2012_0709_Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

AttachmentD 4.) The Community Development Department finds that the Twin Lakes Sub-Area 1 Regulating Plan does not control use nor limit overall building size and therefore does not prohibit the Wal-Mart project. The Regulating Plan is a set of strict standards that apply to building design and placement and certain/specific site improvements, and which regulations do not take a use into account. B. Regulating Plan The CMU District must be guided by a regulating plan for each location where it is applied. A regulating plan uses graphics and text to establish requirements pertaining to the [site development] parameters. Where the requirements for an area governed by a regulating plan are in conflict with the design standards established in Section 1005.02 of this Title, the requirements of the regulating plan shall supersede, and were the requirements for an area governed by a regulating plan are silent, Section 1005.02 shall control. II. 2006TLCAD WINAKES OURT OF PPEALS ECISION The Community Development Department finds that the 2006 Court of Appeals Twin Lakes decision supports the determination that the Wal-Mart project is a permitted use. The Court of Appeals decision regarding a “big box” use on the same piece of land as the proposed Wal-Mart project concluded that without stated limitations on size or use, or a prohibition on use, within either, the comprehensive plan or the zoning ordinance, a large retail use, is permitted. Although the 2006 decision was predicated on the B-6 zoning district, the Court of Appeals decision and its application to our current comprehensive plan and zoning ordinance is still very much relevant and applicable. 2006CAD OURT OF PPEALS ECISION “The City code does not specify any maximum or minimum land-use ratio for the different types of permitted uses within the designated B-6 zone. And although the city’s comprehensive plan does not recommend big box retail, the comprehensive plan does not prohibit such a retail store. Generally, this court “narrowly construe[s] any restrictions that a zoning ordinance imposes upon a property owner.” See Mendota Golf, 708 N.W.2d at 172. Therefore, any “restrictions on land use must clearly be expressed.” Because the B-6 zoning designation does not prohibit retail, including big-box, or multi- family housing, or provide any restrictions on the amount of these land uses in proportion to other allowed land uses, we conclude that it was not reasonable for the city to determine that the Rottlund project, which includes retail, multi-family, and office land uses, is consistent with the B-6 zoning designation.” III2030RCP . OSEVILLE OMPREHENSIVE LAN nd As part of the consideration of the proposed Twin Lakes 2 Addition plat, the subdivision that will facilitate the Wal-Mart development, the City Council has heard extensive testimony from 4 Page4of27