Loading...
99-649�m�. r� �� - J� �y,1�q9 RESOLUTION � CITY C��SpriNT PAUL, MINNESOTA Presented Referred To Council File # g�— ��,9 Green Sheet # ��� � C� Committee Date EQ�.�STi nl� RESOLUTION �E4"�6 THE PREPARATION OF A ZONING STUDY ON TRUC%ING USES ININDUSTRIAL ZONES 1 2 3 WEIEREAS, the City's Land Use Plan (A Chapter of the Comprehensive Plan), adopted Febniary 24, 1999 by the City Council indicates that the Department of Planning and Ewnomic Development (PED) and the Planning Commission should 4 "Study altematives and propose amendments to the zoning code which would distinguish between small and 5 lazge trucking operations. Consider alternatives such as special restrictions on lazge trucking fums and 6 propose the amendment so that it will limit lazge low-employee density hucking use of industrial land. The 7 proposed amendment should act to make consistent, with regazd to trucking uses, the zoning code and high 8 density employment requirements outlined in Appendix A of the Land Use Plan and Policy 24 of the 9 Summary and General Plan addressing intensive use of industrial land;" now, therefore, be it r-a��.ts�S 10 RESOLVED, that the Saint Paul City Council hereby rt6rects PED to prepare for Council consideration, and 11 subsequent submission to the Planning Commission, a zoning study and Legislative Code amendments addressing 12 trucking uses in industrial zones; and be it t' �.� sTs 13 FURTf�R RESOLVED, that the Saint Paul City Council �s that a presentation of this zoning study be made to 14 the Council at its October 27, 1999 meeting. Requested by Department of: � Form Approved by Ciry Attorney � Adopted by Council: Date � ��� Adoption Certified by Council S re B � a � Approved by M Date �� � � l� By: C� G�� /%� Approved by Mayor for Submission to Counci] � CouRc� l r' i i f Z-J� q'I- �'onsen,� TOTAL � OF SIGNATURE PAGES FS� GREEN SHEET owue�ort artcctos Q�� G�q No 64080 rnrcou�cv. PoR ❑ tliYAiiOPNEV ❑ CRVGLFAK ❑ iiWKARLEER41CFB0Yt ❑ f11PNCIRliE0.WPCCSC ❑ WYORIOR44514TqN!) ❑ (CLIP ALL LOCATIONS FOR SIGNATURE) !? esDlutiDn ai�iecfi� ��a �a.�'e�aanQ75��a.3a�uh� sfua� �rr �c��r� :.z i��usfi^ ;�l3enes,�'o � ��s��t�ah'crr� to y�o Counc�'/ �-,-i Dc�o�e< Zy�, /994. PLANNING CAMMISSION CIB CAMMITTEE CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION TRANSACTION S SQURCF Has th�s persoNfirm ever worked under a coMraclfa Mis depaAmeM? YES NO Hes Mia persoMrm ever been a city dnployce? , ' YES NO Does this persoNfirm possess a sldll not normallypocsesseU by any ourreM city employee7 ' YES NO Is this persoNfi�m a farpe[etl ventloh , '� YES NO i COST/REVQlUEBUDGETED(CIRGLEON� ACTVRYNUMBER YES NO INFORMHTION (F7(PLAIl1� ��t- �`1°� July 14, 1999 City Council Action Minutes p� 1 Page 2 5. Resolution - 99-648 - Approving the terms and conditions of an agreement with the Board of Water Commissioners covering direct and indirect centrai ser�ices to be performed by the City for Water Utility. Adopted Yeas - 7 Nays - 0 6. Resolution - 99-649 -' Re uestin the Departmc�n Development to are a zoning study on truc g uses ' presentation to e City Council at their October 27, 1999, Adopted as ended Yeas -'7 Nays - 0 �g and Economic zones and make a 7. Resolution - 99-650 - Approving ihe decision of the Legislative Hearing Officer on Property Code Enforcement Appeals for property located at 227 Monttose Place; 2026 and 2030 Brewster Street; 1166 Barclay Street; 643 and 647 Cleveland Avenue South; 1521 McAfee Street; Lot 7, Lewiston Heights - Fourth Addition (South Highwood); 1607 Hewitt Avenue; 416 Charles Avenue; 591 Payne Avenue; 616 Iry Sueet East; 421 Holly Avenue; 1615 St. Anthony Avenue; 1252 Seventh Sueet East; and 559 McKnight Road 5auth. Adopted as amended Yeas - 7 Nays - 0 (1615 St. Anthony Avenue laid over to August 11) 8. Resolution - 99-651- Amending the 1999 Residential Street Paving project budget by transferring funding from the City-Wide Sidewalk Program, the Locai, Street, Sewer and Alley Project, the Sewer Rehabilitation Program and adding financing from the Water Utility. Adopted Yeas - 7 Nays - 0 9. Resoludon - 99-652 - Regarding extension of the deadline for MediaOne to provide AM equipment test documentation to the City. Adopted Yeas - T Nays - 0 10. Resolution - 99-653 - Releasing a sewer easement on, over, under, and across Lot 18, Block 58, Desnoyer Pazk. Adopted Yeas - 7 Nays - 0 i l. Resolution - 99-654 - Amending the spending and financing plans of the Major Sewer Repairs-99 budget in the Department of Public Works by increasing Sewer Service Fund finan ' cing. Adopted Yeas - 7 Nays - 0 a� -�.�,°� � n Interdepartmental Memorandum CITY OF SAINT PAL3L Date: October 21, 1999 To: Council President Bostrom - - Councilmembers From: Ken Ford (� Subject: Zoning Study on Trucking Uses Enclosed is a preliminary report'on zoning for hucking uses pursuant to the Council's request of July 14. A report was requested for October 27. Additional field checking is needed to complete the inventory of uses that would be affected by the recommendations, but a direction is recommended. A suggested Council • resolution is included requesting review and compietion by the Planning Commission. • �1 q — c� �� Council File # Resolution # • 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 4 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 Green Sheet � RESOLUTION C1TY OF SAfNT PAUL, MINNESOTA Presented By Referred To Committee: Date WHEREAS, the City Council on July 14, 1999 adopted resolution 99-649 requestion PED to prepaze for Council consideration and subsequent submission to the Planning Commission, a zoning study and Legislative Code amendments addressing trucking uses in industrial zones; and WHEREAS, a preliminary report of such a study has been presented to the Council providing for code amendments that address the Council's objectives of neighborhood protection and reducing the potential for low-employee-density use of limited industrial land; RESOLVED that the Saint Paul City Council hereby requests that the Planning Commission review the study and recommended amendments, provide for community review, and present a completed report and recommended amendments to the City Council by January 15, 2000. Adopted by Council: Date Adoption Certified by Council Secretary By: Approved by Mayor: Date � BY Reguested by Department of: Plannin & ECOnomiC evelo ment � By: Form Approved by City Attorney By: Approved by Mayor for Submission to Council ey: f� � Zoning Regulations for Trucking Facilities Preliminary Report October 21, 1999 l�' �Q �� The Issue The truck tr�c and noise, vibrations and fumes necessarily associated with a trucking facility can be detrimental to a residentiai area neazby. The City Council and the Planning Commission have heard considerable testimony on this point in their review of some trucking facility permits tkus yeaz. Many trucking operations are located in azeas zoned I=1 Industrial in Saint Paul. The I-1 disfrict, frequently found adjacent to residemial districts, is intended to accommoc�ate industrial operations "whose extemal, physical effects aze restricted to the area of the district and in no manner affect the surrounding districts in a detrimental way." The Ciry Council requested the preparation of amendments to the zoning code that would more adequately protect residential azeas. A second objeative identified by the City Council is to limit the amount of industrial land in the City devoted to a use with as low an employee density as trucking. This would fiu the Comprehensive Plan policy which favors uses with high employee density for the city's limited amount of industrial land. Because of their increased employment objective, the Saint Paul Port Authority does not allow trucking farm uses in business parks under their control. It may be appropriate to apply such a policy to a larger portion of the city's industrial land. • What is a trucking use? There is no definition far a trucking use or trucking facility in the Saint Paul Zoning Code. Pick up and delivery of goods by truck is, obviously, a necessary accompaniment to many businesses including most any type of manufacturing, moving or storage. For these, trucks aze accessory. Accepted definitions that provide for special regulations on uses where trucking is the primary activity generally describe "truck terminals" or "motar freight terminals." The definition in the Roseville Zoning Code is an example: A building in which freight brought by motor truck is assembled and sorted for routing in intrastate and interstate shipment (Ord. 275, 5-12-59, City of Roseville) A Fairfax Co., Virginia definition is broader: A building or area in which freight brought by truck is assembled and/or stored for routing or reshipment, or in which semitrailers, including tractor and/or trailer xnits and other trucks, are parked or