2012_0709_Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

AttachmentB specific goals and policies, and that the proposed development does not appear to be in conflict with any of them. The Comprehensive Plan addresses development of the Twin Lakes area in the greatest detail in its discussion of Planning District 10. Specifically, the Comprehensive Plan says that future development in Twin Lakes may include retail uses (although retail uses should not be the primary focus of the redevelopment area), and that development proposals should be evaluated against the zoning regulations, the Twin Lakes Business Park Master Plan, the Twin Lakes Alternative Urban Area wide Review, and the Twin Lakes Redevelopment Area Design Principles; analysis of the proposed development against these items is provided below. a.TLAUA WIN AKES LTERNATIVE RBANREAWIDE b. TLBPMP WIN AKES USINESSARK ASTER c.ZRTLRAD ONING EGULATIONS AND WIN AKES EDEVELOPMENT REAESIGN PBecause the entire zoning code has been updated over the past couple of years to be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan, a development that meets the zoning requirements would be, by definition, consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. For all of the reasons detailed above, Planning Division staff believes that the proposed development facilitated by disposal of the City-owned land identified on the is in compliance with the Comprehensive Plan. PRELIMINARY PLAT Theabove statement, namely that the zoning code is supposed to be consistent with the Comp Plan and that if the Wal-Mart proposal meets the zoning requirements it is therefore consistent with the Comp Plan, is more an aspiration than a statement of fact. Such a statement of faith is more appropriate for a forum of shared faith believers than a staff presentation at a public hearing. When this assertion was challenged by several residents at the public hearing, the response ignored their questions by focusing on the subdivision issues. (See referenced Minutes and written comments.) We also find the February 1, 2012, assertion that the Wal-Mart proposal does not appear to be in conflict with any of them, referring to the Comp , not credible. Attached is a highlighted ch clearly demonstrate non-compliance (See Attachment #2). We find it both curious and confusing that this first determination of compliance is now being overshadowed by all the emphasis on the latest determination of compliance issued by the Community Development Department in response to a request from the Wal-attorney.It is difficult to avoid the conclusion that Wal-Mart in effect wanted to give the City an opportunity to issue a more SWARN Appeal--July 2, 2012 3 Page3of18