publie. We aze
specifically requesting also that the Cicy provide a public coa¢aent period oE at
least 30 days following p�blication of the report.
Thank you foz your atcention_
Sincerely, �
"V' � `
Ronald G. Willia s
r�d� �
Amelia Ruth xummel
Twin Cities �roup sierra Club
Attachments
1. Yroposed JL2 Tzucking Transfer Site EAW Petition
2. Proposed Environmenta2 Assessm¢nt
ec: councilmember Jzy Benanav
Couneil President Dan Sostrem
councilmember Jezry Slakey
Councilmember Chsistopher Coleman
couneilmembez Mike Harris
Councilmember Jim Reiter
Councilmember Hachy Lantry
Gladys Morton, Chair, St. Paul Planning Commission
Kathy Loue, Hamline Midway Coalition
Pastor Greg Renstrem, Hamline United Methodist Church
Pastor Tsu Ker Yang, Y.amline United Methodist church
Ginny Yingling, North Star Chapcer Sierra club
Bi11 Clap, Esq.
� y3
rnTOi a aa
�� � �5�. ��.,��
1Vorth Scar Chapcer
779 Clayland Street
Sc. Pau1, MN 55104
/�Pril I.Z 1999
Gladys Motton
Ptanning Commission
City of Sc. Paul
City Hall
St. Paut, MN SS10i
Dear Ms. Morton:
RPR-12-1999 16�24 FIRST ASSET MRNRGEMENT
612 973 1061 P.02i09
Our peciuon to thc Environmental Quality Board (EQB} regarding rhe JLT Tiucking Transfez Faciliry has
been denied by the EQB, as explained in thc auached letter to Mayor Coleman.
In its stcad, we are ccquestiag that the Ciry Planning Commission recommend that the Ciry perform thc
attached "Proposed Envtzonmental Assessment " Please advise your Neighbnrhood Commiace of this
maaer before iu'Iliesday momi�,e meeting. Alw, please send copies of this conespondence and
attachmenrs to all of your Commission members.
Thank you for your attention to tlus mattrr.
SincerclY. � .
``61,�,o.SLa.` � . C..l ,� �-�-,.�..z
Ronaid G. Williatns
Twin Ciues Group Siccra Club
cc: Mayor Narmaa Coleman
Council Presidcnt Dan Bosnom
Caunalmember Jay Benanev
Counciimember 7erry Blakey
Councilmember Christopher Coleman
Councilmemba Mike Harris
Councilmembcr Jim Reiter
COUncilRlCi6j7ei K3Lhy Tan�'S'
Kathy Loue, Hamline Midway Coalition
Pastor Crreg Rensiro� �1ine United Methodist Church
Fasror Tsu Ker Yang. Hamline United Methodist Church
Bill Klap. Esq.
•
•
•
�' Y h
MRR-3a-15.� _��57 WILDe.4 RESE�RCH oti_ �G% 4523 P.01i2:
R9 -s a`1
�
Mazch 30, 1999
Gladys Morton, Chair
Saint Paul Planning Commission
15 West Kellogg Boulevard
Saint Pau(, Minnesota 55102
Dear Ms. Morton_
I am wTiting as a concemed neighbor about the proposed truck transfer facility that 3LT would
like to build on Fairview Avenue just south of Minnehaha Avenue.
I oppose this use of the property for three main reasons: traffic, air quality and noise.
These are not new concems for our neighborhood. We aze ciose to Snelling Avenue, University
Avenue, the Burlington Northem Santa Fe �uck-�ain operation, the fairgrounds, the classic caz
gatherings on weekends. We already absorb more than our shaze of Saint Pau1's tr�c
congestion, exhaust and noise. The cumulative effect leaves us especially vulnerable to negative
effects from a siguficant increase in uvcks entering and leaving our neighborhood every day.
I understand and respect the owner's interest in getting a good value for his investment in this
properiy. The stakes aze very high far me and my neighbors as we11. Por us, this is not just a
question of increasing the retum on one profit center in a large real estate holding. We have
� poured our savings and our time and caze and pride into our homes. We work hazd to keep up
and improve our houses, yards and streetscapes.
I am just one of ihe many paople who thought our neighborhood was worth investing many,
many hours of personal time into a neighborhood planning process so that we could preserve and
improve our quality of life, making our own local contribution to the future vitality of Saint Paul.
We did this because we believed the city would support and value our neighborhood voice.
We aze not a vrealihy neighborhood but we woik hazd to be a good, strong neighborhaod. We
support local businesses, keep up our homes and yards and live respectfully alongside neighbors
who aze different from us. But these accomplishmenu aze fragile and aze under increasing
pressure.
I believe that in the long term, Saint Paul would reap greater benefits and prevent more problems
by showing support for our neighborhood on this issue, rather than by allowing this resident-
unfriendly use of an industrial property that is located where people live.
Sinc�ely, . ' ( n
C i, _.�.r�
�, �,�__.
Ginger Hop �
•
1728 Blair Avenue
Saint Paul, Minnesota 55104
REGEIVED
MAR 3 0 1999
ELANNING & ECONOMIC DEVEIAPMENT
ibiy L TOTRL P.01
TS- "I
03/29/1959 23'°0 6127211649 K�NNE�Y TR?ti5 La{E PA6c 02
t�1�R 3 0 1�99
RECE��ED
Mazch 29, 1999
�
Ms. Gladys Morton
Chsir, St. Paul Planning Commission
15 West Kellogg Blvd
$t. Paut, MTv� 55102
Dear Ms. Morcon,
��jy�i&ECONOM�C DEYELO�ti1�
It was with regret and constemation that I heard that JLT, owners of the property
at Fairview and Minnehahe Avenues are planning to lease it out as a trucking hub.
Futther, access and egress to the property is to be on Fairview Avenue due to the wishes
of the owner. although there aze residences directly aczoss the street.
I have been a resident of this neighborhood since I moved to St. Paul six years
ago. I came to this neighborhood because my son and his family ]ive here. I have
become active in local affairs and recently bought a house here. When I first moved in,
the neighborhood was not rated very well compared to other areas. I have watched it
change; people here care Many btock clubs have been formed in recent yeazs, most
people care about their property and, importandy, property prices have risen 15 percent in
the last year. 'fhic does not occcu ifthe area is not perceived as viabie.
i was unable to attend the heazing last week, but know you heard many residents
cite their concerns about the use of this property, so I'll not repeat them. I DO caze about
the quality of life here, especially as my gandchildren, and a lot of other children, live
here. t atso understand that the Pozt Authority has set certain criteria for the use of
property; which does not include tcuck uansfer areas.
Usin¢ this property for truck transfer will not add value to the neighborhood, will
not creaze many jobs, does not help the tax base, and certainly wiil creaie many problems
for the neighborhood. It is also not the hzghest and best use of the property. I am certain
that the owner can find better use for it, if he tries. Housing units for the e(derly who
wish to stay here aze certainly an option and much needed.
I do hope chat the Planning Commission arrives at a solution that is win-win, and
that the neighborhood does not lose out due to the des'ues of a single person.
i
��S'n elyc�
Iiamet J. �ednick
1783 W. Thomas Avenue
St. Paul, MN 55104 •
� Yt
From: iom M�nn^r Fw (fi51j659-91q Voica �651)fi59-911) To� Connniss�oner G�aAys Motlon at rJO Mr Tcm E¢ac� CM�e 1 oR Suntlay. Marc� 29. 1999 I:0) i9 F.0
�� -S 2-�j
•
Swida��, �farch 23. 1999
Commissioner Glad��s \forton
St. Paul Plaivun� Conuuission
1? F�'est I�ello�e Boule�'ard
St. Paul. \I\ ?�102
F_�Z: Go Tom Bzacli. 266-9099
Dear Coitunissioner \torton:
Thatilc }�uu for tha opporhmitt to spaak to flia Plamiins Connnissiou durine �•our puUlic
hearin� last Frida}�. I am sure it �ti'as oU�'iuus that I am nut accustomed to speaking Uefore
committaas such as this. I appraciata }�our patiauca as I shuubkd to m� puint.
I am ��'ritiu� to } ou to remind of the tremendotts uuportanez ti� e placa on tlia issue of the
proposed JLT dz��alopment at 625 Fain•ia�v A�e. I faal our commm�ih is 1 modal for tUe
cih of St. Paul. Tlia prassuras oY da�'elopmant in our araa ara da�radine our community to
the point �vhere ��'e arz a(1 considering li��iu� altemnti� es outside the Cih� Of St. Paul. I
aut surz t�oti t� ill agrae that tliis �4'ould Ue a loss to the cirv as a ��'(iola. \�"e solicit }'our
support attd t11z support of tl�a Pla�witlg Committaa in ancoura�ine JLT to radirzct this sitz
uito a partnersl�ip �cith our neighUorliood that w•ill beuefit SLT uid our neigiiborhuod.
Our ueiohborhood is a di� arse ueiohborhood. h1y� strzat nlona iucludas fmnilias of sevaral
• afluiic backeirounds, Eldarl�� parsons. �"atarans, a collasa professor. a Ia�F}�ar, a fork lift
operator, tnick dri�'er, euginears, tnanaeers, tneat pacl:er etc... R'e all ��ork toaather to
impru��e Uie ueiohborhood utd participlta in n�iol�borhood watch prosrlms pl:mrino
flo« ars aud maintauiiug cotmnon araas. Tha sa��ing "it takas a couuuu»ih� to rnisa a
child" is nut lost to fear iu our neiahUorhovd. �'e are a"couuuuuih'� in tlie h�aditional
sansa, ,y�at fouiid a Ualluce with modem d1y proUlzms that pl�gua uiam� cih• couunuiuties
toda�•. Cla1r1�� our communih� neads to ba nurhirad 1nd dacaloped by tha cit�.• of St. Paul.
•
Our naiol�Uarhood has ahcaJ•s eneouragad busivass dacefopment. Eaeh y�aar ��e hava a
picnic. �Va al�ca}s im'ita businassas in tl�a <uea to attaud. Thosz tliat cntutot ara trelted to
UarUecue at ���ork. In man�• cases t�'a lia��e resolved mnn} disputes ���ith busiuesses ti��ithout
tlie nonnal confi•outations that go�anuuaut nuut fi�equantl}• mediata.