stored. The Current Situation in Saint Paul � Truckingfaci7itiespermitted ag-G� • Trucking facilities are first permitted in the I-1 Industrial District where they are permitted by right. The use is listed as follows: (3) Warehousing and wholesaZe establishments, and truckingfacilities. This use, along with other uses permitted in the I-1 district, is also permitted in the I-2 Industrial District. Intent of the I-1 District As stated in the Zoning Code: The I-1 Industrial District is intended to p�-imarily accommodate wholesale and warehouse activities, and industrial operations whose external, physical effects are restricted to the area of the ctistrict and in no manner affect the surrounding districts in a detrimental way. The I-1 District is intended to permit, along with other specified uses, the manufacturing, compounding, processing, packaging, assembly, or tseatment offinished or semifinished products from previously prepared material. (60.610. I-1 Industrial District) For comparison, the stated intent of the I-2 (heavier) Industrial District is: The I-2 Industrial District is intended primarily for manufacturing, assembling and fabrication activities, including Zarge scale or specialized industrial � operations whose external effects will be felt in sur•rounding districts. The I-2 District is intended to permit the manufacturing, processing and compounding of semifinished products from raw material and prepared material. The processing ofraw material in bulkform to be used in an industrial operation is a permitted use in the I-2 District. Existing Operations The Saint Paul Midway azea, due no doubt to its location between the two major city centers, has been, historically, an important center for Yrucking operations. Over the last two decades as the metropolitan regaon has expanded, expansive sites in suburban locations have become more attractive for tnzcking uses and the vast majority of operations in the east metro area are in the suburbs. Some 90 operations are located in the east-metro suburbs of Saint Paul compazed with some 20 in the City. Since the Saint Paul Zoning Code permits trucking facilities in both major industrial zones, it has never been necessary to define a irucking facility or to identify firms by this use. Available information on the firms that exist in the City is limited in completeness and accuracy. Throuah available directories, a Minnesota Department of Training and Economic Development listing and field observation, staff has identified operations that may qualify under one or another definition at 21 locations. Fifteen of these are in azeas zoned I-1. Four are in areas zoned I-2, and two aze presently non-conforming in • Z qq-G`l� . residential districts. (These figures, and others that follow, aze preliminary figures that will likely change as fiirther field checlting is completed.) Detrimental Impact The external characteristics of a trucking operation that are degrading to a nearby residential azea are precisely the kind of impacts that zoning is intended to prevent. Trucks, especially tractor trailers, generate more noise than automobile traffic, and even if minimum noise standazds are met, the constant nature of large truck motors arriving and leaving, and sometimes idling on the site, is a particulaz annoyance for nearby zesidents. A street with lazge tractor trailers as a common element of the traffic is substantially different in chazacter from a street with only car and small truck traffic and more detrunental to residential tranquility the greater the number of trucks. Large trucks reduce comfort for pedestrians and, at least in perception, reduce safety for children and all pedestrians. Odorous fiunes, high and bright headlights that can shine in windows, and vibrations are other characteristics that residents find detract from the quality of a residential environment. Since these characteristics are readily perceived impediments to a quality residential environment, they inhibit attractiveness in the market place and, consequently, reduce residential property values. Identification and Analysis of Options The problem is evident: trucking firms, by the very nature of their primary activity, are apt to have significant adverse impact outside the zoning district in which they are � located, particularly if they are neaz the edge of that dastrict. Permission of trucking firms by right, therefore, would appeaz to be incompatible with the stated purpose of the I-1 Industrial District in the Zoning Code. A review of regulations in other cities indicates that this incompatibility is commonly recognized. There are solutions in established practice. Alternatives for consideration include: 1. Remove trucking facilities from the list of uses permitted in the I-1 zoning district, restricting new and expanded facilities (truck or motor freight terminals according to a specific definition) to the I-2 district. 2. Make trucking facilities (truck or motor freight terminals according to a specific definition) a use perniitted only by special condition in the T-1 zoning district with conditions that would include a specified distance from residentially-zoned property. 3. Bliminate trucking facilities from the permitted uses in the I-1 district and perxnit them only as a conditional use in the I-2 District. 4. Distinguish trucking facilities by size, permitting only smaller ones in the I-1 district. • a9-�`� • Any of these solutions would require the addition of an appzopriate definition to the zoning code. A number of definitions from vazious city codes are cited below. Option 1, Define Truck Terminals and permit them only in the I-2 Zoning District. This is the most direct response to the recognition that these facilities aze inconsistent _ with the stated purpose of the I-1 Zoning District. This option would accoznplish two purposes: it would eliminate at least most of the potential conflict with residential areas, and it would significantly reduce the amount of industrial land in the City potentially devoted to low-employee-density trucking uses. Available anformation indicates that under- this option existing trucking operations in approximately 161ocations would be made non-conforming. (Four would remain as conforming uses because they are already in I-2 districts and one presently on residentially-zoned land would remain non-conforming.) Option 2, Require a Special Condition Use Permit for Truck Terminals in the I-1 Zoning District. Conditions established could address noise, traffic and visual chazacter and could include a specified distance from residential uses. This would address primarily the neighborhood protection objective, but would not as clearly reduce the land area potentially put to this use. Most applications of the I-1 District in the City were established with the district's limited purpose in mind; many are close to non-industriai uses, often residential. On the other hand, some I-1 areas are extensive and some existing � trucking facilities zoned I-1 are not close to residential districts. The number of current operations made non-conforming under this option is in the range of 5- 10, the actual number depending on actual distance measurement. Option 3, Permit Truck Terminals Only Conditionally in the I-2 District. Because of potential traffic and neighborhood impacts, all transportation uses, including motor freight terminals, are conditional uses wherever permitted under the new code currently in preparation for the City of Minneapolis. This alternative is not suggested by the objectives for new provisions in Saint Paul. The problems identified involve industrial land adjacent to residential or non-industrial uses, typically land zoned I-1. The site plan review process ensures that traffic and other impacts will be reviewed for proposed development even where land is zoned I-2. Option 4, Permit Only Smaller Terminals in the I-1 District. Building square footage would be the standazd basis for discrimination on the basis of size. While the relationship isn't necessarily direct, a lazger facility is generally going to involve more truck traffic, the major factor that causes detrimental impact. A lazger number of smaller facilities in an azea, however, could have as much traffic and as much impact as a single lazger facility. For this reason, permission of only smaller facilities would not necessazily contribute to either of the objectives far improvement. • 4 �`t -4`� • Recommendation A definition should be added to the zoning code to provide for addressing trucking operations specifically. A definition similar to that included in the new code under consideration for the City of Minneapolis covers both buildings and land azea and appeazs to be appropriate for our purposes: Motor Freight Terminal. A building or area in which freight is assembled or stored for routing in intr-astate or interstate shipment primarily involving truck tractors and semitraiZers. Since operations have been found to be incompatible with the stated purpose of the I-1 - zoning district, they should not continue to be permitted in that district by right. They should either be permitted only under conditions that would prevent detrimental impact on property outside the district, or not permitted in the district at all. The conditional use approach is suggested by the following factors: 1. Most of Saint Paul's firms are located in areas zoned I-1 and a11 of these would be made non-conforming and would be prevented from expanding if the use is no longer permitted in that district. Trucking has an essential rale in the city and regional economy and it is not clear that all opportunities for this use in I-1 districts as presently mapped need to be eliminated. 