Agenda - Planning Commission - 11/03/2005

Home

Page 8 -- October 10, 2005 g.g. trial districts." It also defined the size and number of billboards permissible "per buildable lot in a commercial or industrial distr/ct adjacent to an interstate toll- way or expressway. However, the ordinance did not define what signs were permitted in the business districts. Therefore, the zoning ordinance was too confusing for the court to role in favor of the city. see also: Schulr,: v. C!ry of Cumberland, 22'8 F. 3d 831 (2000). see also: TannerAdverSsing Group LLC v. Fayerte County, 411 F. 3d 1272 (2005). Ordinance- Ordinance fails to define 'drive-in retail store' BuiMing supply shop claims ordinance unconstitutionally vague Citation; State.of Minnesota v. Rose, Court .of Appeals of Minnesota, No. A04- 1640 (2005) MINNESOTA (08/16/05) -- Rose operated Builder's Supply Warehouse in Kandiyohi County in a zoning district abutting the highway. Under the zoning code, only certain uses were allowed within the distri.ct, namely those uses associated with automobiles. These uses included "drive-in retail or service uses; .... drive-in restaurants;"' "drive-in theaters;" and auto repair shops. The county zoning adm/rfistrator issued Rose a citation, finding his busi- ness was not an allowed use within the district. Rose sUed, arguing his store was a "drive-in retail store." The court ruled in favor of the county. > ' Rose appealed, arguing the ordinance was unconstitutionally 'vague be- cause it did not define "drive-in retail," and a reasonable merchant could con- clude any retail business that had parking spaces for its customers was a' "drive-in retail store." DECISION: A ~rmed. The ordinance was not unconstitutionally vague. Rose's argument ignored the ordinary meaning of "drive,in," which was "an establishment, especially an outdoor movie theater, designed to permit customers to remain in their motor vehicles while being accommodated." Applying the ordinary meaning of "drive-in" to the ordinance, a "drive-in retail store" was a retail store designed to accommodate customers ~n their motor vehicles. ' A retail store where customers drive into a parking lot, park their vehicles, and then leave their vehicles to enter the store to receive service clearly did not fit this definition. Therefore, under the ordinary meaning of '"drive-in," Builder's Supply Warehouse was not a "drive-in retail store," and was not a permitted use in the district. Ultimately, Rose's store did not meet the zoning ordinance's requirements. see also: Stare v. Hyland, 431 N.W. 2d 868 (1988). see also: State '~,. Davidson, 481 N.W~rd 51 (1992). 176 © 2005 Ouinlan Publishing Group. Any reproduction is prohibited. For more information please call (617) 542-0048.