I undarstnnd fliat tlie plamune committee ma` lia��e little rzcoursa «hen a dz��eloper such
as JLT entars tha areua �vith a Izoal attihida tliat say's "Let's look at the facts•" and "the
nzighhor�l�ood's espectations doii t Yit zonina la�vs". C1ear14� I am not as ncquainted �vi8i
zoning laG�'s as JLT lppears to ba. Ho�ve�•ar, I thiiili it is clzar fliat JLT is not iuterastzd ui
thz ��alua tl�is neigh6orhvod Urings our cih�, a neigliUorhood vf �vhich «e 1re cei} proud.
Should «a facz loud uoisas uutil rivah�a uiidnight, I and mmn' of my naighbors «�ill Uegiu
to look for houseiue else�vliere. The brzlkup of our neiahUahood will no douUt result ui
an incrzase ai low-income rantal housnig, rlUier d�an tlie currant tuix of locv- to moderate-
uicome o«Yier -occupaut liousntg we currently enjdy. Tha cost to thz city for 8us sluft in
housmg «�ould be suUstaurial. The benefit to JLT would also be substantial, as it clearly
� �7
crom_ioinMi�+��°r Far..(551)659-91UVOice(S51)65 ToCOnimisslooerGaAysMOrtanatdoMr.TOmBeac� Paye2oRSunday.March2&199910ASlPU
��'ould ot�ar a ereat pool of lo�v-waga ��orkars ideal for tha industn� tha� proposa far tl�is �
sitz.
I sincaral�• liopa that JLT «ill joni us in fmd'ui� an altamatica usa for this sita. I faal flia
taam «ork approacli to ecouomic dac�elopuieut ui our arza has bean profitable to our
comnlunih�, iha cin�. and thz busuiesses in our arza. I solicit tha piaminie conunissivn to
rajact Uia cun proposal and eucouraQe JLT to bruiQ a ua�v proposal to tha tabla fliat
��'ill iucluda tha support of tha uaiehUorhood of wluch tha}� ���ish to bzcome a part.
Tl�oivas �Iu�dzr
76� Tahuu Street
St. Paul. �N » 10-4
•
�
� ��
-������� �N� �,���1u�;,�v �c��}�_� �l�,l'��
\����C`tl\1�:��� �T l�:n� �):� ��1,� _ �� r \Q.1�C�1 a,�4 1 g q q
�-�
� � .
\ o� �C,or�� mt��o^�`�
�r
n
U
�
� �1 U:�o� v� ,� �G �'�l �113� � U,hC_�
a� ����� C���-��� ��.���.�� ��.���� � Q.�`�
� �,`�o„�.` ��L� o� r��� `�0�� �"��.�wv..�; , a`��
�\�4^�� 1�v��� �.�.�: �) a�.p.� \��0'`�,� �;h 55 � U�� .
��'t�1 \�.�t��.�e, �w i�'��. ���.o. ��.3�� �.).'��, oh ��fi�-ha�.�,��
�i�,,��o�� Co��.� '� `�., �\ ,�,,'�,. � �,�, ��� mo�/
Ov.� 4.,���, �\ ��u�� t� � ���� '.� �--`�� � a,��.� � �,
\>\ ���o.,�� �-..,�,ti�,�,L W v��� . -c�.��
, �
�,�.� Y ��- ?����.U.>��� , �.� �1�„� ����m U.�. ,
� �a\ �>c� � o \�1«:��k� � y �'' �1�. S ��� V.�a,\S.�
�,`��.�., �z^�� ���- � ����, . ��� _�� a,� �: � �.; 0,�12, ��
��.�� . � .ca�Cc� o`����s � wo'U� �E C�a�k
v�a`���h �,��� ��c��.wv�l��'� . �� -l�c�.,��`� ��o��.t�
v� ��� v"�`�`��,, � ,c��. c " ��\`��
� �_�L��- ��.ti.`., \�.; ���� � —
����� ��i�� '�1`. f�\`��L�lc���:i. ��� `���}�, l �, \1� C�»\����
1Lp ��.�\\��C�. � �,\ `�.� Q..� \'�. .
�, � ��o.��` � c� ��.,'�,,�nc. I�;.fi, �J
�.� ��.r ..����vJ���. ...�,�� � a����� � ���� �v��
��� ern :� � ��.�.�c��t� C ��v �c4.,�. ��� �.�.Yc. ��
�� c�.�> �L , �.i`L�C�t� .�� h,ti`�, C,'���C� e�.� �n� cl _ U�� R�1R�
n� �.�s��Y�� , �r �.���� � �� , -�,.�L �t�cx2, ���.�' ��>v.��.�,c��
l�� �.�.��tZ• , � 0.�� �r. �.�� �ta �� - � ^��
�v'V;.�C�� ���.nl ����� 0.��- � �i �U.� �U.�� �� U�k' \N--
� '��'� 'C��� � -� .,��c�..�.0 � �.,�e��' � Cu�c� .������ !�
a-0.,�� �.'���.�, v�� ��. "
S o � �, c�- . , , \C�` ��-� r� ��9;�." �A
Z�,wvC�� �� C v I� C� �� ;�C� r
hov.�..�.�c���,,,r�,���� c��� _��,� ��� ��: .'.�T,��.�. C�.`c��� ;a► �.�,�,�c���Z�.
��v�.i, ��,�5..�..ti �, �� n���� h��� �,��.z�, �;�.�.��Yb� a� g,,:,�, ��
�.�....�v.sh�. ���l� '���...D��C�L. �-��S `b� i C�ioRA�; �0 ��
�\��.y uoNT \�� <A ��� 0 C= N y ��_ � r.
qq-S�y
� 59
iv.BT'CY7 25. 177� •
?lease Consider:
Increased noise pollution
Increased traffic
Lac�c cf routes to exit area
ail of t^.e aoove exist here. In; 1997 and 1998 a
trai2er stora;e area was at the same locatior..
�rucks were enterin� and exiting a� all hours. inis
�ade mucn noise pollution, caused �y hard 'cra{ing and
loud acceleration.
If trucks use �airvzew ;oin� ��iorth; a semapnore
would be �:eeded at P�:innehaha Avenue. In 1993 this cost
was �25,000.00. If goin� east on �',innehaha to 3r.ellin�,
t'r:ey er.t°r a^ already over used intersection.
Cur residents are much closer to tha propo�ed area
than t�.e resider�ts of B:vS? i�.idway Container Yard• `iheir
corplairts to noise nave been stron� in oppositioa ior •
ma^y years.
These homes were mostly built around 1910, so tney
have bee:� around lon�er tnan this business. �
We live in a
home ow;zed by the family from the time it was built.
�espectfully
Eu�er.e and �arbara Louden
1802 BZa�r nvenue
051-644-724
� �� n -�" � � f_ l
L `! � `<"�%?�z L � �/ C`
/
�G�� � ����
•
� So
i;R-29-0� �ON 15�1°
Chri;tine E. Olsen
1833 W. Nfinnchaha
S:. Paul, itiIIv 55104
I�larch 29, 1999
•
Gladys 1�foROn
Planning Commission
c/o Jean Birkhalz
1100 Cily Hall
25 W. 4 St.
St. Paul, MN 55101
Dear Ms. Morton:
PRT DuPPRTi�::tiT
FRK ti0. 612c257co:
RECEIVED
MAR 2 6 199�
E1.fiL'(NING & ECONOMIC DEYELOPMEPII
.�
� �S a-`{
I live across the street from the proposed Dawes Truck Temvnal. I am concerned about this proposed
facility and it's impact on the neighborhood.
Cathy Lue, from the HamlinaMidway Coalition, contacted me as soon as they knew about the proposed
plan. I attended a meeting with JLT (Jerry Trooien and 7oe Meyers), Cathy Lue, and several other members
of the community on February 17 at TLT's offices. At this meeting fhe plan was presenled and concerns
fi�oin the neighbors discussed. Those conccrns includcd light, sound, air pollutioi�, a�id tralT'ic. Tl�c piaci
sliowed the use ofFairview instead ofPrior. From conversations Cathy had with Tom Beech she,knew that
JLT was told not to use Fairview. The ne'sghbor5 asked JLT to not use Fairview and to consider soma
other use for ilus site. Mr. Trooien's response to al1 of this was that he was the owner and, since it was
zoned industrial, he could do as he wanted. He also totd us he had a signed contrad with Dawes for the
trucking facility and that this was a done deal.
Dawes would be doing for the community.
A second mce[ing, at Dawes reqaest, was held on March 16 at the Hamline Library. At that meeting John
McDaniels was questioned about Dawes operations. Many of the same issues were covered. Mr. McDaniels
was also asked wha.t Dawes would be bringing to the neighbothood and St. Paul.
None of thejobs would be newjobs coming into the community. It was unclear what other positive things
A tnird cornmunity meeting was held on March 22 at Iv'ewell Park. At this meeting approximately 45
neiglzbors expressed tltcir concerns for a trucking faciIity in the neighborhood. The neighbors voted
overwhelmingly to oppose the truCking facility.
I reafize that thece will be some kind of development on this site and understand why this would happen.
What I don't understand is why something more compatib(e with the neighborhood and community
couidn't be found.
I am cvilling to work with 7LT in further development of their property to fit the needs ands
concerns of the community.
• erely, ._}..
� Lti.,,�.a
Christine E. Olsen
� �-�'�"` �
� S/
i
779 C1ayland Street
Saint Pau1, MN 55104
March 26, 1999
Saint Paul Planning Commission
City Ha11
Saint Paul, N�i7 55101
RE: Proposed Truck Transfer Site
Fairview & Minnehaha Avenues
Gentlepersons:
My husband and I are homeowners 2 short blocks north and one
short block west of the proposed truck transfer site. I work as a
customer service representative for an insurance coinpany. We
bought our 1-1/2 story home 3 years ago with a VA loan and $0
down.
�
Just this past Wednesday, I heard Mayor Coleman on the radio, •
proclaiming renewed concern about the extreme shortage of
affordable housing in Saint Paul. Our Hamline-Midway neighborhood
consists largely of this scarce commodity!
Hamline-Midway is also a unique model of diversity and
stability in the Twin Cities. We are old and young, with lots of
children as we11 as retirees. We are blue collar, middle class,
and professionals. We are also white and black and Hmong and
Native American; the neighborhood church we belong to is bilingual
and bicultural--English and Hmong. We have parks, rec centers,
playgrounds, schools, churches, libraries, a nationally ]cnown
university, and neighborhood stores. We have active block clubs.
We maintain and update and improve our homes, and the government
shows its appreciation by raising our tax-assessed value every
year...
If you were trying to plan a modern urban neighborhood, it
would be very much like ours!
