Agenda - Planning Commission - 02/02/2006

Home

Page 6 -- December24, 2005 ZIR. hied. After several appeals and reconsiderations, the city's zoning administrator ultimately denied the application. The city identified 16 specific sites which were reasonably available for the operation of an adult business. Dino's appealed, arguing that the city failed to provide substantial evidence that any of the sites were reasonably available. Dino's submitted a report that showed that none of the sites were available because they were either occupied or not for sale. The lower court upheld the zoning administrator's decision, and Dino's appealed. DECISION:Affirmed. Substantial evidence supported the city's findings. Under the First Amendment, a lbcal government could regulate adult busi- nesses as long as there was a reasonable opportunity to operate the business within the city limits. A city provided an adult business with a reasonable opportunity to operate if: 1) relocation sites were considered part of an actual business real estate market for commercial enterprises; and 2) there were an adequate number of relocation sites. The business operator was required to "fend for themselves" in the real estate market. The city only had to show that a site was potentially available for use, purchase,, or rent as a commercial enterprise; the city was not required to act as a real estate broker to ensure that an owner of property would sell or rent to an adult business. Dino's argued that the city's code required the city to locate a site that was potentially available for the use, purchase, or rent as an adult business, opposed to any commercial enterprise as required by the U.S. Constitution. The city code adopted a definition of the relevant market as the market for adult entertainmeni specifically rather than the market for commercial enterprises. However, this lan- guage did not impose on the city the obligation to act as a real estate broker and find an actual relocation site for adult business operations. The court determined . that the city intended to require only that a site be "potentially"-- not actually -- available for use, purchase, or rental as an adult business. The city provided substantial evidence that, in 2003, the market for adult businesses was active. Seventeen other adult businesses operated in the reloca- tion areas, and there were other sites available for sale or lease to adult busi- nesses. Therefore, because the city showed that there were reasonable available sites for an adult entertainment business, denial of Dino's permit was proper. Variance -- Property seeks variance to use garage as guesthouse Court misreads ordinance Citation: Palmer v. Board of Adjustments, Becker County, Court of Appeals of Minnesota, No. A05-899 (2005) MINNESOTA (11/15/05) -- In 2004, Palmer applied for a variance to 'allow her to continue to use a garage that had been built as a guesthouse on her property in 197~-. The Board of Adjustments of Becket County denied her request for a variance, and Palmer appealed. © 2005 Quinlan Publishing G~oup, Any reproduction is prohibited. For more information please call (617) 542-0048. 136