pf_03600 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

~~~. ~~~... ~.~.... .~....,.. ..... ...... ........ ................~..~....... ~.................. ..... OF . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ~ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ~ . . . . . . . . . . . . .. ......... .,~. ~...,....~...... ~....... ..... ...~...,.....~. ...~ ......... ......... .............. ...... ........~........~.. ................ . ARGUMENT........................................... ........................ ........................... 6 .....f\..RO.UT\r1ENT......... ...... .... ......... .............. .... ...... .............~.~.. .......... .... ............ ........ ............ 7 1. Standard of Revie\v ............................................. .................................................... -r I II. Because Applicant failed to demonstrate that the proposed crematorium would not harm public health and safety, it failed to meet a standard of the CUP ordinance and the City's denial of the permit was reasonable and must be upheld................................... ............................................................................ 8 A. The courts will defer to a rational denial of a Conditional Use Permit ..........8 B. The burden of providing that a proposed use meets the criteria for a Conditional Use Permit falls on the applicant ............................................. 10 C. Far from meeting its burden to show that there would be no negative impact on public health, Applicant left the City with great uncertainty and doubt.......................................................................................................... 12 D. Far from clearing up uncertamtres Applicant's experts introduced new uncertainties and were unqualified to speak on many of the issues .................................................................... 17 E. In public health matters, including environmental protection, uncertainty of the type faced by the Roseville City Council is dealt with through c au ti 0 nand re s traim .. . . . .. .. ..... . .. .. .. . . .. .. .. . . .. .. ...... ........ .. .. . . .. .. .. .. .. . . .. .. .. .. .. . . . . ... 1 9 II. Because Applicant's proposal is inadequate and the project is fraught with uncertainty, this court should affirm the trial court's dismissal of this lavlsuit. The only alternative would be remand................................................... /; / CON C L U S ION. .. .. . . .. .. .. .. .. .. .. . . .. . . . . . . . . .. . . ... . . . .. . . .. .. .. .. .. .. ...... .. .. .. .. .. .. . . . . . . .. .. .. .. . . . . .. . . .. . . .. . . . . . :2-+