Agenda - Planning Commission - 05/01/2003

Home

318 Page 8 -- April 10, 2003 Plat Approval-- Plan rejected due to conflicting land uses and unnecessary conversion of farmland Developer ctaimed plan complied with zoning standards MINNESOTA (02/18/03) -- A developer intended to construct homes on 70 acres of land located in an area zoned "agTicultural." An application was sub- mitred for preliminary approval of a plat consisting of 14 five-acre lots for residential housing. The plan was determined to be in compliance with the county zoning ordinance. The planning commission conducted a hearing, and Environmental Ser- vices Director Heemsbergen appeared, expressing concerns about the plan even though he conceded the proposed lots met the dimensional requirements of the local zoning ordinance. Among other things, Heemsbergen opined the project was in conflict with the goals and policies of the county comprehensive guide plan. Neighbors also appeared and objected to the project, stating their concerns related to increased traffic, unsightly lawns, and lower property values. · The planning commission decided, although the preliminary plat met the stated zoning requirements, it would result in conflicting land uses and the unnecessary conversion of farmland. It recommended denial. The developer apparently decided not to change the preliminary plat and instead submitted the plan to the county board of commissioners. There, Heemsbergen appeared and expressed the same concerns. The board suggested the developer resubmit the plan with reconfigurations. At the following meet- Lng, the developer submitted a letter from the assistant county surveyor, stating the prelim/nary plat met all of the zoning ordinances. In June 2002, the board considered the plan for the second time. The board' adopted Heem. sbergen's findings and conclusions and denied approval'.. The developer appealed, arguing the preliminary plat satisfied the zoning and subdivision ordinances. The developer also contended the board lacked legal authority to reject the application. DECISION: Reversed. The county zoning ordinance expressly permitted single-family dwellings in agricultural districts at a maximum density of one per five-acre lot. Thus, the developer proposed a permitted use, and, accordingly, the board only had authority to review the application to determine if it was in compliance with the zoning and subdivision ordinances. Thus, the board exceeded its authority. The court also found the board erred in giving the comprehensive guide plan the same force of law as the zoning and subdivision ordinances. Citation: PTL, LLC, v. Chisago Count,,; Board of Commissioners, Court of Appeals of Minnesota, No. C5-02-1170 (2003). see also: County Builders Inc. v. Lower Providence Township, 287 A.2d 849 (1972).