2. The distribution of trucking facilities in the east metro region indicates that Saint � Paul's shaze is not excessive. In fact, proportional to the city's size, Saint Paul's share is low in comparison with a number of suburban communities. Because of the nature and use of the I-1 district, prohibition of trucking facilities within 600 feet of a residential district will significantly reduce opportunities for new facilities and wi11 make a number of existing firms non-conforming, preventing expansion. Conditions placed on trucking uses should address the following: • Distance from a residential district • Visual and noise impact on a residential district • Direct access by truck route not.impinging on a residential district Simply from the standpoint of the language of the zoning code, removing trucking facilities as a permitted use in the I-1 district is logical because the finding has been that they aze, by nature, inconsistent with the stated purposes of this district. • a�-��� • ?? Are they a necessary part of the city's economy? Most are in I-1. Would a restriction to I-2 be too limiting? • � � _�,�1� � Appendix Definifions Rochester, N.Y. Truck Terminal. Land and buildings used as a relay stafion for the transfer of a load from one vehicle to another or one party to another. The terminal cannot be used for permanent or long-term accessory storage for principal land uses at other locations. The terminal facility may include storage areas for trucks and buildings or areas for the repair of trucks associated with the terminal. - Fairfax CounYy, VA Truck terminal. A building or area in which freight brought by truck is assembled and/or stored for routing or reshipment, or• in which semitrailers, including tractor and/or trailer units and other trucks, are parked or stored. Minneapolis, MN The new zoning code proposed for the City of Minneapolis includes the following definitions: Motor Freight Terminal. A building or area in which freight is assembled or stored for routing in intrastate or interstate shipment primarily involving truck tractors and • semitrailers, ttnd which is not a packags delive�y service. Package Delivery Service. A use which transports packages and articles for expedited delivery primarily in single rear axle straight trucks or smaller vehictes, where no single item weighs over one hundreditfty (ISO) pounds. Roseville, MN Motor Freight Terminal (Truck Terminal): A building in which freight brought by motar truck is assembled and sorted for routing in intrastate and interstate shipment. (Ord. 275, 5-12-59) Minneapolis Code, Proposed Package delivery and motor freight terminal uses are not permitted by right in any district, but aze conditional uses wherever they are allowed. Package delivery is first permitted as a conditional use in the C4 General Commercial District, the most intense of the code's four commercial districts "established to provide for a wider range of commercial development allowing a mix of retail, business services and limited industrial uses." i q� -��q Motor Freight Terminals are allowed as conditional uses in the I2 Medium and I3 General � Industrial Districts. They are not permitted in the Il Light Industrial District. Stated purpose of the I1 Light Industrial District: The II Light Industrial district is established to provide ctean, attractive Zocations for low impact and technology-based light industrial uses, research arxd development, and similar uses which produce IittZe or no noise, odor, vibration, gZare or other objectionable influences, and have Zittle or no adverse effect on surrounding properties. (550.190. Staff Altemative) Other uses with which truck hauling is associated are restricted in size in the Il Light - Industrial District: Warehousing and distribution; furniture moving and storage. (a) In general. Warehousing and distribution uses and furniture moving and storage uses in the II District sha11 be limited to thirty thousand (30, 000) sguare feet ofgross floor area. (Can be increased by conditional use permiz) (550.230. ) Factors specifically identified for consideration when increased floor azea is requested include: 1) proximity to residential uses; 2) screening and landscaping of truck pazking and loading area; and 3) location of truck routes and amount of truck traffic. Stated purpuse of the I2 Medium Industrial District (in which motor freight terminals are first allowed) The I2 Medium Indistrial District is established to provide locations for medium industrial uses and other specific uses which have the potential to produce greater • amounts of noise, odor, vibration, glare or other objectionable influences than uses allowed in the Il District and which may have an adverse effect on surrounding properties. Roseville Zoning Code Wholesale and warehousing uses are permitted in I-1 Light Industrial Districts. Motor Freight Terminals are not permitted in I-1 Light industrial Districts but aze first permitted as a conditional use in I-2 General Industrial Districts: � g �m�. r� �� - J� �y,1�q9 RESOLUTION � CITY C��SpriNT PAUL, MINNESOTA Presented Referred To Council File # g�— ��,9 Green Sheet # ��� � C� Committee Date EQ�.�STi nl� RESOLUTION �E4"�6 THE PREPARATION OF A ZONING STUDY ON TRUC%ING USES ININDUSTRIAL ZONES 1 2 3 WEIEREAS, the City's Land Use Plan (A Chapter of the Comprehensive Plan), adopted Febniary 24, 1999 by the City Council indicates that the Department of Planning and Ewnomic Development (PED) and the Planning Commission should 4 "Study altematives and propose amendments to the zoning code which would distinguish between small and 5 lazge trucking operations. Consider alternatives such as special restrictions on lazge trucking fums and 6 propose the amendment so that it will limit lazge low-employee density hucking use of industrial land. The 7 proposed amendment should act to make consistent, with regazd to trucking uses, the zoning code and high 8 density employment requirements outlined in Appendix A of the Land Use Plan and Policy 24 of the 9 Summary and General Plan addressing intensive use of industrial land;" now, therefore, be it r-a��.ts�S 10 RESOLVED, that the Saint Paul City Council hereby rt6rects PED to prepare for Council consideration, and 11 subsequent submission to the Planning Commission, a zoning study and Legislative Code amendments addressing 12 trucking uses in industrial zones; and be it t' �.� sTs 13 FURTf�R RESOLVED, that the Saint Paul City Council �s that a presentation of this zoning study be made to 14 the Council at its October 27, 1999 meeting. Requested by Department of: � Form Approved by Ciry Attorney � Adopted by Council: Date � ��� Adoption Certified by Council S re B � a � Approved by M Date �� � � l� By: C� G�� /%� Approved by Mayor for Submission to Counci] � CouRc� l r' i i f Z-J� q'I- �'onsen,� TOTAL � OF SIGNATURE PAGES FS� GREEN SHEET owue�ort artcctos Q�� G�q No 64080 rnrcou�cv. PoR ❑ tliYAiiOPNEV ❑ CRVGLFAK ❑ iiWKARLEER41CFB0Yt ❑ f11PNCIRliE0.WPCCSC ❑ WYORIOR44514TqN!) ❑ (CLIP ALL LOCATIONS FOR SIGNATURE) !? esDlutiDn ai�iecfi� ��a �a.