But the proposed truck transfer site bordered by Fairview and
Minnehaha Avenues--two old residential streets--is not
neighborhood-friendly! •
�t S Z
�q -S2-y
�
z
The "anticipaLed" hours of operatio� at the p site
extend from 7 a.m. ti11 9 p.m. on some wee;cnig=cs and ti11
midnight on others, plus some weekend hours, wi:n no stated
closing or "cxuiet hours." Neighbors on Fairview, N'_nnehaha, and
nearby streets wi11 have at most 7 hours of respite on selected
wee;cnights from the repeated high-decibel backup signals. And
those who work graveyard shift will have little if a�y rest.
The site wi11 also bring increased air pollution, in an area
that already has among the highest levels of air pollution in the
Twin Cities. Other environmental concerns inclua2 runoff and
visual pollution, which are both cited in the Planning Commission
Staff Report.
But the environmental damage to our neighborhood is not as
important as the threat to neighborhood safety. Semi's and all
the smaller trucks turning onto and off of Fairview to access this
site--opposite our newly reopened neighborhood store--would pose a
grav2 hazard, especially for children.
• OK, let's look at the "big picture": Per2aps, as the
Plann�ng Commission's Sta£f Report advises, the entrance and exit
could be on Prior instead of Fairview. The proposed truck
transfer site could be toned down and prettied up, behind
landscaping and some noise-barrier wa11s, as recommended by the
Staff Report.
Let's ca11 a spade a spade--this is the typical fig-leaf
solution to unsuitable development! The noise, even if somewhat
muffled, would still be a big problem for neighbors during the
facility's long and late hours of operation. The bia picture also
includes the additional facilities that the owner has planned for
other portions of this site, entailing sti11 more traffic and
pollution.
The planned truck transfer site wi11 not confer any benefits
at all on our neighborhood! Even under optimal conditions, it
will have a deleterious effect on our quality of life. Approval
of this particularly unsuitable project would therefore constitute
a"taking" from neighborhood residents, diminishing both our
peaceable enjoyment of our homes and our property values. This
• project would also compromise Hamline-Midway as a safe,
affordable, multicultural modern urban neighborhood. The Planning
Commission must exercise all due care to see that this
� 53
3
neighborhood and its quality of life are preserved.
Thank you for your attention.
Sincerely,
Amelia R. Hummel
cc: Mayor Norman Coleman
Councilmember Jay Benanav
Council President Dan Bostrom
Councilmember Jerry Blakey
Councilmember Christopher Coleman
Councilmember Mike Harris
Councilmember Jim Reiter
Councilmember Kathy Lantry
�
•
•
'�' Sy
, ni.To�aMinrl?r Fz�:(nit)659-910VO1ce.�65�)659�910TO'COmmrsslnnxGUCysNnrtontloAlr.TOmBearhatSCPaWNannmgCoinmisson Frg+tnf3StturdayMarc�2].199A3:dn;epy
�Q �J � t
• Corrunissioner Gladrs \iorton
St. Paul Planning Cemmission
1� R'est I�el1o� Eoulecard
5[. Paul, bL\ »102
F.�Z: C,/o Tom Beach, 266-9099
Dear Coaunissioner \Lorton:
I ain �nateE�il tor tlie opporauiin• aEforded U}• die coaunission to state m}• opia�oiis regarding
the proposed necr taick [ransker kacilite- [oc G2� Fairc Arenue. I hac-e li� in the
nei�hbochood adjacent to this proposed facility� for ten �•eats, and « � z: en the opporhinitf
to �cork c d7e H:unline �Iid�ca} Coalition Yor die past inondt eonceming et�s site.
\iy husband and I purchased a house on Tatum Stree[ ten }�zacs ago this mend�. \�'e, like
odiers in eur neighborhood, chose to li� in an inner-city neighborhood, c�illingl�• ttading
highec noise lzcels a�id trafdc for afTordable housing, a caciallt mited area, economically
diverse neia green parks fer eur children, pcozimity m Haml�ne lini� and
Hancock Elementar}•, and thricing businesses along Snelling:lcenue. The Ae�cell Park
neighborhood still oEters all diose d�ings to a great miE of people, including lo�cer-income,
ieorking class, and pcofessional people of all races and ages. R'e hace created secernl block
clubs, Ccime R�atclies, and m�� neighbor and I organize a nei��rhbothood-�vide P�g Roast in
our local pla}•�round each summer ���hich im hundreds oEcesidents. \�'e do no[ have a
horrible crime rate, trouble u-i[h daigs, or gangs.
• \�'e luie� ��heti �.e purchasrd a hoine in the ciry that �ce coutd not e�pect die quiet of a
suburb, the clean air of the counhy, but on 6alance our needs �cere met. At the tm1e, ece did
I,now that the site comered by Dlmnehaha and Fai:ciew �cas zoned I-1, or lib t industry.
T7ic site, ichidt has had industrial uses for ocei si�t�r years, c.as a facility Eor a computer
compan�� at the time. �f e did not a ce it much consideration, because �ce, reasonably,
assumed that industrial sites adjoining residential sites must make reasonable
accommodations. A distinction must be make betc �chat neighbors could reasonably
espect for decelopment on this site, and evhat is happening no�c. A computer faciliry is a faz
ccZ� from a trucking tieet �chich intends to operate hea��� tn�cks unTil 12 midnight, and,
indeed, the ciry's adopted land use plan itselt saps the cit} should consider altematices such
as special resttictions on lar�e micking firms. Thus, having a large tnickuig hcm move in
doccn the street «�as, in my opinien, neither foreseeable nor reasonaUle.
IS THIS SITE PL_-L� StiITABLE FOR CO3IPATIBLE bIISED tiSE I\
ACCORD iVCE ��TTH THE CIT�'S L_S:\D USE PLrL� � At present, it is not. Planning
Corrunittee staft cecommend that it can be made so bj• mo�-ing its entcance and using sound
baniers. I su�est that an}' comp:uiy opetating nois}' [iucks, unloading eyuipment such as
forklifts and hydraulic lifts, from secen in the moming ttntil midnight is not compatible with
a residential area. Period. No amount c+F sound restrictions �cilt cempletel�� muffle out these
sounds. L� addition, die lights used bp JLT have consistentl� cteated a peoblein and haee
not been remedied (despite empty promises by JL"� since JLT bought the site. In some
cases the lights shining into adjoining houses remain so bright, all night, that one can read at
night with no intcmal lights on. Such use deprives adjacent properties oE sleep, enjoyment of
u
X� ,ss
f�om: icn M�mler Fa: (651)6549IR Vome. (fi51)fi59-5111 To Cnn:missloner GIZN's Morton rlo Alr.TOm Beach zt SL Pa:J �lann•r.g Ccmmisson �a9? 7 0' 3 SaturAay. MarcA 27. 1999 3'd' FU
land, and creates a nuisance. � cemprehensice zoning plan e�ists ro stabdize pmpeet;,• uses.
Ligh[ industrial acti�-in' such as computer assembly, ottice or edier 8-�, ltbhtec n�ise and
trtftic use is �vi[hin the intent of the zoning, and also allows neighbors to continue to live
and enio5�, ecen impro�e, their homes. ?. nuisance use �cill, rathec, destaUilize the adjacent
residential area, as dap care centers ma5• (ose business, prepertc values mac c•,-ell decrease, and
diosr of us «ho lia� worked hard ro keep die neigliborhood clean and decent look for
other ptaces to lis-e.
DOES THE ECONObIIC INTE£.EST OF JLT L� DE�"ELOPI��G THIS SITE FOR A
TRIICI�TG F�CILITI OUTI�'EIGH THE INT'ERESTS OF I`TEIGHP>ORS ��TD THE
CITl OF ST. P�UL? �s die o�cnec o£ [he site, TLT has the nght to decelep tt and make a
pcota. Eut its interests do not ounceigh those of the citc and its neighborheoc. In this
instance, TLT might lose profi[ in not deceloping [his site Eor the pcesent pu:pose, but that
�ci11 be minga[ed bp its abiliq' to de� e(op it for more suitabte ptojec[s. The cin has an
inrerest in m:iintaining affordable heusinb fer its cesidents, and that �cill not be mitib red by
any addicional propecty' taties, etc. realized b�� rhis development. ��'i11 urban spra�cl rzsulting
from residen[s fleeing [his area beneti[ the citf? Nor �vill d�e increased ttaTTlc en Faircie�v
and Unicersits result in anydiing but increased maintenance costs. Similarl�, tne
hemee« and pcopertp o�cnecs cannot mitigate the loss of the value o[ eu� pr�pecty �vith
a neisp facility opeca[ing from secen untii midni�ht, keeping us accake, �: akmg oue children,
�:-idz hea�-�• traEYic cempeting ter scheol buses and leacin� us onlc one majoc outlet,
DIuinefiaha, Erom �cliidi to entu or lea�-e our neigftUorhood d�at is not ria� eled 6-r hea�
trucks.
�C�L3T IS THE TREND I'OR ZONIN G I�i �' T�IIS ARL' _'.:' The \lidc Hei�itts
nei�bochood esisted before the industrial use. \Ianp homes �cere buil� in late 1390s, or
earl}• 1900s--homes «ith historical and architectucat value. But, clearl}, flze are�a has become
home to industrial decelopmrnt. But not e�clusirely. ��'e have seen thc cih• impro�-e our
NeR Park corcununit�� building and playground, and open rno nec� scheols in the
iinmediate aces of this trucl;ing site. Sucely it is not in the best interest oFancone to
deliberatel}- locate large b oups of childcen neac such a site. The cit}• has not indicated that
residential use in this area �z'ill wane until it becomes so(elc industrial. Theretere, this site
cnust be deceloped in a caa�- that �cil1 centimie to be compaCble and not hacmLul io the
residential decelopment.
��"e are not asking that jLT tum this area into a park,. Of mucse as a neighborhood a�e must
be espected to enduce seme incon�enience rather than cur[aiI jLTs fceedom te use its site to
inake a pcofit, Uut TLT must also use this pcoperty ui a cFa}' ��at causes no un:easonable
haan to us. �Iodem societp requires Eactories, smelters, and taickin� Elee[s, and such
acti��icies are not nuisances if carned on in suitable lecalities and the adce�se impact on
neighbocutg localities is onlc acoida6le at pcohibitive cost. �C e suggest dtat using dzis site fot
a diEEerent, more suitable and respectful pucpose, does net censtimte prohibitice cost ro JLT.
