04-24-1985 Council Agenda - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

July 1979. No. 6 LAKEVILLE CONSIDERS "PERFORMANCE" ZONING FOR FREEWAY CORRIDOR The City of Lakeville faces a problem not uncommon among communities which developed comprehensive plans in the late 1960s: How do you deal with currently undeveloped areas which were zoned at a time when population growth projections for the Metropolitan Area were more than three times what they are today? Background Lakeville completed its first comprehensive plan in 1967. That plan was based on the assumption that Lakeville would experience tremendous growth, particularly along the Interstate 35W corridor, in the corning decades. The adopted zoning map, reflect- ing this assumption, shows a corridor zoned for high intensity use. However, the growth anticipated in 1967 never carne, especially along the freeway corridor. A few businesses have come and gone indicating, for the most part, their presence was premature. As Lakeville develops its plan under the Metropolitan Land Planning Act, what to do with the freeway corridor is still an issue. The community considers the corridor to be a "front door," and recognizes its devel- opment potential when market demand is generated. Since it prepared its 1967 plan, Lakeville has become concerned with its fiscal con- dition. In anticipation of a high growth rate, the city made large investments in munici- pal sewer, one of which was in the northern half of the freeway corridor. Zoning in the southern portion is comparable, but from a financial point of view the city needs a return on its capital investment in the north before allowing development requiring similar services in the south. Community Response Lakeville now considers the freeway cor- ridor as a separate planning district with artificially defined boundaries (see map below). But how to control development within the district has been difficult to determine. LAK vl LLE t: Reg wsi c0(jRDpfZ I o7r kt- I _ 3 __J scale I " =4r1,P7 °nth Lakeville has recently considered several proposals for the freeway corridor that range from allowing no development to allowing planned unit developments with relatively few stipulated criteria. However, none of the proposals were acceptable to both public officials and landowners. As a result, the city, with the help of a consult- ant, decided to try a new direction. As a first step, the consultant researched alternative ways to control development. What has subsequently evolved was influenced to a great degree by the "per- formance" system of approving develop- ment proposals used in Breckenridge, Colorado. Under the Breckenridge Devel- opment Code, there are no uses by-right and virtually no prohibited uses, no prescribed density or intensity of use, and no bulk or setback requirements. These matters, as well as social, economic, public facilities, environmental and design con- siderations for each neighborhood, are 59