Laserfiche WebLink
<br />Mr. Bill Malinen <br />August 24, 2007 <br />Page 3 <br />In summary, historical documents do not in our opinion support the resident's claim that <br />the 2001 Comprehensive Plan amendment allows only "Scenario 1"uses of Twin Lakes <br />Redevelopment properties. The 2001 AUAR, the 2001 Twin Lakes Master Plan and the June <br />26, 2001 Resolution changing the Comprehensive Plan designation of Twin Lakes properties <br />to BP- Business Park all suggest a contrary conclusion: that the Comprehensive Plan BP- <br />Business Park designation allows for a blend or mix of specific uses as proposed by a <br />developer, and as is ultimately agreeable to the City Council. Moreover, logic does not support <br />the resident's argument. It seems clear to us that the Council's adoption of a BP designation <br />was intended to allow flexibility in land uses. It does not appear the Council ever intended in <br />2001 to adopt a Comprehensive Plan amendment for Twin Lakes properties that provided for a <br />proscriptive parcel-by-parcel designation. <br />I hope this provides a clear summary of our opinion on the matter discussed herein. <br />Please call if you have questions. <br />Please distribute this memo to Council members. It is, in essence, a summary of the <br />advice and counsel we have provided to staff in the process of analyzing the specific resident's <br />claim. <br />Regards, <br />/s~yyc~> <br />Jay T. Squires <br />JTS/lmj <br />~: io9sas <br />