�'e�aanQ75��a.3a�uh� sfua� �rr �c��r� :.z i��usfi^ ;�l3enes,�'o � ��s��t�ah'crr� to y�o Counc�'/ �-,-i Dc�o�e< Zy�, /994. PLANNING CAMMISSION CIB CAMMITTEE CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION TRANSACTION S SQURCF Has th�s persoNfirm ever worked under a coMraclfa Mis depaAmeM? YES NO Hes Mia persoMrm ever been a city dnployce? , ' YES NO Does this persoNfirm possess a sldll not normallypocsesseU by any ourreM city employee7 ' YES NO Is this persoNfi�m a farpe[etl ventloh , '� YES NO i COST/REVQlUEBUDGETED(CIRGLEON� ACTVRYNUMBER YES NO INFORMHTION (F7(PLAIl1� ��t- �`1°� July 14, 1999 City Council Action Minutes p� 1 Page 2 5. Resolution - 99-648 - Approving the terms and conditions of an agreement with the Board of Water Commissioners covering direct and indirect centrai ser�ices to be performed by the City for Water Utility. Adopted Yeas - 7 Nays - 0 6. Resolution - 99-649 -' Re uestin the Departmc�n Development to are a zoning study on truc g uses ' presentation to e City Council at their October 27, 1999, Adopted as ended Yeas -'7 Nays - 0 �g and Economic zones and make a 7. Resolution - 99-650 - Approving ihe decision of the Legislative Hearing Officer on Property Code Enforcement Appeals for property located at 227 Monttose Place; 2026 and 2030 Brewster Street; 1166 Barclay Street; 643 and 647 Cleveland Avenue South; 1521 McAfee Street; Lot 7, Lewiston Heights - Fourth Addition (South Highwood); 1607 Hewitt Avenue; 416 Charles Avenue; 591 Payne Avenue; 616 Iry Sueet East; 421 Holly Avenue; 1615 St. Anthony Avenue; 1252 Seventh Sueet East; and 559 McKnight Road 5auth. Adopted as amended Yeas - 7 Nays - 0 (1615 St. Anthony Avenue laid over to August 11) 8. Resolution - 99-651- Amending the 1999 Residential Street Paving project budget by transferring funding from the City-Wide Sidewalk Program, the Locai, Street, Sewer and Alley Project, the Sewer Rehabilitation Program and adding financing from the Water Utility. Adopted Yeas - 7 Nays - 0 9. Resoludon - 99-652 - Regarding extension of the deadline for MediaOne to provide AM equipment test documentation to the City. Adopted Yeas - T Nays - 0 10. Resolution - 99-653 - Releasing a sewer easement on, over, under, and across Lot 18, Block 58, Desnoyer Pazk. Adopted Yeas - 7 Nays - 0 i l. Resolution - 99-654 - Amending the spending and financing plans of the Major Sewer Repairs-99 budget in the Department of Public Works by increasing Sewer Service Fund finan ' cing. Adopted Yeas - 7 Nays - 0 a� -�.�,°� � n Interdepartmental Memorandum CITY OF SAINT PAL3L Date: October 21, 1999 To: Council President Bostrom - - Councilmembers From: Ken Ford (� Subject: Zoning Study on Trucking Uses Enclosed is a preliminary report'on zoning for hucking uses pursuant to the Council's request of July 14. A report was requested for October 27. Additional field checking is needed to complete the inventory of uses that would be affected by the recommendations, but a direction is recommended. A suggested Council • resolution is included requesting review and compietion by the Planning Commission. • �1 q — c� �� Council File # Resolution # • 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 4 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 Green Sheet � RESOLUTION C1TY OF SAfNT PAUL, MINNESOTA Presented By Referred To Committee: Date WHEREAS, the City Council on July 14, 1999 adopted resolution 99-649 requestion PED to prepaze for Council consideration and subsequent submission to the Planning Commission, a zoning study and Legislative Code amendments addressing trucking uses in industrial zones; and WHEREAS, a preliminary report of such a study has been presented to the Council providing for code amendments that address the Council's objectives of neighborhood protection and reducing the potential for low-employee-density use of limited industrial land; RESOLVED that the Saint Paul City Council hereby requests that the Planning Commission review the study and recommended amendments, provide for community review, and present a completed report and recommended amendments to the City Council by January 15, 2000. Adopted by Council: Date Adoption Certified by Council Secretary By: Approved by Mayor: Date � BY Reguested by Department of: Plannin & ECOnomiC evelo ment � By: Form Approved by City Attorney By: Approved by Mayor for Submission to Council ey: f� � Zoning Regulations for Trucking Facilities Preliminary Report October 21, 1999 l�' �Q �� The Issue The truck tr�c and noise, vibrations and fumes necessarily associated with a trucking facility can be detrimental to a residentiai area neazby. The City Council and the Planning Commission have heard considerable testimony on this point in their review of some trucking facility permits tkus yeaz. Many trucking operations are located in azeas zoned I=1 Industrial in Saint Paul. The I-1 disfrict, frequently found adjacent to residemial districts, is intended to accommoc�ate industrial operations "whose extemal, physical effects aze restricted to the area of the district and in no manner affect the surrounding districts in a detrimental way." The Ciry Council requested the preparation of amendments to the zoning code that would more adequately protect residential azeas. A second objeative identified by the City Council is to limit the amount of industrial land in the City devoted to a use with as low an employee density as trucking. This would fiu the Comprehensive Plan policy which favors uses with high employee density for the city's limited amount of industrial land. Because of their increased employment objective, the Saint Paul Port Authority does not allow trucking farm uses in business parks under their control. It may be appropriate to apply such a policy to a larger portion of the city's industrial land. • What is a trucking use? There is no definition far a trucking use or trucking facility in the Saint Paul Zoning Code. Pick up and delivery of goods by truck is, obviously, a necessary accompaniment to many businesses including most any type of manufacturing, moving or storage. For these, trucks aze accessory. Accepted definitions that provide for special regulations on uses where trucking is the primary activity generally describe "truck terminals" or "motar freight terminals." The definition in the Roseville Zoning Code is an example: A building in which freight brought by motor truck is assembled and sorted for routing in intrastate and interstate shipment (Ord. 275, 5-12-59, City of Roseville) A Fairfax Co., Virginia definition is broader: A building or area in which freight brought by truck is assembled and/or stored for routing or reshipment, or in which semitrailers, including tractor and/or trailer xnits and other trucks, are parked or stored. The Current Situation in Saint Paul � Truckingfaci7itiespermitted ag-G� • Trucking facilities are first permitted in the I-1 Industrial District where they are permitted by right. The use is listed as follows: (3) Warehousing and wholesaZe establishments, and truckingfacilities. This use, along with other uses permitted in the I-1 district, is also permitted in the I-2 Industrial District. Intent of the I-1 District As stated in the Zoning Code: The I-1 Industrial District is intended to p�-imarily accommodate wholesale and warehouse activities, and industrial operations whose external, physical effects are restricted to the area of the ctistrict and in no manner affect the surrounding districts in a detrimental way. The I-1 District is intended to permit, along with other specified uses, the manufacturing, compounding, processing, packaging, assembly, or tseatment offinished or semifinished products from previously prepared material. (60.610. I-1 Industrial District) For comparison, the stated intent of the I-2 (heavier) Industrial District is: The I-2 Industrial District is intended primarily for manufacturing, assembling and fabrication activities, including Zarge scale or specialized industrial � operations whose external effects will be felt in sur•rounding districts. The I-2 District is intended to permit the manufacturing, processing and compounding of semifinished products from raw material and prepared material. The processing ofraw material in bulkform to be used in an industrial operation is a permitted use in the I-2 District. Existing Operations The Saint Paul Midway azea, due no doubt to its location between the two major city centers, has been, historically, an important center for Yrucking operations. Over the last two decades as the metropolitan regaon has expanded, expansive sites in suburban locations have become more attractive for tnzcking uses and the vast majority of operations in the east metro area are in the suburbs. Some 90 operations are located in the east-metro suburbs of Saint Paul compazed with some 20 in the City. Since the Saint Paul Zoning Code permits trucking facilities in both major industrial zones, it has never been necessary to define a irucking facility or to identify firms by this use. Available information on the firms that exist in the City is limited in completeness and accuracy. Throuah available directories, a Minnesota Department of Training and Economic Development listing and field observation, staff has identified operations that may qualify under one or another definition at 21 locations. Fifteen of these are in azeas zoned I-1. Four are in areas zoned I-2, and two aze presently non-conforming in • Z qq-G`l� . residential districts. (These figures, and others that follow, aze preliminary figures that will likely change as fiirther field checlting is completed.) Detrimental Impact The external characteristics of a trucking operation that are degrading to