My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
2013_1118_packet
Roseville
>
City Council
>
City Council Meeting Packets
>
2013
>
2013_1118_packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
11/14/2013 2:38:12 PM
Creation date
11/14/2013 12:57:59 PM
Metadata
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
208
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
121 planning statute whenever conflict exists: "therefore in the event of a conflict between the <br />122 Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Ordinance, the Comprehensive Plan controls." <br />123 Regarding Question 3, the City Attorney states, "Since Minnesota Statute 473.865 requires that <br />124 the Zoning Ordinance and the Comprehensive Plan not conflict, I would recommend that to the <br />125 extent the Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Ordinance may conflict as described in Answer to <br />126 Question No. I above, the City Council amend either its Zoning Ordinance or Comprehensive <br />127 Plan to eliminate the conflict." <br />128 STAFF ANALYSIS /DISCUSSION <br />129 While there was a lot of discussion during the Wal -Mart approval process on the City Attorney's <br />130 opinion on how it impacted that development, it is clear that there is some ambiguity in the <br />131 current Comprehensive Plan and Zoning that needs to be rectified. Based on staff's analysis and <br />132 research, we offer the following points to consider: <br />133 Comprehensive Plan Dehinitions <br />134 The Planning Division believes that the City Attorney's answer to Question I puts the Planning <br />135 Division in a precarious position because the criteria suggested by the City Attorney has not been <br />136 codified into the Comprehensive Plan or more importantly the Zoning Ordinance. The absence <br />137 of such criteria does not give the City much ability to utilize that methodology in determining <br />138 permitted uses. Alternatively, if criteria was included in the code, some of it would be subjective <br />139 and subject to claims of arbitrary treatment by aggrieved parties. Staff would suggest that the <br />140 City Council not include specific types of uses from the Comprehensive Plan and instead use <br />141 general descriptions on what is allowed and rely on the Zoning Code to specifically deal with the <br />142 distinctions that need to be made between land use types. <br />143 To further make the point, staff will note that keeping Comprehensive Plan land use designations <br />144 in the definition of Community Mixed Use will make any development /redevelopment within <br />145 Twin Lakes difficult at best, since most uses that this area has been designed to accommodate are <br />146 of a regional nature. Office uses stand out as a prime example of a regional use, especially a <br />147 corporate campus, which has always been a use desired for Twin Lakes. Other uses including <br />148 hotels, restaurants, a fitness center, and /or an office /showroom, are far more regional when <br />149 applying the sorts of analysis the City Attorney has suggested. The best recommendation that <br />150 staff can give is to eliminate reference of the Comprehensive Plan land use definition from <br />151 CMU land use definition. Comprehensive Plans are broad -based documents that include goals, <br />152 policies, and objects that are interwoven into the City Code and, in this case, the Zoning <br />153 Ordinance, as a means to regulate. A Comprehensive Plan is not the regulatory document for <br />154 which specific development sites rely. <br />155 The Planning Division also concludes that using roadway classifications as a means to <br />156 differentiate between types of commercial areas is, when applied to current areas and their uses, <br />157 may be problematic for existing and future development. Twin Lakes is a good example of this <br />158 where although the CMU does not include roadway functional classification as a guiding <br />159 measure, the site has direct visibility and access to the adjacent regional highway system. <br />160 Follwing the language of the Regional Business definition, it would appear that regional <br />161 businesses should be allowed in the Twin Lakes area. It is the staff's position that either <br />162 modifications or elimination of such language should occur in order to make the definitions clear <br />163 and concise. <br />164 Size Limitations <br />Page 4 of 8 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.