��`hat �cill be prohibiti�e is the cost to us—these actic�des �cill interfere substantiallp and
Luzteasonably R-ith the interest oE substan[ial numbers oE landholders in the usc of enjopmrnt
of our land, interfere with our health, comfort and concenience by emission oE unpleasant
odors, fumes, loud noises, etcessive light, and much additional and dangerous heavy traffic.
•
•
•
� ,� `
Frmn:TOm�ninrix Fm:(651)659-911]VOice:(651�55491BTa'COmm�ssinnerGlatlySMOrtontloMr.TOmBeachat Pa9n3ot3SaNr�ay.Marc�2].19993a859Fnf
�q_sa`I
�
•
•
The old masim One \tust Use His Propertc So ds tiot To Injure That of �lnothec is deeplF
imbedded in rlmecican laR-. This should also applc to industrial sites that are bordered on
ta sides, closelS•, b5• houses. EceR- industrial anno}•ance cannot be addressed, of course, noc
erers thing that burdens the peace and ttanquillitc of a neighborhood. But in a
neib berhood that is alread5• burdened to the bteaking point bc encroaching industrial
anno}•ances, it is necessar�� for the ci�t� to look at its compzehensice plan and detemvne
�chether a trucking facilitq is reasonable to be placed in this site. Should the ciri of St. Paul
sacrifice an ethnicalls dicerse, economicallj• miszd, histocicallz' significani neigltborhood for
die sake e[ a particular h�e ok de� Should the cin• favor this deF cather
than nurture and support a neighborho�d that is a benefit to the cin'� Is this sitz reall}
appropriate �chen the lack of aEfocdable housin� has reached a crisis, �chen ucban spca�vl has
beceme au issue addressed bp dze Goccnzor of Dlinnesota, c•hen di� bIa} oT St. Paul
openlc reiteraces his support Eor inneo-ciR� neighborhoods+
I respectfiilly subcnit to this conunittee that it is not.
Thank pou for j•our consideration of these cemarks.
Sincerely,
Tulie Grifhn
7G�4 Tatum
TahiarChelton Block Club Leadre
� s�
MRR.13.1999 6�43PM HFlMLIIJEihiIDWAY N0.280 P.2
AY
HAMLINE M�DWAY CQA.LIT�ON
Ham4ne Park Plsp;round I3uildiug � t5G4 LaFoad Avenue, Saint Paul, D9�'i 55104 � 612-646•14S6 � 61Z-641-G I23
March 13,1999
Ms. Gladys 1Vlorton, Chair
St. Paul Planning Commission
15 W. Kelloag Blvd.
St. PauJ, MN 557.02
Dear Ms. Morton:
I am writing on behalf of the Hamline Midway Coalirion Board of Directors. �t its
NIarch 16th meeting, the '6oard of Directors voted ++na.��mously to oppose JL'I'
Company's proposal £or a truck transfer facility on Fairview and 1�tinnehalla
Avenues in St. Paul.
We want to thanlc you for � anfing a publzc heazing on this si�nificant issue, �vhich
we underst is scheduled for March 26th. � The HNIC Eoard of Directors x�quests
that, if possible, the heazing Ue held after usual business daytime hours, so tl�1t
constituents who would be affected by fliis proposed operation would be ablc• tu
paTti.cipate in the hearina,
T# you have questions, please contact zne or Jodi Bantley, HNIC Executive T7ireccor.
Thantc you. -
Sincerely,
/�/�. ,� �
L
Cath�rine Lue, Community Organizer
tr. Councilmember Jay Benanav
Steve IvlcKeown, HYi IC President
Pat Teiken, HMC Treasuzer and Sub-distxict A Representative
Dedicated to snaking t�e Hamlirae dtitfwaY s2e{gbbo-rhood a befler ptate to tiae asu! rWrk.
��a�, ��w���
\ J
�J
•
�F S�
�
h1tiR. �.1Sy'3 S�1�Phl HAt�LiNEihlI�b1HY
!�
,1 �
�
HAMLINE MID�V
N0.45E_P.1_
Post-it' F2x Note 7671 � 3_ ¢
To��M �[l�CFI From �.�l'f'N
c���c=_Ft �.1.G.P. co.
Pt+cne * Pror:e d i . ..
Z6G- qo9R
Ii3mline Park Placground Bwidin, � 1i64 L�fond �venue, Saint Paul, hiV �i I04 � 612•64G-19sG + 61:•641-6123
•
�s-ch 4, 1994
�-5. GLdys Mortoz
C1Lirpe:son
St Paul Planning Cou~�:-xtission
15 W Kello� Blvd.
St. Pau11V�' 557.02 "
Dezr �4s. iVlorton:
Lu E
� _ �-y
On UehalE of the TiamL-�e �2zdw av Coailition (FLy1C�.Board of DirecEors, T am requesting that the
St. Pau� Planning Comnussion hold a puUlic hearing JLT Cumpany-'s pzoposed freight transfer
facility on Fairvievv and W.est �riinnehaha'A.venues. This request is based on the unanimously
shared eonceir�s oE Ulock chtb 3eaders and other neighbors li�•ing close to the proposed sit�e, who
met with Coalition zepresentatives on Febn�ai�• 24. These consfituenis and T�C w to
pGblicl;�� sllare the follo�ain; cox�cems:
1; The residential area adjacent to JLT's propexEy is alzeadp satvrated with aix and noise
pollu�on from the entire industrial corridoY in,ihe westernportion of District 11.
2) Such a Eacility would necessarily generaEe additional noise polluiion irom increased fruck
traffic, indudin� the possibiLty of noise fzom id.l�nj hucks.
3) Lil:e�vise, flt� proposed facility would incsease ai: pollurion, par�cularly the unileallhy
diesel fimles from i�ucl<s. ,Several area residenis aze alze2dy aftlicted cvitn respiratory
pxoUlems• . ,
4) The siee plan sug�zsts that'izuc�: txaffic w'ould entex/eo ess on'Fairview Avenue, dizectly
across the sireet from a ro�nT of homes. Ineseased traffic rn1 Fain West IvSinnehaha and
Prior Avezuies, consideruzg their heavy cunent use in conjvnction wiCh the industrial corridor
and Suzlino on Northem-Santa Fe Railroad T-TuU Site, is hi�hly tutiwelcome.
5) Questions about the pruposed facility's hovrs of opera�on and daily volume of txaffie hace
not been satisfacEorily answezed.
HtiiC is IZOpeful that the Plaruung Co�ruivssion r,cill d ant tivs request for a public hearing on flie
JLT proposal. Please conEact me or Cathy Lus, 651-6�10-19S6 wifh youz decision. Thanlc you
fer y our considerafion.
Sincerzly,
��� m���
Jodi \�f. SantIey
Executive Director
• /jmU
cc: Steve 2vicl�eocvn, I�vIC Board Presidene
Cath}r Lue, I3MC Community Ozgaz�izez
Council��e� �is��y�,$��Fp�E Hamlina �tlzdioay neighborbood a belter place to lue and work.
sr, ��: � i•;� � ,��:..;.
� 3 5�
Feb-22-99 05:23P JLT
u_�2�:98 1G:1: td.t ootoaiace.
651 641 1244 P_02
���GR�UF 1�lC.
�„,��� �
738 Yandai4e Stre4i •� 4 'auE, µ� `�"`�tia (sst� 64s-St1 S�(fi51)
�eb�uazy 2?. 1499
41F- �l utit Bc;OLEi
7Qlllil�, S�CtiL:l�]SL
City af 5�.1'v+il
i7t�icr uf Lfcen�c, [nspccEiocr aud £nYironmental
3_+0 S�. Pcccr Surci. Su=�z J��
S�-I':�ui,htN 551Ur-ISIO
Dcu bi:. F3ca:.i::
l4`� vruu3.i li�� tn ga befacc dte Piaaeli�� Comiwssioti w;t':i uiu ptans f�ar I}swes
` Tt3wax��R o�� FebrwrS i�, 19w9.
n�1r- Bci1r T will be sLhenitting the plans yau requestccl u socro s� tfr�y srn
pcirued; eitheF li�ay or wnlor•e��'.
'�luuii you.
ti:ne�rtl}.
��"'-��-� ���
fiurc Wiitiam��n
31�5 Gcoup, ��-
t`A
u
�
� � `O
�
�� ,�vo,
- l�r wirt�
��
� �v
•
@
e�
�
��� '
dc7=l �``''>s
� � {�'�� . t
�,
�����
i .i9�.� �iv's �n`�.
� T'( �V.
��,
�
�
� ���vt.
�'i v �r i r�f
-- :��.�
�����
U��n r�n,��
�-I
�o
f O '• �O r��n� �ta
1���o�n
� l�( � ��
_;
;
;
�
�
'�] � /�V � �� ;
��. �`����t �� �;�
t�
- I � 1°U
�
� �
�, �o��� �..�v�..� f ��i ��� �.�,��►
55 No t,�.R� :
t ls Vdt i�t G�1�7
4�iVJ t 1'P"/�V.;
�N._�.�
!°
� ��
�� v,t'. GAR�
� ,t ��
� I t'^Zf��Cii ��-� i'T�'
v� °
��_s ati !
a
��
�'
�''
�I:� �u�, ;
.��;,
�,�� � €1 °�(.�;
o� {
�
�� t����s
°to
�+bM,�F�� �, y �' L�s � r� J�€ t r� � ,�s � �
Examples of Sound Levels
Threshold oYPai
Rock Baad
(at 100ft)
:, ,
� x �'�
Large Gat6ering
of People
��
`� ^ 't � �\
Conversational �
Speec6
140 dB
130
120
110
� Pneumatic
1 0 o Chipper
90
8 0 E
Dawntown St Pant
7 O Street Traffic
(Daytime)
6 0 E _ . B¢s�ness Office �
5 O E _ Yrivate Of£tce
40 � �
30 � I� ;
�
2 O Library
10
0
� �Z
�
•
�
�— - —_ — �
�' �
• I T ' ~ Wfltl� ;' F
� `
I � '
I ��
I
n3B 3t�x �
I a�
� - `<1
_ wl
I = z,
z,
�Ci
�
� � 'NOfYJ.WIYbIB
� 'e �� �
d ..� •
I f� � / M �� .lMMG 1p�
�� � � � .I
�^4.p �p+,0.. J. ; �,��; n
V� rnd
� � / i �1tl43
� � e\
/i � ,
e� � �
f �9 � �
m K
I , _ N 3 � �
.