a nearby residential azea are precisely the kind of impacts that zoning is intended to prevent. Trucks, especially tractor trailers, generate more noise than automobile traffic, and even if minimum noise standazds are met, the constant nature of large truck motors arriving and leaving, and sometimes idling on the site, is a particulaz annoyance for nearby zesidents. A street with lazge tractor trailers as a common element of the traffic is substantially different in chazacter from a street with only car and small truck traffic and more detrunental to residential tranquility the greater the number of trucks. Large trucks reduce comfort for pedestrians and, at least in perception, reduce safety for children and all pedestrians. Odorous fiunes, high and bright headlights that can shine in windows, and vibrations are other characteristics that residents find detract from the quality of a residential environment. Since these characteristics are readily perceived impediments to a quality residential environment, they inhibit attractiveness in the market place and, consequently, reduce residential property values. Identification and Analysis of Options The problem is evident: trucking firms, by the very nature of their primary activity, are apt to have significant adverse impact outside the zoning district in which they are � located, particularly if they are neaz the edge of that dastrict. Permission of trucking firms by right, therefore, would appeaz to be incompatible with the stated purpose of the I-1 Industrial District in the Zoning Code. A review of regulations in other cities indicates that this incompatibility is commonly recognized. There are solutions in established practice. Alternatives for consideration include: 1. Remove trucking facilities from the list of uses permitted in the I-1 zoning district, restricting new and expanded facilities (truck or motor freight terminals according to a specific definition) to the I-2 district. 2. Make trucking facilities (truck or motor freight terminals according to a specific definition) a use perniitted only by special condition in the T-1 zoning district with conditions that would include a specified distance from residentially-zoned property. 3. Bliminate trucking facilities from the permitted uses in the I-1 district and perxnit them only as a conditional use in the I-2 District. 4. Distinguish trucking facilities by size, permitting only smaller ones in the I-1 district. • a9-�`� • Any of these solutions would require the addition of an appzopriate definition to the zoning code. A number of definitions from vazious city codes are cited below. Option 1, Define Truck Terminals and permit them only in the I-2 Zoning District. This is the most direct response to the recognition that these facilities aze inconsistent _ with the stated purpose of the I-1 Zoning District. This option would accoznplish two purposes: it would eliminate at least most of the potential conflict with residential areas, and it would significantly reduce the amount of industrial land in the City potentially devoted to low-employee-density trucking uses. Available anformation indicates that under- this option existing trucking operations in approximately 161ocations would be made non-conforming. (Four would remain as conforming uses because they are already in I-2 districts and one presently on residentially-zoned land would remain non-conforming.) Option 2, Require a Special Condition Use Permit for Truck Terminals in the I-1 Zoning District. Conditions established could address noise, traffic and visual chazacter and could include a specified distance from residential uses. This would address primarily the neighborhood protection objective, but would not as clearly reduce the land area potentially put to this use. Most applications of the I-1 District in the City were established with the district's limited purpose in mind; many are close to non-industriai uses, often residential. On the other hand, some I-1 areas are extensive and some existing � trucking facilities zoned I-1 are not close to residential districts. The number of current operations made non-conforming under this option is in the range of 5- 10, the actual number depending on actual distance measurement. Option 3, Permit Truck Terminals Only Conditionally in the I-2 District. Because of potential traffic and neighborhood impacts, all transportation uses, including motor freight terminals, are conditional uses wherever permitted under the new code currently in preparation for the City of Minneapolis. This alternative is not suggested by the objectives for new provisions in Saint Paul. The problems identified involve industrial land adjacent to residential or non-industrial uses, typically land zoned I-1. The site plan review process ensures that traffic and other impacts will be reviewed for proposed development even where land is zoned I-2. Option 4, Permit Only Smaller Terminals in the I-1 District. Building square footage would be the standazd basis for discrimination on the basis of size. While the relationship isn't necessarily direct, a lazger facility is generally going to involve more truck traffic, the major factor that causes detrimental impact. A lazger number of smaller facilities in an azea, however, could have as much traffic and as much impact as a single lazger facility. For this reason, permission of only smaller facilities would not necessazily contribute to either of the objectives far improvement. • 4 �`t -4`� • Recommendation A definition should be added to the zoning code to provide for addressing trucking operations specifically. A definition similar to that included in the new code under consideration for the City of Minneapolis covers both buildings and land azea and appeazs to be appropriate for our purposes: Motor Freight Terminal. A building or area in which freight is assembled or stored for routing in intr-astate or interstate shipment primarily involving truck tractors and semitraiZers. Since operations have been found to be incompatible with the stated purpose of the I-1 - zoning district, they should not continue to be permitted in that district by right. They should either be permitted only under conditions that would prevent detrimental impact on property outside the district, or not permitted in the district at all. The conditional use approach is suggested by the following factors: 1. Most of Saint Paul's firms are located in areas zoned I-1 and a11 of these would be made non-conforming and would be prevented from expanding if the use is no longer permitted in that district. Trucking has an essential rale in the city and regional economy and it is not clear that all opportunities for this use in I-1 districts as presently mapped need to be eliminated. 2. The distribution of trucking facilities in the east metro region indicates that Saint � Paul's shaze is not excessive. In fact, proportional to the city's size, Saint Paul's share is low in comparison with a number of suburban communities. Because of the nature and use of the I-1 district, prohibition of trucking facilities within 600 feet of a residential district will significantly reduce opportunities for new facilities and wi11 make a number of existing firms non-conforming, preventing expansion. Conditions placed on trucking uses should address the following: • Distance from a residential district • Visual and noise impact on a residential district • Direct access by truck route not.impinging on a residential district Simply from the standpoint of the language of the zoning code, removing trucking facilities as a permitted use in the I-1 district is logical because the finding has been that they aze, by nature, inconsistent with the stated purposes of this district. • a�-��� • ?? Are they a necessary part of the city's economy? Most are in I-1. Would a restriction to I-2 be too limiting? • � � _�,�1� � Appendix Definifions Rochester, N.Y. Truck Terminal. Land and buildings used as a relay stafion for the transfer of a load from one vehicle to another or one party to another. The terminal cannot be used for permanent or long-term accessory storage for principal land uses at other locations. The terminal facility may include storage areas for trucks and buildings or areas for the repair of trucks associated with the terminal. - Fairfax CounYy, VA Truck terminal. A building or area in which freight brought by truck is assembled and/or stored for routing or reshipment, or• in which semitrailers, including tractor and/or trailer units and other trucks, are parked or stored. Minneapolis, MN The new zoning code proposed for the City of Minneapolis includes the following definitions: Motor Freight Terminal. A building or area in which freight is assembled or stored for routing in intrastate or interstate shipment primarily involving