My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
2007_0319_Packet
Roseville
>
City Council
>
City Council Meeting Packets
>
2007
>
2007_0319_Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/10/2012 12:38:43 PM
Creation date
8/26/2009 3:20:40 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Roseville City Council
Document Type
Council Agenda/Packets
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
111
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 Cull 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 T�immel v. Townshi� 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 App. 2005){unpublished} as an example of this legal principle.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 />51�A�s�m <br />�: o �a�a+� <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.