- ._ ,_..r*������� ���3SvJa ������ ��y '
I '
� ,� :
� < ♦'
� 3NAtld ✓�r' �
�e3�r�.cs�
� J y�ne}(
% �
� w� ��
s
1 ��
I � � �e�m�sLe
� 3 � �3
I � �5�$�bb�. ���9'F�'e.�"€ai W
i8 �'� s��, erw '��a
�� ��.�ad S � '...an:�R
� u
� �ire��„��� �
� J I x .nAS � 1 'gp �. y
l
'_'__' '�'_ " _'�� -.',a�
� nw ..it€9 , �
3iva
rvonm
� \���
i n
�` Y r
M31AbIOJ
��
� b
���
WOIl1'
�� /
�.�--Sa`I
_' � �
m
� � a �-. .. , �
� ��
�'
0 �� � �vx���.
A _
�� ^
� �.
.S'� _ _ >� � �
', v __ °� 43II
S 3 ---- — —_=__ �4`CIS "z� ��` �
P -- CGa'
'r^� a � � 3 LL 3 I
e��'���.� o�'�<:� " � �a �
��r � �ezc.<� i o �
, �✓ Q R �J R I � sm��m iCy�� �yI
�; Z Q _ _I 30 3?m$�yn ~ L 2
f 9 - _' "�l � m ; � �d
c* — � nl �� ��� �
_ - , '�I�� w'!!ON v z 3 W � � 8
_ ' i -
� �
_ _ e �I � w> �$
� N3153M 9 0
�. 2 � ar w � �
°_ = I o a � E ��
�� '__ w Y � � � o� '
_.����"�' "�':n�wi � � � � � - _
, i .-1 � d 8> � �' E
`; ���� e oy �" j Z - ¢ J� o €� _ �
� Z F
r � � t : _`-, P000 _ a a_- °�f w:�
;;,. � � � 3 � _
fw�. °' �s h� r w� w �
�. a �owo, z W � � �' n3
Y Q � s � �
y �� oy �'__�_'_' � m s s W'; -
��� �b i �j ._.�,�, lL � � � a � x� �
�� ���_�J � ���,,, � Y ° S� 8 0
�\ �. ��,, s %;. � j � 3 5 m ¢ � i
. 's,�� � �� '�b t U � y W w`o ''" o '" z� a
�� °�C$� ��� �d�� � t i y �"% �
i �� � _� � � � i � i • ^ � � �
i �
� �
I \ ��S
1 \ � V+
���T \ -.rba..... : e
1 �\\\ 8 rt�+ ,�f, '(Y
I � oE �s
� ; ¢ r Aa� �
i �
�
j \ �aa
1 � � , A
♦
1 ����_�__� . ...
� � � �]'!'_-#�
-� -� 1 \
AMMJ � W1JM%31 I ��� AtlMl3 1
� � 1
� SW 30M]9m �� � EP
' � ��, � ���
� �
1 � � _ � � P�
1 1 � `� ��
i 1
� I a I �,
1
� 1 § 1 �
1
� 9xn3rvs 1 I '� �1
1 � � ���
I � � ��a
I
� � � '�.w,�1
� )
� EI zl , j 30wU9v3 �/
1
dl a j L� %
1
� �12 Q /
� i' 1VEA /
� i . ' i 6Wi�P
I '
1 � ..�.�:
r 1 � `__'"_""� ' �.,, :`
P�/ `` ��ti� '�� �
� �
y3�IM tll$$ISSiry _
�3
HIGALIGATS OF THE COMMERCIAL VEAICLE ROUTE ORDINANCE
All trucks of 15,000 lbs. rated gross weight or under may travel on any
street in the city with the exception of city parks and restricted
parkways as shown on the map. The gross weight is the rated weight of the
vehicle or combination of vehicles whether or not it is loaded.
All trucks over 15,000 lbs. rated gross weight must use the routes as
designated on the reverse side map except as follows:
Trucks (9 ton) may travel on any street within industrial districts and
the central business district.
When entering or leaving a truck terminal or making a pick up or delivery,
trucks (9 ton) shall reach or leave such location by traveling over the
shortest route from the nearest truck route. Direct travel between
deliveries, without returning to truck routes, will be allowed where the
distance between delivery points does not exceed one mile.
For delivery or pick up purposes, commercial vehicles (9 ton) may travel
on designated parkways between the delivery or pick up location and
adjacent intersections.
Randolph Avenue and St.Clair Avenue between West Seventh Street and
Cleveland Avenue; and Grand Avenue between Dale Street and Cretin Avenue
are not designated truck routes. However, commercial vehicles over 15,000
lbs. rated gross weight, when making a delivery, a pick up, or when
traveling to or from a truck terminal located in the area bounded by
Mississippi River Boulevard, Marshall Avenue, Snelling Avenue, Se2by
Avenue, Summit Avenue, Kellogg Boulevard, West Seventh Street, Otto Avenue •
and Highland Parkway, shall consider Randolph Avenue between West Seventh
Street and Cleveland Avenue; St.Clair Avenue between West Seventh Street
and Cleveland Avenue; and Grand Avenue between Dale Street and Cretin
Avenue as truck routes (9 ton), and all provisions of this ordinance
applicable to truck routes shall apply.
Except for recreational vehicles (RV's), no vehicle 22 feet in length or
longer or T feet in width or wider may park on any city street or alley
for more than 30 minutes or for longer than is reasonably necessary to
load or unload.
Clearly marked commercial vehicles may, between 5:00 AM and 11:00 AM, for
purposes of loading or unloading only, park in metered spaces without
payment or in truck loading zones. After 11:00 AM, commercial vehicles
may, for purposes of loading or unloading only, park in truck loading
zones to a maximum of 30 minutes.
No provision of this ordinance shall undermine or permit violation of any
rule or order of the State Commissioner of Transportation or of any State
law or provision regarding the regulation of any aspect of trucks or any
other vehicle.
City of St. Paul
Public Works Department
Traffic Division
800 City Hall Annex
266-6200
November, 1996
•
9j�j � �
, �q -sa�l
6 � ��f 1 J.rM ` <
C p' � t ` v
�"'>a, � r
• �o� - � ` �
� � � .�
i is �y
E a .::�= cK'-� c
� � LS i3:�- ` y '� .
WT 3:.w e y� � / .
� f ; COOrI]:r � � ¢'� O` �� /)
3.� r t � �
� �, � � 3 "
+� E � C
� c � �
K G �
� � 5�37 V
m y� bs..cr � so �
� 6 �
4 ��.t
E
15 �vJ
tS LS1Af d � .
- �h
IS 3Cr�yv ' I N �
} I ! `n N t
� / W S �
� £ t:E `�
3w 3�t.' � Q+ � �� : i
� � (�,(� ��,\
LS tGtl3_G3 \�" L C C1�'t'� � f--
EE� N 15 Mfd C C� ` W � 4
� iS L`� �
� P
I 15 1t4u6Jm \ "� -
1. d95 .y`
t:- �. M`- ' Nv0 b?+
F' �
\ 4k .
C•
� ` -
• i; r..s�.r \ M - .
r 35 b0 �
C
3.'+ :�5'+ S
� " Q \ _ �
tS 3Af ; i
j c \ 3' � �
' ^ G IS '�SVn . <: �' �3.�]
! �/ 1 u
4M� � �2 i` � + ? R',� L J �
v NJ3:53u "*
: b .�.., � � o O
CTl ° q '° r �. ; —
U � � � � �> ,
. 15 3� �+ � �
1 -_' ; T � 'ry Y
-�-i �' •
cn E g �
� " , u ..�.�. (
— k � s - � i
¢-i
•� < a... �:o.Yn 3� ��-
� Z ' �,�'� y a� ` � E ca ��
� j � '3 � � � r r'� i �\
O W 3Y 31)`M� 3.`� }'IY.vv L^5 � �`
U ¢ 1 Q �" ls Q
6 S � � ` i
"` � e Qt
' ; 5 �s +
� , � �
3v ?�ti35 3v ry�n35 :S
� � r L
U � � � � �� � � !S 'tliY i
��
M3.�wf 3+ M3wrf CS �i
i � �E
� �'�� Wx M V � � St PS
� r F `c 1
� Qhl�3a M 3v Pnl.�n3L w iv Ont3�3� '�`S �•
( J � �
� �l /
♦� -y C�" 1V N13'1J N ]N M'�3�fJ P� /
C
� � � 1 r
�`M.. �
�/ E b ��
_" � �.v�+W _ �
\./ l � if1 � �
�i
��
--� i
� j i
�---' �
�
'� �
---� �
T i LLt
r I C
. J,--i' z
w
��
�
2
-0
r.
� L7 ' ' I��� `:� ���:,: 1
�` `�� '' i� �� �
5I
�- ; ,�� :, �; I I � e `� � -� '.�.� I
'_ � � u , i
�, � � o ,
� i � � � �..� —
� t
� � i� � � ' =' ;
I
� I
�rn
J
I i .� W
� ._.�� -.-.� C}
� I I
I E�.� I i � I
� i E::E3 �
�..W. I I
�
I
�.......°
;
- ; �
Y
1
1
n
— I .._,
�,_
�: - I�� r
°'---- `" ::J �:
F�`=3 '�' � ^ ;
,:::_: _ ' i�
� �
� ^ , �'^[
�_.-.'i _� , 3 -
_ `
�.` In
,�
e_� � I —
� I,
�'_
_....._........._. _ _......_..
_y_ "_........_. ... ...._........... __.
�
1
;_-:;
„
�
�-��
' GL
�O
I�
�/ /
� '
; -,,
< <;
;i
��;
i.-:._ -�
1 t :
� 6:-
�_
PR(OR _-__.. ..__... _. -
�r��.e�i:d� ��".;�"�� �y�
�� ��� �����I��
: ;,_ '="c.,.. ��!'�'.^:��:.c �
\ \ \. O J . � . � �. i/: _ �_ --
�„ ' I I 9x �:
I
� -
� I �_
_ '' I
I
v J �_
� _ � I
��
----J
��
�u-�_. - c. z:� � . _' 's�a: � � .
% i '. i �i2'
—'�—
- �:
/
•
��i
2, :C -'iY'S
: �:�s--
S "�;�=�z
a
/ i� �I uP/"�
z�� ���'9f:�u�KLS
?` '
n-vs E;
`wSY� i
� �iRe.E nw
� � Tx.^ °.u.
� �V"4' �/uv
}w:_J� 1
� J ST�'
\� SW:S�
%/`7.`; ,�
�
L. ' ' i
i%'
/%
��%1�:.%
(.' � . � i
L��
� F:(^� y
Fx aCAl -. I Wb'
re YJ �S.++E �e: E _ .