truck tractors and • semitrailers, ttnd which is not a packags delive�y service. Package Delivery Service. A use which transports packages and articles for expedited delivery primarily in single rear axle straight trucks or smaller vehictes, where no single item weighs over one hundreditfty (ISO) pounds. Roseville, MN Motor Freight Terminal (Truck Terminal): A building in which freight brought by motar truck is assembled and sorted for routing in intrastate and interstate shipment. (Ord. 275, 5-12-59) Minneapolis Code, Proposed Package delivery and motor freight terminal uses are not permitted by right in any district, but aze conditional uses wherever they are allowed. Package delivery is first permitted as a conditional use in the C4 General Commercial District, the most intense of the code's four commercial districts "established to provide for a wider range of commercial development allowing a mix of retail, business services and limited industrial uses." i q� -��q Motor Freight Terminals are allowed as conditional uses in the I2 Medium and I3 General � Industrial Districts. They are not permitted in the Il Light Industrial District. Stated purpose of the I1 Light Industrial District: The II Light Industrial district is established to provide ctean, attractive Zocations for low impact and technology-based light industrial uses, research arxd development, and similar uses which produce IittZe or no noise, odor, vibration, gZare or other objectionable influences, and have Zittle or no adverse effect on surrounding properties. (550.190. Staff Altemative) Other uses with which truck hauling is associated are restricted in size in the Il Light - Industrial District: Warehousing and distribution; furniture moving and storage. (a) In general. Warehousing and distribution uses and furniture moving and storage uses in the II District sha11 be limited to thirty thousand (30, 000) sguare feet ofgross floor area. (Can be increased by conditional use permiz) (550.230. ) Factors specifically identified for consideration when increased floor azea is requested include: 1) proximity to residential uses; 2) screening and landscaping of truck pazking and loading area; and 3) location of truck routes and amount of truck traffic. Stated purpuse of the I2 Medium Industrial District (in which motor freight terminals are first allowed) The I2 Medium Indistrial District is established to provide locations for medium industrial uses and other specific uses which have the potential to produce greater • amounts of noise, odor, vibration, glare or other objectionable influences than uses allowed in the Il District and which may have an adverse effect on surrounding properties. Roseville Zoning Code Wholesale and warehousing uses are permitted in I-1 Light Industrial Districts. Motor Freight Terminals are not permitted in I-1 Light industrial Districts but aze first permitted as a conditional use in I-2 General Industrial Districts: � g �m�. r� �� - J� �y,1�q9 RESOLUTION � CITY C��SpriNT PAUL, MINNESOTA Presented Referred To Council File # g�— ��,9 Green Sheet # ��� � C� Committee Date EQ�.�STi nl� RESOLUTION �E4"�6 THE PREPARATION OF A ZONING STUDY ON TRUC%ING USES ININDUSTRIAL ZONES 1 2 3 WEIEREAS, the City's Land Use Plan (A Chapter of the Comprehensive Plan), adopted Febniary 24, 1999 by the City Council indicates that the Department of Planning and Ewnomic Development (PED) and the Planning Commission should 4 "Study altematives and propose amendments to the zoning code which would distinguish between small and 5 lazge trucking operations. Consider alternatives such as special restrictions on lazge trucking fums and 6 propose the amendment so that it will limit lazge low-employee density hucking use of industrial land. The 7 proposed amendment should act to make consistent, with regazd to trucking uses, the zoning code and high 8 density employment requirements outlined in Appendix A of the Land Use Plan and Policy 24 of the 9 Summary and General Plan addressing intensive use of industrial land;" now, therefore, be it r-a��.ts�S 10 RESOLVED, that the Saint Paul City Council hereby rt6rects PED to prepare for Council consideration, and 11 subsequent submission to the Planning Commission, a zoning study and Legislative Code amendments addressing 12 trucking uses in industrial zones; and be it t' �.� sTs 13 FURTf�R RESOLVED, that the Saint Paul City Council �s that a presentation of this zoning study be made to 14 the Council at its October 27, 1999 meeting. Requested by Department of: � Form Approved by Ciry Attorney � Adopted by Council: Date � ��� Adoption Certified by Council S re B � a � Approved by M Date �� � � l� By: C� G�� /%� Approved by Mayor for Submission to Counci] � CouRc� l r' i i f Z-J� q'I- �'onsen,� TOTAL � OF SIGNATURE PAGES FS� GREEN SHEET owue�ort artcctos Q�� G�q No 64080 rnrcou�cv. PoR ❑ tliYAiiOPNEV ❑ CRVGLFAK ❑ iiWKARLEER41CFB0Yt ❑ f11PNCIRliE0.WPCCSC ❑ WYORIOR44514TqN!) ❑ (CLIP ALL LOCATIONS FOR SIGNATURE) !? esDlutiDn ai�iecfi� ��a �a.�'e�aanQ75��a.3a�uh� sfua� �rr �c��r� :.z i��usfi^ ;�l3enes,�'o � ��s��t�ah'crr� to y�o Counc�'/ �-,-i Dc�o�e< Zy�, /994. PLANNING CAMMISSION CIB CAMMITTEE CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION TRANSACTION S SQURCF Has th�s persoNfirm ever worked under a coMraclfa Mis depaAmeM? YES NO Hes Mia persoMrm ever been a city dnployce? , ' YES NO Does this persoNfirm possess a sldll not normallypocsesseU by any ourreM city employee7 ' YES NO Is this persoNfi�m a farpe[etl ventloh , '� YES NO i COST/REVQlUEBUDGETED(CIRGLEON� ACTVRYNUMBER YES NO INFORMHTION (F7(PLAIl1� ��t- �`1°� July 14, 1999 City Council Action Minutes p� 1 Page 2 5. Resolution - 99-648 - Approving the terms and conditions of an agreement with the Board of Water Commissioners covering direct and indirect centrai ser�ices to be performed by the City for Water Utility. Adopted Yeas - 7 Nays - 0 6. Resolution - 99-649 -' Re uestin the Departmc�n Development to are a zoning study on truc g uses ' presentation to e City Council at their October 27, 1999, Adopted as ended Yeas -'7 Nays - 0 �g and Economic zones and make a 7. Resolution - 99-650 - Approving ihe decision of the Legislative Hearing Officer on Property Code Enforcement Appeals for property located at 227 Monttose Place; 2026 and 2030 Brewster Street; 1166 Barclay Street; 643 and 647 Cleveland Avenue South; 1521 McAfee Street; Lot 7, Lewiston Heights - Fourth Addition (South Highwood); 1607 Hewitt Avenue; 416 Charles Avenue; 591 Payne Avenue; 616 Iry Sueet East; 421 Holly Avenue; 1615 St. Anthony Avenue; 1252 Seventh Sueet East; and 559 McKnight Road 5auth. Adopted as amended Yeas - 7 Nays - 0 (1615 St. Anthony Avenue laid over to August 11) 8. Resolution - 99-651- Amending the 1999 Residential Street Paving project budget by transferring funding from the City-Wide Sidewalk Program, the Locai, Street, Sewer and Alley Project, the Sewer Rehabilitation Program and adding financing from the Water Utility. Adopted Yeas - 7 Nays - 0 9. Resoludon - 99-652 - Regarding extension of the deadline for MediaOne to provide AM equipment test documentation to the City. Adopted Yeas - T Nays - 0 10. Resolution - 99-653 - Releasing a sewer easement on, over, under, and across Lot 18, Block 58, Desnoyer Pazk. Adopted Yeas - 7 Nays - 0 i l. Resolution - 99-654 - Amending the spending and financing plans of the Major Sewer Repairs-99 budget in the Department of Public Works by increasing Sewer Service Fund finan ' cing. Adopted Yeas - 7 Nays - 0 a� -�.