pf07-021 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

f • • 1�1s �� May 25, 2007 (via U.S. Mail and e-mail) Nlr. John Livingston Cent Ventures 1660 Highway 100 S., Suite 500 St. Louis Park, MN 55416 Dear Mr. Livingston: I am writing this letter to fiurther clarify the status of the City of Roseville's receipt and processing of your land-use applications on April 6, 2007 (General Concept Plan and Rezoning) and April 20 (preliminary plat). Staff sent responses regarding the "completeness"' of those applications on April 12 (by mail only) and April 27 (by mail and email)— dates that fell within fifteen business days of our receipt of your original application on April 6. We sent those responses to the addresses given in business cards that that had been provided to staff. Neither staff, nor the City Attorney, is aware of any statute or case law stating that the City is limited to one response during the "15 day completeness determination period" (hereafter 15-day period). Your recent email focuses on issues of "completeness" of the applications under Minn. Stat. Section 15.99, the 60 Day Rule. The provisions of that law dealing with completeness, however, only serve to identify the start date of the 60-day application review period. As discussed below, the issue of completeness is inconsequential, because it is the City's intention to act on the merits of your applications within the period prescribed by the 60 Day Rule. The real issue is our need for data to adequately review the merits of your request(s). The 60 Day Rule allows cities to extend the initial 60-day period by an additional 60 days. The courts have indicated that the fact more time is needed is an adequate reason to extend the initial 60 day period. Here, the City made the determination to extend the 60-day application review period by an additional 60 days on April 27 — as referenced in the letter that was sent to you on that date. Thus. setting aside the completeness issue, the first applications were submitted by you on April 6, 2007; the extended review period will conclude on August 3, 2007 (unless further extended at your request). There seems to be some misunderstanding regarding the term '`complete." From your correspondence, I am inferring that you are concerned about our determination of ``complete" as it relates to the 15-day period in the 60 Day Rule. Again, however, we are willing (solely for the sake of avoiding further argument) to consider your application to be '`procedurally '`complete", for purposes of this law, as of April 6, 2007. Roseville's staff, as stated above, continues to regard your application as incomplete for the purposes of our substantive review of the merits of the request(s). To avoid City of Roseville Community Development Department 2660 Civic Center Drive •:• Roseville, Minnesota 55113 651-792-7005 :• TDD 651-792-7399 •:• ww�v.ci.roseville.mn.us