MC° W^St
�'
� ' i-:_ _3==--ya w �c-:._..� ._". ' '
ua-.: '.N:ua:w I
, 4n'.a �ao�4 � /
FR �
S�19
� �
�r..nc a.vuwc
.+.�amECr:
�� _sa-y
HOG«'�fA�
A ft C H t T E C T 5
_'-.y � :-.
' s. z
� 4i 6]C..YA
/ S C3'.'2.
��
- x'.r.+ri �
V
Bi.IlJL�Ci Ot!\fA:
JLT
� k „ K , ,„.�_.. . GROUP
_ :39�'.��D.1LLi5i
Sf. P.iC1.1L� yi la
:6l?IWbllll
�xr..cc_z.t� F.�.C:61216t1-LS.t
• —�
PftOfECT LOG1P.0�`.
� / �m.�xv-c�a
\/ F.�¢n�vnv�tE
� Si. P.ill. \C1
� wwc_ xr.- c
SAE vr�! f �� �•.
ClE fJ S�P'�-CU x
�
� � st,uL�c �`.avr:
�
01'.�ES
� ! S _ ��.�QQ.`Ci
/�y N
p � F <
S �%43 I
�4%t �
` � S�fE PL.L� � SRE 4�'�.
l�,� _ �, IPROlEG7REVlE�YSEf
� 2-t;.99)
1 ! COi�S[Al'CROY 8m SEf
scww.wr. ' 1�]99
� RE�L{O�Ji I-(&99
r.u.c ze .:e �r.,. R..R7570\ �2 422.99
I ��8� �1�1Y�.b0J
_ � o�.�v n'a��
� C2�Gl'&7 BH
�
, ��, SFffFC Ad OF 6
���
� � � �
� 3 . �. 3 ._�, S , �, j , `� 3_ �
'�-0� !'-6" 6'�fi 9'_6 . G'�fi � g'=fi '!C�
' � � ' I� YIN.
.�
'm {
000c c�c
� e'-a' s �o' o a. cCCK xca
r;xcR x.. � ;��s;
�- s' x ia' cu ec;x ccca
'.��➢CCK P4� i1P.`2�
CCGR 1LCN - ICC% �
�
'`;
, .z
z� c�ae�s ,� _
i�
.7
,.T
.7
m1
.i
i.
.T
i .�
^ .T
)Z'-0' •� a�
�T
—T __-__-_
I . n _ _ .
,,.. -
; � �,;• �
i � �� �
i I ''''�/� �=�
11Eti a -
CNLEf 'U�
rae Ccac
LG-iS
r nrau�u- so�oc�r
c_�_ s�. rs_c.
r `
�s�'c:c cec�
wai=cu5�
�m
r�c:rt ro cc:ac vzai
Y]GT i'] &VZ JCS 1d'-0� C�}i A=i
0� :..^.NC. SLY3 CY 56\p CJSFICN ,N :CC< .li}
- SE= S�I:� R'�L FJ4 :r^hSG::C'CV/C.^.�Y_ _C \ a
�IoO� P�N
o� PF•�=*�
AI�
�6" P!FE 9CL'4ip
a e+cv a.i. eccx
A
�
�
1 � .
/\ I l C'
`/ �
i
� I
�'�.
_' p + I
� v ;
�
� ,
I
�
—_ ' E .
� �
0
�I
�i
_'� F � I
. v
.,
i1 � G 1
i�
a'-a' x ia' o.r. w« ccc�
w/xu w„�;= M.(te)
WOR 1CCE - COGi iCCV �
-d �
' '—_ � q '
i
8'-e % 10' O.d. CCOC DCCQ � ��/
w/�K ie.e � tn.C2)
oac�x iaac - occx icco - �
12' % 18' O.ti. OR!F_-IH OCJR ' �j
qN�'/E rUUP m.(�) '�n�
CCOR 1CC9 I
t •� �
_a. ^
T �`i �
��
I
i;�-0
J _�
4 � /' X
i a�
f '�
.
�
.{.'���,F:n C�.
Fi O r
AP. C�E
Y _ _.
,LL-"_=" _" "-_ _
�r w_ � -.i: � � -
iT_c.^C
AC" t4 . � Y Z.
�+FC
L`�.�i =••C__
�
g�Il.l���[ n�
JLT
GROL
: 39 l".j.�DA1.
5:. P.iLL. }L�
i6!�,sti.!
F.�.'i �5:?; �
P37 `EQ LCG
F.u���,�.
ST.. P.�l �.
BULDL\G Tc
DA".� c:
��Cti
� ��
�s
�AOR Pla.ti 3 SCF:
(PFtO.iECC REV�.��' `
2-L7-991
ca�srx�cna� s¢
1-7-99
��srov = i
REti15I0ti =?
D�TE �=
DEL�t�} IR
' (}iECt�7 BH
S[�ET �-3 OF
-�
.'
.�, . , �
North Star Chapter
PUBLIC HEARING
ST. PAUL CITY COUNCIL
a� "
MAY 12, 1999
RE: JLT TRUCIC TRANSFER FACILITY SITE PLAN
Amelia R. Hummel and Ronald G. Williams
779 Clayland Street
St. Paul, MN 55104
REPRESENTING: TWIN CITIES GROUP SIERR.A CLUB
A. SITE PLAN INCONSISTfiNT WITH I-1 ZONING DISTRICT
The Zoning Code of the City of St. Paul says that the intent of
the I-1 Industrial District is "to primarily accommodate
wholesale and warehouse activities, and industrial operations
whose external, physical effects are restricted to the area of
the district and in no manner affect the surrounding districts
a detrimental way." (Sec. 60.611) The Code further states that
new buildings in I-1 must conform to specific uses, including
"(3) Warehousing and wholesale establishments, and trucking
facilities." (Sec. 60.612) The thrust of the Zoning Code here
to delineate light industrial areas to contain only activity
which has no deleterious effects on the areas surrounding such
activity. The Code sharply distinguishes I-1 from the next
industrial classification, I-2, by stating that I-2 is for
certain "industrial operations whose external effects will be
felt in surrounding districts." (Sec. 60.621)
in
is
A confused reading of the Code would focus on the second
conjunct, ��and" in the sentence which includes "wholesale and
warehouse activities, and industrial operations...in no manner
af£ect the surrounding districts in a detrimental way." (Sec.
60.611) Upon such a reading, I-1 would include wholesale and
warehouse activities, regardless of whether or not they affected
the surrounding districts. Thus, you would have some I-1
activities which detrimentally affected adjoining neighborhoods
and some which did not.
1
�
� 1313 Fifth 3tz�et 3E, Suite #323 • Menneag�otis, MN 55414 •(612) 379•3853
� ay
Such a reading would mean that the Code is incoherent in setting
I-1 parameters. You would have radically different types of
activities in areas designated as I-1, some detrimentally
affecting neighboring districts, some not.(Sec. 60.612)
Furthermore, of the numerous specified I-1 uses, there would be
no way to tell, for most of them, whether they were the type that
were allowed to detrimentally affect its surroundings or of the
type given no such allowance. One such specified use is
"trucking facilities."
The City Zoning Code's delineation of I-1 districts is coherent.
It clearly indicates that trucking facilities, among others, are
one of the specified uses o£ I-1 and thus must "in no manner
affect the surrounding districts in a detrimental way." This
means the JLT Truck Transfer Facility proposal would have
conformed to code if the proposed site had been in an I-1
district where the trucking facility would not have disturbed the
surrounding neighborhood. However, since the proposed site abuts
a residential neighborhood, the proposed site plan does not
conform to the Zoning Code of the City of St. Paul.
B. PROPOSED SITE PLAN INCONSISTENT WITH 1980 CITY LAND USE PLAN
The Zoning Code with regard to site plan review and approval
states that "the planning commission shall consider and find that
the site plan is consistent with: (1) The city's adopted
comprehensive plan and development or project plans for sub-areas
of the city." (Sec. 62.108 (c)) The pertinent part of the 1980
City Land Use Plan (1980 Plan) says:
Mixing incompatible uses will create an unsuccessful
development. For example, uses which generate large volumes
of traffic, noise or air pollution cannot be combined with
uses requiring quiet. On the other hand, traditional
separation of uses is not necessary when the uses do not
interfere with each other or do not create external problems
such as noise or air pollution.
(p. 19) Since the site plan proposes activity which is
incompatible with the adjoining residential neighborhood, the
site plan is inconsistent with the 1980 Plan. This is true of
the originally proposed site plan and of the site plan with
restrictions, approved by the Planning Commission.
2
�q -s a�
On Page 3 of the Planning Committee's Resolution (Resolution)
approving the site plan with restrictions, it quotes the 1980
Plan: "The City should encourage conditions which allow the
mixing of appropriate light industry with housing and commercial
activities." (p. 1) The Resolution then quotes 1980 Plan Policy
(1.4-3): "In cases o£ incompatible land uses, the city will use
the techniques listed above [in Policy (1.4-2)] wherever possible
to create or improve existing buffers between land uses." (p. 10)
Finally, the Resolution cites Policy (1.4-4): "The city will
ensure through its site plan review requirements that all new
development provides adequate buffering as part of its design."
The problem with the Resolution here is that, with this site
plan, buffers are not sufficiently ameliorative to make the plan
conform to either the Zoning Code or the 1980 Plan. Often
buffers between light industrial and residential neighborhoods
are in the form of significant land tracts which are occupied by
some use which does not detrimentally affect the residential
neighborhood. But that is not possible at the Fairview and
Minnehaha site, since the proposed building is on land abutting
the residential neighborhood. Though the Resolution restricts
the site plan with noise barriers, these barriers would be
insufficient to negate significant detrimental effects on the
neighborhood with regard to noise and would have absolutely no
eifect on expected rise in air pollution.
There is yet another way the site plan is inconsistent with the
1980 P1an: since it threatens a residential neighborhood, it is
inconsistent with the following 1980 Plan objective:
To determine and support the most compatible solutions for
meeting housing demands while promoting energy conservation
and neighborhood stability.