�,°� � n Interdepartmental Memorandum CITY OF SAINT PAL3L Date: October 21, 1999 To: Council President Bostrom - - Councilmembers From: Ken Ford (� Subject: Zoning Study on Trucking Uses Enclosed is a preliminary report'on zoning for hucking uses pursuant to the Council's request of July 14. A report was requested for October 27. Additional field checking is needed to complete the inventory of uses that would be affected by the recommendations, but a direction is recommended. A suggested Council • resolution is included requesting review and compietion by the Planning Commission. • �1 q — c� �� Council File # Resolution # • 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 4 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 Green Sheet � RESOLUTION C1TY OF SAfNT PAUL, MINNESOTA Presented By Referred To Committee: Date WHEREAS, the City Council on July 14, 1999 adopted resolution 99-649 requestion PED to prepaze for Council consideration and subsequent submission to the Planning Commission, a zoning study and Legislative Code amendments addressing trucking uses in industrial zones; and WHEREAS, a preliminary report of such a study has been presented to the Council providing for code amendments that address the Council's objectives of neighborhood protection and reducing the potential for low-employee-density use of limited industrial land; RESOLVED that the Saint Paul City Council hereby requests that the Planning Commission review the study and recommended amendments, provide for community review, and present a completed report and recommended amendments to the City Council by January 15, 2000. Adopted by Council: Date Adoption Certified by Council Secretary By: Approved by Mayor: Date � BY Reguested by Department of: Plannin & ECOnomiC evelo ment � By: Form Approved by City Attorney By: Approved by Mayor for Submission to Council ey: f� � Zoning Regulations for Trucking Facilities Preliminary Report October 21, 1999 l�' �Q �� The Issue The truck tr�c and noise, vibrations and fumes necessarily associated with a trucking facility can be detrimental to a residentiai area neazby. The City Council and the Planning Commission have heard considerable testimony on this point in their review of some trucking facility permits tkus yeaz. Many trucking operations are located in azeas zoned I=1 Industrial in Saint Paul. The I-1 disfrict, frequently found adjacent to residemial districts, is intended to accommoc�ate industrial operations "whose extemal, physical effects aze restricted to the area of the district and in no manner affect the surrounding districts in a detrimental way." The Ciry Council requested the preparation of amendments to the zoning code that would more adequately protect residential azeas. A second objeative identified by the City Council is to limit the amount of industrial land in the City devoted to a use with as low an employee density as trucking. This would fiu the Comprehensive Plan policy which favors uses with high employee density for the city's limited amount of industrial land. Because of their increased employment objective, the Saint Paul Port Authority does not allow trucking farm uses in business parks under their control. It may be appropriate to apply such a policy to a larger portion of the city's industrial land. • What is a trucking use? There is no definition far a trucking use or trucking facility in the Saint Paul Zoning Code. Pick up and delivery of goods by truck is, obviously, a necessary accompaniment to many businesses including most any type of manufacturing, moving or storage. For these, trucks aze accessory. Accepted definitions that provide for special regulations on uses where trucking is the primary activity generally describe "truck terminals" or "motar freight terminals." The definition in the Roseville Zoning Code is an example: A building in which freight brought by motor truck is assembled and sorted for routing in intrastate and interstate shipment (Ord. 275, 5-12-59, City of Roseville) A Fairfax Co., Virginia definition is broader: A building or area in which freight brought by truck is assembled and/or stored for routing or reshipment, or in which semitrailers, including tractor and/or trailer xnits and other trucks, are parked or stored. The Current Situation in Saint Paul � Truckingfaci7itiespermitted ag-G� • Trucking facilities are first permitted in the I-1 Industrial District where they are permitted by right. The use is listed as follows: (3) Warehousing and wholesaZe establishments, and truckingfacilities. This use, along with other uses permitted in the I-1 district, is also permitted in the I-2 Industrial District. Intent of the I-1 District As stated in the Zoning Code: The I-1 Industrial District is intended to p�-imarily accommodate wholesale and warehouse activities, and industrial operations whose external, physical effects are restricted to the area of the ctistrict and in no manner affect the surrounding districts in a detrimental way. The I-1 District is intended to permit, along with other specified uses, the manufacturing, compounding, processing, packaging, assembly, or tseatment offinished or semifinished products from previously prepared material. (60.610. I-1 Industrial District) For comparison, the stated intent of the I-2 (heavier) Industrial District is: The I-2 Industrial District is intended primarily for manufacturing, assembling and fabrication activities, including Zarge scale or specialized industrial � operations whose external effects will be felt in sur•rounding districts. The I-2 District is intended to permit the manufacturing, processing and compounding of semifinished products from raw material and prepared material. The processing ofraw material in bulkform to be used in an industrial operation is a permitted use in the I-2 District. Existing Operations The Saint Paul Midway azea, due no doubt to its location between the two major city centers, has been, historically, an important center for Yrucking operations. Over the last two decades as the metropolitan regaon has expanded, expansive sites in suburban locations have become more attractive for tnzcking uses and the vast majority of operations in the east metro area are in the suburbs. Some 90 operations are located in the east-metro suburbs of Saint Paul compazed with some 20 in the City. Since the Saint Paul Zoning Code permits trucking facilities in both major industrial zones, it has never been necessary to define a irucking facility or to identify firms by this use. Available information on the firms that exist in the City is limited in completeness and accuracy. Throuah available directories, a Minnesota Department of Training and Economic Development listing and field observation, staff has identified operations that may qualify under one or another definition at 21 locations. Fifteen of these are in azeas zoned I-1. Four are in areas zoned I-2, and two aze presently non-conforming in • Z qq-G`l� . residential districts. (These figures, and others that follow, aze preliminary figures that will likely change as fiirther field checlting is completed.) Detrimental Impact The external characteristics of a trucking operation that are degrading to a nearby residential azea are precisely the kind of impacts that zoning is intended to prevent. Trucks, especially tractor trailers, generate more noise than automobile traffic, and even if minimum noise standazds are met, the constant nature of large truck motors arriving and leaving, and sometimes idling on the site, is a particulaz annoyance for nearby zesidents. A street with lazge tractor trailers as a common element of the traffic is substantially different in chazacter from a street with only car and small truck traffic and more detrunental to residential tranquility the greater the number of trucks. Large trucks reduce comfort for pedestrians and, at least in perception, reduce safety for children and all pedestrians. Odorous fiunes, high and bright headlights that can shine in windows, and vibrations are other characteristics that residents find detract from the quality of a residential environment. Since these characteristics are readily perceived impediments to a quality residential environment, they inhibit attractiveness in the market place and, consequently, reduce residential property values. Identification and Analysis of Options The problem is evident: trucking firms, by the very nature of their primary activity, are apt to have significant adverse impact outside the zoning district in which they are � located, particularly if they are neaz the edge of that dastrict. Permission of trucking firms by right, therefore, would appeaz to be incompatible with the stated purpose of the I-1 Industrial District in the Zoning Code. A review of regulations in other cities indicates that this incompatibility is commonly recognized. There are solutions in established practice. Alternatives for consideration include: 1. Remove trucking facilities from the list of uses permitted in the I-1 zoning district, restricting new and expanded facilities (truck or motor freight terminals according to a specific definition) to the I-2 district. 2. Make trucking facilities (truck or motor freight terminals according to a specific definition) a use perniitted only by special condition in the T-1 zoning district with conditions that would include a specified distance from residentially-zoned property. 3. Bliminate trucking facilities from the permitted uses in the I-1 district and perxnit them only as a conditional use in the I-2 District. 