My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
pf_03800
Roseville
>
Planning Files
>
Old Numbering System (pre-2007)
>
PF3000 - PF3801
>
3800
>
pf_03800
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/28/2014 1:13:58 PM
Creation date
7/3/2013 11:40:52 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Planning Files
Planning Files - Planning File #
3800
Planning Files - Type
Planning-Other
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
24
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
March 5, 2007 <br />Page 5 <br />This provision is consistent with the type of judicial review that occurs in the area of <br />land use decisions. As has been stated in dozens of zoning cases in our courts, the standard <br />rule is that when there is a full and complete record of the proceedings below, that the court <br />hearing an appeal will only consider the evidence that is a part of the record below. Under <br />those circumstances, no additional evidence may be offered by the parties. I have district court <br />orders in cases refusing to allow additional evidence to be submitted at the trial court level. By <br />way of example only, Council members could refer to Kimmel v. Township of Ravenna, 2005 <br />WL 3372716 (Minn. App. 2005)(unpublished) as an example of this legal principle. <br />Hopefully, this short analysis will be of some assistance in future deliberations on <br />proposed amendments to Code Section 1014.04. <br />Very truly yours, <br />Scott T. Anderson <br />STA/sem <br />RRM: #102764 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.