(p. 20) The 1980 Plan further expresses concern about the
"increased demand for smaller, one and two-bedroom dwelling units
for both ownership and rental purposes." There are many smaller
single-family dwellings, plus a good number of duplexes and
quadruplexes, in the Fairview and Minnehaha neighborhood which
would be adversely affected by the proposed facility. One reason
there is so much development going on in Hamline-Midway is that
it is stable and safe. If this truck terminal project is allowed
to go forward, people would move out, the neighborhood would
3
r�� -S �-�1
decline, and the outward-bound residents would contribute to
urban sprawl. It could be argued that such a fall in demand for
this neighborhood's housing would lower city housing costs; but
in £act such suburban-bound flight would be the signal indicating
that this affordable neighborhood was about to go into a neglect-
and-decline cycle, with all the associated social costs. About
half of St. Paul's property tax revenue derives from residential
use, too, which is very unusual in this day and age. So on two
levels, the City is very aware of the need for affordable
housing. The 1980 Plan's concern is with preserving the supply
of good-quality affordable housing in livable neighborhoods. The
site plan in question is inconsistent with this goal.
C. PROPOSED SITE PLAN INCONSISTENT WITH 1980 DISTRICT 11 PLAN
As stated in the above section, the Zoning Code requires site
plans to be consistent with City sub-area plans, as well as with
the City Comprehensive Plan. The District 11 Plan is the sub-
area plan which includes Fairview and Minnehaha. Some pertinent
goals of the Plan as reported in the Planning Commission
Resolution are:
• Maintain the present balance between residential and
commercial and industrial use.
• Develop buffers to separate residential areas from
commercial and industrial areas.
• Confine through traffic to relatively few streets, treat
other streets as local, resident serving streets.
• When developing major through streets, minimize detriment to
bordering land uses.
(p. 3)
The site plan contravenes the District 11 Plan in several
respects:
(1) First, it would disturb the present balance between
residential and commercial and industrial use, not because
of light industrial activity at the site, but because the
proposed activity is incompatible with the adjacent
residential neighborhood. The result would be neighborhood
deterioration, possibly to the point that residential areas
would be converted to industrial areas.
�
c�� -S a4
(2) Second, the proposed buffers are insufficient to protect the
residential neighborhood from detrimental effects.
(3) Third, in further developing Prior Avenue (a major through
street), the site plan contravenes "minimiz[ing] detriment
to bordering land uses" because the planned facility is
incompatible with the adjoining residential neighborhood.
D. SITE PLAN RESTRICTIONS IMPRACTICABLE OR INEFFECTIVE
The condition that the develope_�erform a noise studv and
present noise mitigation plans to Commission staff prior to
permitting, does not protect the neighborhood. The Commission
has failed to provide for public review and comment, to ensure
that the study is valid and the proposed mitigation measures are
adequate. This condition violates the public's right to review
and comment. Appealing this amorphous approval is like trying to
nail Jell-O to the wall!
The addition of landsca�in� and some noise-barrier walls, as
recommended in the Planning Commission's Staff Report, would have
no effect on noise from the trucks coming and going on the
street; they would also do little to effectively reduce the
impact of air brake or high-decibel backup signal noise during
the facility's long and late hours of operation.
The restriction on ogeratina hours as a way of preventing
detrimental effects on the neighborhood is ineffective, since
semi-trailer trucks from out of state will be allowed to enter
the site at the time of their arrival, day or night. The noise
of such large trucks arriving after hours, including engine
noise, air brakes, and the mandated high-decibel backup signals
as they approach the loading bays or other parking locations
within the facility, is certain to affect neighbors adversely.
The 15-minute limit on idlina is unenforceable and therefore does
not adequately protect neighborhood residents from noise or air
pollution, The drivers wi11 be independent operators, and many
from out of state, so they wi11 not be under any company's
supervisory control. Placing this burden on the site owner or
the tenant trucking company would be like tasking the fox to
protect the chickens. The burden of monitoring and enforcement
5
��'U � !
thus appears to be upon neigrborhood residents, which is thus
unfairly burdened with monitoring round-the-clock arrivals in
order to preserve quiet and air quality.
Restrictions on trucks sto�oin� or idlina on neighborhood streets
is less enforceable than the 15-minute limit on idling, for the
same reasons.
Site barriers along Minnehaha will be inePfective because the
houses are on a hill above the site.
The restriction that "truck traffic mav not use Fairview Avenue"
is ineffective because, as indicated by the developer as well as
residents, the City does not effectively patrol Fairview Avenue
with the goal of restricting through truck traffic. Even with
the truck terminal entrance and exit on Fairview, there is an
experience-based concern that yet more trucks will use Fairview
and other neighborhood streets in order to avoid traffic at major
truck route intersections. As indicated by official City maps,
Fairview Avenue north of University Avenue is not a truck route.
The Commercial Vehicle Route Ordinance states:
Al1 trucks over 15,000 lb. rated gross weight must use the
routes as designated by the reverse side except as follows:
Trucks (9 ton) may travel on any street within industrial
districts and the central business district.
When entering or leaving a truck terminal. .., trucks (9
ton) shall reach or leave such location by traveling over
the shortest route from the nearest truck route.
This ordinance is violated daily, by substantial numbers of
trucks which use Fairview and Minnehaha Avenues. These avenues
border, but are not within, an industrial district; they are both
designated as local, resident-serving streets. It is not within
the developer's power to prevent independent truckers from
traveling along neighborhood streets. Any development,
therefore, which may lead to heavier truck use of Fairview Avenue
or other neighborhood streets is contraindicated. This is a
primary neighborhood concern addressing children's safety, noise,
and air pollution hazards. This restriction fails to protect the
adjacent neighborhood in any way at all.
�
�t� -5�-`f
E. HARM FROM INEFFECTIVE RESTRICTIONS
Harm £rom Noise
One of the earliest motivations for urban planning, historically,
was the recognition that decent housing for workers is essential
for productivity. No employer would want their shift workers to
live next to a facility like the proposed truck terminal.
According to the National Institutes of Health, lack of adequate
sleep can cause or aggravate other health problems. It also
causes children and adults to experience difficulties in memory
and concentration, thus adversely affecting learning, job
performance, and safety. In addition to shift workers who must
sleep during the day or in the evening, children and the ill or
disabled require rest and sleep during the day as well.
Daytime noise and noise-induced stress constitute a serious
threat to residents' physical health and emotional well being.
It is important to note that many of this working neighborhood's
80-90 year old homes lack air conditioning, so daytime and
nighttime noise will be especially harmful during the spring,
summer and fall, when windows are open for cooling and
ventilation.
Harm from Air Pollutio
Increased air pollution wi11 affect children playing outside,
residents walking or exercising outside, and anyone doing
anything inside older homes which lack central air conditioning.
It will have greatest immediate impact upon infants, the
elderly, and those with chronic or acute respiratory problems.
When my wife was collecting petition signatures along Fairview
and Minnehaha--right after returning to work after a bout of
pneumonia--she met two residents with oxygen tanks and many
others who volunteered the information that they had emphysema,
or that they or their children had asthma. This area already has
a very high level of air pollution, and many of its residents are
clearly at risk. The ill and disabled must not be driven from
their established homes by improper development of adjacent land,
in violation of the city plan and the zoning code.
F. ENVIRONMENTALLY SENSITIVE AREA
7
��. - s a�t
This thriving working neighborhood is environmentally endangered
and already under environmental siege from surrounding traffic
and industrial activities. newell Park, the little neighborhood
which includes Fairview and Minnehaha, is vulnerable because it
is bounded on three sides by light industrial activity--the
Burlington Northern container yard off Pierce Butler Road, the
factories between Prior and Transfer Road, and the I-1 area at
Fairview and Minnehaha.
In addition, it is only about 12 blocks away from what was, in
the past, the most air polluted site in Minnesota, Snelling and
University. In the 1980's this intersection was cited several
times by the EPA for air quality non-attainment. The City has
worked hard to reduce pollution levels at this intersection and,
consequently, has been cited only once in the last couple or
years. The City has put in place an alarm system which is
triggered when air pollution is high. It then finesses the
traffic signals to discourage traffic from entering the
intersection and encourage those in the intersection to more
quickly exit. A daily timing device and the "ring round" which
takes traffic around Spruce Tree Center also reduces air
pollution.
The fact that the City has to go to so much trouble to take care
of this problem and that there is, even now, occasional air
quality non-attainment, is evidence that the air quality problem
in this area is serious and that it would be vulnerable to
significant air pollution increases. In addition, the federal
EPA is now concerned with the kind of particulates that diesels
emit to the air and is studying the matter to see how the problem
can be reduced. The introduction of the proposed truck facility
threatens the air quality of this area, a problem which should be
studied, as we suggested in our "Proposed Environmental
Assessment."
During most of the year, it is bearable for most--though not all-
-residents. During the State Fair, however, the smog is visible
to the naked eye, and exercise may be dangerous for the unwary.
This is a strong community here, but to maintain it the City must
be vigilant in shielding it from incompatible activity and
environmental threats.
G. SITE PLAN IGNORES THE 1999 CITY LAND USE PLAN
8
q,�,—.say
The 1999 City Land Use Plan (1999 Plan) of St. Paul's
Comprehensive Plan was adopted by City Council on March 3, 1999,
and is subject to review by the Twin Cities' Metropolitan
Council. It was recommended by the St. Paul City Planning
Commission on September 25, 1998. Thus this impressive forward-
looking document is solidly backed by the entire government of
the City of St. Paul. Though it does not yet have legal force as
the 1980 Plan presently does, it certainly is an important guide
£or policy judgments of the type which are critical for the
Planning Commission and for the City Council in considering site
plan reviews.
In the 1999 Plan's discussion of Equitable Metropolitan
Development, it lists several policies, two of which are:
3.3.1 Saint Paul will support an increase in the number of
jobs and housing units in the city, and will try to focus
growth along transit corridors, thereby supporting the
strategies of the Metropolitan Council's Regional
Blueprint....
3.3.5 The City should express its support and, where
appropriate, join in housing programs and projects that
contribute to balanced populations (age and income) in
communities and neighborhoods throughout the East Metro
area.
(p. 14) This says we should promote growth along transit
corridors, not deterioration as the proposed plan threatens. MTC
Bus #7 runs along Minnehaha avenue through this neighborhood and
Bus #16A (plus limited stop #SO) runs on University Avenue, only
about 5 blocks south of Minnehaha. The #16 is one of the most
frequently running buses in the Twin Cities. The other policy
above talks of supporting balanced populations (age and income).
The Fairview and Minnehaha neighborhood is such a neighborhood,
with a strong balance among ages and with low income and middle-
range income. The 1999 Plan indicates preservation and
encouragement of such neighborhoods.