4. Distinguish trucking facilities by size, permitting only smaller ones in the I-1 district. • a9-�`� • Any of these solutions would require the addition of an appzopriate definition to the zoning code. A number of definitions from vazious city codes are cited below. Option 1, Define Truck Terminals and permit them only in the I-2 Zoning District. This is the most direct response to the recognition that these facilities aze inconsistent _ with the stated purpose of the I-1 Zoning District. This option would accoznplish two purposes: it would eliminate at least most of the potential conflict with residential areas, and it would significantly reduce the amount of industrial land in the City potentially devoted to low-employee-density trucking uses. Available anformation indicates that under- this option existing trucking operations in approximately 161ocations would be made non-conforming. (Four would remain as conforming uses because they are already in I-2 districts and one presently on residentially-zoned land would remain non-conforming.) Option 2, Require a Special Condition Use Permit for Truck Terminals in the I-1 Zoning District. Conditions established could address noise, traffic and visual chazacter and could include a specified distance from residential uses. This would address primarily the neighborhood protection objective, but would not as clearly reduce the land area potentially put to this use. Most applications of the I-1 District in the City were established with the district's limited purpose in mind; many are close to non-industriai uses, often residential. On the other hand, some I-1 areas are extensive and some existing � trucking facilities zoned I-1 are not close to residential districts. The number of current operations made non-conforming under this option is in the range of 5- 10, the actual number depending on actual distance measurement. Option 3, Permit Truck Terminals Only Conditionally in the I-2 District. Because of potential traffic and neighborhood impacts, all transportation uses, including motor freight terminals, are conditional uses wherever permitted under the new code currently in preparation for the City of Minneapolis. This alternative is not suggested by the objectives for new provisions in Saint Paul. The problems identified involve industrial land adjacent to residential or non-industrial uses, typically land zoned I-1. The site plan review process ensures that traffic and other impacts will be reviewed for proposed development even where land is zoned I-2. Option 4, Permit Only Smaller Terminals in the I-1 District. Building square footage would be the standazd basis for discrimination on the basis of size. While the relationship isn't necessarily direct, a lazger facility is generally going to involve more truck traffic, the major factor that causes detrimental impact. A lazger number of smaller facilities in an azea, however, could have as much traffic and as much impact as a single lazger facility. For this reason, permission of only smaller facilities would not necessazily contribute to either of the objectives far improvement. • 4 �`t -4`� • Recommendation A definition should be added to the zoning code to provide for addressing trucking operations specifically. A definition similar to that included in the new code under consideration for the City of Minneapolis covers both buildings and land azea and appeazs to be appropriate for our purposes: Motor Freight Terminal. A building or area in which freight is assembled or stored for routing in intr-astate or interstate shipment primarily involving truck tractors and semitraiZers. Since operations have been found to be incompatible with the stated purpose of the I-1 - zoning district, they should not continue to be permitted in that district by right. They should either be permitted only under conditions that would prevent detrimental impact on property outside the district, or not permitted in the district at all. The conditional use approach is suggested by the following factors: 1. Most of Saint Paul's firms are located in areas zoned I-1 and a11 of these would be made non-conforming and would be prevented from expanding if the use is no longer permitted in that district. Trucking has an essential rale in the city and regional economy and it is not clear that all opportunities for this use in I-1 districts as presently mapped need to be eliminated. 2. The distribution of trucking facilities in the east metro region indicates that Saint � Paul's shaze is not excessive. In fact, proportional to the city's size, Saint Paul's share is low in comparison with a number of suburban communities. Because of the nature and use of the I-1 district, prohibition of trucking facilities within 600 feet of a residential district will significantly reduce opportunities for new facilities and wi11 make a number of existing firms non-conforming, preventing expansion. Conditions placed on trucking uses should address the following: • Distance from a residential district • Visual and noise impact on a residential district • Direct access by truck route not.impinging on a residential district Simply from the standpoint of the language of the zoning code, removing trucking facilities as a permitted use in the I-1 district is logical because the finding has been that they aze, by nature, inconsistent with the stated purposes of this district. • a�-��� • ?? Are they a necessary part of the city's economy? Most are in I-1. Would a restriction to I-2 be too limiting? • � � _�,�1� � Appendix Definifions Rochester, N.Y. Truck Terminal. Land and buildings used as a relay stafion for the transfer of a load from one vehicle to another or one party to another. The terminal cannot be used for permanent or long-term accessory storage for principal land uses at other locations. The terminal facility may include storage areas for trucks and buildings or areas for the repair of trucks associated with the terminal. - Fairfax CounYy, VA Truck terminal. A building or area in which freight brought by truck is assembled and/or stored for routing or reshipment, or• in which semitrailers, including tractor and/or trailer units and other trucks, are parked or stored. Minneapolis, MN The new zoning code proposed for the City of Minneapolis includes the following definitions: Motor Freight Terminal. A building or area in which freight is assembled or stored for routing in intrastate or interstate shipment primarily involving truck tractors and • semitrailers, ttnd which is not a packags delive�y service. Package Delivery Service. A use which transports packages and articles for expedited delivery primarily in single rear axle straight trucks or smaller vehictes, where no single item weighs over one hundreditfty (ISO) pounds. Roseville, MN Motor Freight Terminal (Truck Terminal): A building in which freight brought by motar truck is assembled and sorted for routing in intrastate and interstate shipment. (Ord. 275, 5-12-59) Minneapolis Code, Proposed Package delivery and motor freight terminal uses are not permitted by right in any district, but aze conditional uses wherever they are allowed. Package delivery is first permitted as a conditional use in the C4 General Commercial District, the most intense of the code's four commercial districts "established to provide for a wider range of commercial development allowing a mix of retail, business services and limited industrial uses." i q� -��q Motor Freight Terminals are allowed as conditional uses in the I2 Medium and I3 General � Industrial Districts. They are not permitted in the Il Light Industrial District. Stated purpose of the I1 Light Industrial District: The II Light Industrial district is established to provide ctean, attractive Zocations for low impact and technology-based light industrial uses, research arxd development, and similar uses which produce IittZe or no noise, odor, vibration, gZare or other objectionable influences, and have Zittle or no adverse effect on surrounding properties. (550.190. Staff Altemative) Other uses with which truck hauling is associated are restricted in size in the Il Light - Industrial District: Warehousing and distribution; furniture moving and storage. (a) In general. Warehousing and distribution uses and furniture moving and storage uses in the II District sha11 be limited to thirty thousand (30, 000) sguare feet ofgross floor area. (Can be increased by conditional use permiz) (550.230. ) Factors specifically identified for consideration when increased floor azea is requested include: 1) proximity to residential uses; 2) screening and landscaping of truck pazking and loading area; and 3) location of truck routes and amount of truck traffic. Stated purpuse of the I2 Medium Industrial District (in which motor freight terminals are first allowed) The I2 Medium Indistrial District is established to provide locations for medium industrial uses and other specific uses which have the potential to produce greater • amounts of noise, odor, vibration, glare or other objectionable influences than uses allowed in the Il District and which may have an adverse effect on surrounding properties. Roseville Zoning Code Wholesale and warehousing uses are permitted in I-1 Light Industrial Districts. Motor Freight Terminals are not permitted in I-1 Light industrial Districts but aze first permitted as a conditional use in I-2 General Industrial Districts: � g