04-10-25 - Council Special Work Session Agenda Packet

Home Search

Practical Implications If the City does move forward with regulating the minimum distance between like businesses, there is the practical challenge of identifying and defining which businesses are of the same type. For example, businesses could be within the broad category of restaurants but serve different types of food either in genre (e.g. Italian, Indian, American) or format (e.g. fast, sit down, bar). Similarly, two businesses could sell similar products, like tires, but one could be an auto parts store while the other is an automotive service provider. Because defining what businesses are of the same type is not necessarily obvious or intuitive, any regulation on the minimum distance between like businesses will need to be sufficiently detailed to guide consistent enforcement and minimize the potential for litigation from business owners or the public who view the regulation as vague or its application as arbitrary. Form of Regulation As noted above, the City's authority to regulate land use derives from its zoning authority under the MPA, which is the "uniform procedure for adequately conducting and implementing municipal planning." Minn. Stat. § 462.351. The Metropolitan Land Planning Act ("MLPA") also affords the City authority to regulate the use of land, with the purpose of the MLPA being to "establish requirements and procedures to accomplish comprehensive local planning with land use controls consistent with planned, orderly and staged development and the metropolitan system plans." Minn. Stat. § 473.85-871. The MPA specifies that municipalities may regulate zoning through their "official controls," meaning its ordinances, and that the enacting municipality must follow a certain process for enacting such ordinances. See Minn. Stat. § 462.357. This includes review and study by the planning commission, a public hearing preceded by public notice, and approval by the majority of the city council. Id. The Minnesota Court of Appeals has made clear that the MPA and MLPA preempt local regulation as it relates to the process by which land use regulations are approved by a municipality. Nordmarken v. City of Richfield, 641 N.W.2d 343, 350 (Minn. Ct. App. 2002). Consistent with this, the only mechanism by which the City may regulate zoning is by ordinance, as specified in the MPA, rather than by its Charter. This is consistent with the recognized purpose of a city charter, which is to provide the scheme of municipal government and its operations. Given the nature of the City's zoning authority, any regulation on the minimum distance between like businesses is within the purview of the City Council. 2