In its section on "Strategy 2: Neighborhoods as Urban Villages,"
the 1999 Plan states and "Objective 5.1 Urban Villages: Theme
with Variations" with policies including:
7
��,-�a`i
5.1.1 The City neighborhood organizations, developers and
realtors should use the urban village principles listed
below, which are condensed £rom the Charter of the Congress
for the New Urbanism, for assessing neighborhoods and
promoting the advantages of city living.
• Good neighborhoods are compact and pedestrian-friendly.
• Good neighborhoods have a mixture of land uses.
• Good neighborhoods have a broad range of housing types.
• Good neighborhoods are designed to support mass transit
with appropriate land uses and densities within walking
distance of public transportation.
• Good neighborhoods have commercial, civic, and
institutional activity embedded, not isolated in
remote, single-use complexes.
• Good neighborhoods have schools within walking and
short bicycling distance, for most children.
• Good neighborhoods have a range of park facilities,
from tot-lots to village greens to ballfields to
community gardens. (Large parks and conservation areas
serve as boundaries between neighborhoods.)
• Good neighborhoods are safe and secure.
• In good neighborhoods, the architecture and landscaping
physically define the streets and public places.
(pp- 25-26)
Amazingly, the above listed characteristics beautifully define
Newell Park, the neighborhood which includes Fairview and
Minnehaha.
Newell Park, in turn, is part of the larger Hamline-Midway
neighborhood, a model of diversity and stability in St. Paul. We
are old and young, with lots of children as well as retirees. We
are blue collar, middle class, and professionals. We are also
white and black and Hmong and Native American; the neighborhood
church my wife and I belong to is bilingual and bicultural--
English and Hmong. We have parks, recreational centers,
playgrounds, schools, churches, libraries, a nationally known
university, and neighborhood stores. We have active block clubs.
We maintain and update and improve our homes, and the government
shows its appreciation by raising our tax-assessed value every
year. This is a neighborhood not to be threatened with
incompatible development, but a neighborhood to be preserved!
10
qq-say
In its discussion of "Objective 5.2 Mixed Land Uses/Mixed Use
Development," the 1999 Plan list policies including:
5.2.1 In traditional neighborhoods, the City will support
compatible mixed use within single buildings and in separate
buildings in close proximity. Mixed use reduces
transportation time and cost. National surveys show that,
on average, city residents drive only half as many miles per
year as suburban dwellers, primarily because each trip is
shorter in the city.
(p. 27) This is yet another 1999 Plan ideal already mirrored in
the Hamline Midway neighborhood. The grocery store at Fairview
and Minnehaha has apartments above. A few blocks away off
Minnehaha and Snelling are other buildings, such as a coffee
shop, a hardware store, and a restaurant which also have
apartments above. If our neighborhood deteriorates because of
the proposed truck transfer facility, people will have to move
away from the mixed use neighborhood, thus contributing to urban
sprawl. This is precisely the kind of thing the 1999 plan is
trying to avoid. The City must promote compatible mixed
development, and preserve it where it already exists.
The 1999 Plan's Appendix C says:
10. Study alternatives and propose amendment to the zoning
code which would distinguish between small and large
trucking operation,s. Consider alternatives such as special
restrictions on large trucking firms and propose an
amendment so that wi11 limit large low-employee-density
trucking use of industrial land. The proposed amendment
should act to make consistent, with regard to trucking uses,
the zoning code and high density employment requirements
outlined in Appendix A of the Land Use Plan and Policy 24 of
the Summary and General Plan addressing intensive use of
industrial land.
(p. 71) It is my understanding that, in this regard, the City
intends to prohibit additional truck transfer facilities in St.
Paul, just as Roseville did some years ago and as other area
municipalities have done. It makes no sense for the City to
establish a policy like this and then squeeze in one more
development of the sort that this policy prohibits.
11
�q-say
H. SITE PLAN ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT NECESSARY
It is critical that City Council have adequate environmental
information in deciding on this site plan with serious possible
effects on its adjoining neighborhood. That is why we attached a
three page "Proposed Environmental Assessment" to our April 13,
1999 letter to Mayor Coleman requesting the City to do a serious
environmental study of the site plan's environmental effects on
the neighborhood. (I also said that the Environmental Equality
Board had denied our petition to do an Environmental Assessment
Worksheet on the grounds that the proposed building was less than
100,000 sq. ft. The petition was signed by 400 citizens, almost
all from our neighborhood.) In response to our request of the
Planning Commission to recommend that the City Council initiate
such a study, the Planning Commission declined to recommend the
study on the grounds that it "was advised.._that the City does
not have legal authority to undertake extraordinary environmental
review under a different process or name."
The City not only has the authority to order the environmental
study we suggested, it has the duty to do it. It is unhelpful to
label a suggested environmental study "extraordinary�� and then
contend that it need not be done. Here is what the State of
Minnesota's Environmental Rights Act says about environmental
protection:
The legislature finds and declares that each person is
entitled by right to the protection, preservation, and
enhancement of air, water, land, and other natural resources
located with in the state and that each person has the
responsibility to contribute to the protection,
preservation, and enhancement thereof.... Accordingly, it
is in the public interest to provide an adequate civil
remedy to protect air, water, land and other natural
resources located within the state from pollution,
impairment, or destruction.
(Minnesota Statutes 116B.01) The vehicle for the environmental
protection remedy is the state government, and by extension, city
government. A critical way the city is to effect environmental
protection is to gather sufficient information to make a
reasonable environmental assessment. An excellent way for the
City to gather information with regard to this site plan would be
12
`C�-Say
to do our "Proposed
the neighborhood a
protection.
Environmental Assessment." This would give
reasonable chance for its environmental
Accordingly, we again request that the City do the "Proposed
Environmental Assessment" and "that the City provide a pub2ic
comment period of at least 30 days following publication of the
report."
2. LACR OF ADEQUATE PUBLIC REVIEW OF SITE PLAN NOISE STUDY
The City is to be given credit for doing at least part of the
environmental study we recommended. At the March 26, 1999
Planning Commission Hearing, the City staff recommended that a
site plan noise study be done. For some reason this study was
long delayed and not made public until, Monday, May 10, 1999, the
very day we write these words. But this is only two days away
from the City Council public hearing! It is an extreme,
unreasonable and almost impossible burden for us to attempt to
find an expert who can interpret a noise study in the eleventh
hour like this.
We nevertheless offer a few hurried observations about the noise
study. The study addresses only truck engine noise at Dawes
Trucking anticipated operating levels from slow moving and idling
trucks. It ignores piercing back-up truck signals and air
brakes, the most bothersome of truck noises. It also ignores
opening and closing of dock doors. Even during hours when the
noise ordinance is not exceeded as an hour-long average of engine
noise levels, the instantaneous noise levels from air brakes and
repeated back-up beepers wi11 disturb neighborhoods peace and
quietude and will disrupt sleep.
A rather puzzling part of the study reports that the �'Number of
truck operations permitted per hour to remain below L10 55 dBa
[the highest night noise level allowed by the St. Paul noise
ordnance]" is 26. This apparently means that the amount of noise
at night created by 26 trucks in an hour is acceptable in
neighborhoods of Highland Park, Macalaster Groveland, and St.
Anthony Park, as well as Newe11 Park. However, it is difficult
to believe that any residential neighborhood in St. Paul would
tolerate such noise.
13
��l -S a�\
The noise study also ignores the affect of the proposed study on
daytime noise. We cannot tell from the study if the truck
facility would violate the ncise ordinance during the day. In
addition, the study does not indicate the present noise level in
the Fairview and Minnehaha neighborhood.
At this point it is important to bring to bear here our earlier
discussion of the Zoning Code. The zoning requirement states
that the neighborhood must not be adversely affected in any way
by I-1 activity. This is stricter than simply requiring that the
proposed activity not violate noise ordinances.
Finally, since the permit request relates to a building with 26
bays, it is imperative that any comprehensive study consider
noise impact at maximum operating capacity, not just presently
anticipated operating levels.
Out of due process concerns, our April 13th letter to Mayor
Coleman specifically requested "that the City provide a public
comment period of at least 30 days following publication of the
report tthe "Proposed Environmental Assessment"]. It is very
important that citizens have the opportunity to assess and
comment upon environmental assessments which so critically bear
upon their neighborhood preservation. Accordingly, we request
minimally, that a 30 day public comment period be allowed for the
noise study and a public hearing at the end of that period.
J. PROJECTED CAPACITY OF PROPOSED FACILITY?
The Resolution reports that 45 semi-trailer trucks and 40 smaller
trucks would use this facility weekly. (p. 2) However, it also
reports that the building would consist of 26 docks. With
optimal scheduling, such a building could accommodate over 100
trucks a day! The proposed site plan and its presently
anticipated levels of operation are seriously incompatible with
the residential neighborhood. But if the building were to
realize its capacity, the facility would violate the neighborhood
in spectacular fashion! Even the noise ordnance would be
radically exceeded. Air pollution also would dramatically rise.
One has to wonder, why is such a facility being built with that
kind of capacity? What is to stop the owner from allowing the
building to reach its capacity? It is a serious concern that
14
q`t
the proposed building would have a much more serious detrimental
e£fect on the neighborhood than the site plan suggests because
the site plan fails to address the building's capacity.
IC. ECONOMIC IMPACT UPON NEIGABORHOOD
The Planning Commission failed to address the financial impact of
the proposed facility upon neighborhood homeowners. Such an
incompatible industrial development would decrease their property
values and discourage lending institutions from financing home
improvement loans, second mortgages, or mortgages for prospective
purchasers of homes.
L. CONNECTION WITH AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT
The Planning Commission failed to give special consideration
under the Americans With Disabilities Act for neighbors with
respiratory and other disabilities, including asthmatic children
and adults, who are at high risk from increased air pollution;
from stress during the 2ong operating hours from noise of the
truck engines, backup beepers, and air brakes, and from loss of
sleep due to noise and aggravated respiratory problems.
Residents with chronic or disabling health problems should not be
forced out of an established affordable neighborhood by
incompatible adjacent development.
M. ALTERNATIVES TO TRUCK TRANSFER FACILITY
There are many reasonable development alternatives for this site
which would be compatible with the neighborhood. These would
include low polluting light industries which were not open in the
evening hours. The bus line on Minnehaha flat lancl make this
site perfect for disabled and elderly housing. Such a development
would create less air pollution than other alternatives, since
those residents would use the bus lines to a great extent. But
even other housing would be a better air pollution-wise than
introducing a lot of trucks to the area. That is because cars
would not emit the air particulates of truck diesel engines,
particulates which now of a major concern and study by the
federal EPA.
15