2006_0918_Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

09/07/2006 14 �� FAX 612 373 0929 GREENE ESPEL PLLP :� If[I:I �!I I�!1 Christopher K. Miller, Interim City Manager September 7,2006 Page 2 revie�� and permit applications in the area south of the international a�rport.4 Regarding the comprehensive guide plan amendment process. we became lead appellate coi:ns�� for the City of Mendota Heights in Mendota Golf LLP �>. City of Mendota Hei;hts following the Minnesota Court of Appeals' decision affirming an order requiring the City to arr�ei�d its comprehensive guide plan. After convincing the Minnesota Supreme Court to review the case, we persuaded the Supreme Court to overturn the order and established an important precedent re�a�-ding the relationship between canlprehensive guide plans and zoning ordinances in 1�1 i�7:=cs�tcl } Our experience in this field is not limited to litigation. Cities such as Richfield and Ramsey have retained us to provide opinion letters regarding difficult land-use questions. �n addition, I teach the land-use law course at William Mitchell College of La�av, and lecture both locally and nationally on topics related to land use and environmental law. Most recently. I spolce at the 2006 National Conference of the American Planning Association, and will spealc at the annual conference of the APA's Minnesota chapter tat�r this month. The process we envision for advising tl�e City. If the City were to retain Greene Espel to advise it I would serve as the senior attorney. Pamela Vander�iel, an attorney with over four years of experience advising cities in land-use matters, and whose hourly rate is more affordable, would also assist me. Ms. VanderWiel perf'or�ned second-chair responsibilities in our representation of Mendota Heights in Allen ��. C.�'i�y of Mendota .�''eights (mentioned in footnote four), and is the primary outside counsel for the City of F�arrni��gton in a law.��it against the City alleging that school district property is imin�.inc from the requirements of zor�itag ordinances and comprehensive guide plans. We would suggest that the City retain us to play the following roles. We would inventory the full set of legal questions that iieed to be considered for the City to make the most appropriate decisions. We would advise the CiCy regarding the sequenc�, in which certain decisions should be made. Regarding those questions, we would advise t�tEr City regarding its duties. Where the law presents the City with choices, we would assist the City to evaluate the rislcs and benefits of various approaches. Such advice would best be deli�vret� in two stages, with the final two steps fully completed after the conclusion environmental review. � O'Nerll v. City of Bloorningtan {2041-20D?). The core issues in O'Neii'l involved whether environmental review a�nt�st precede certain lcinds of land-use decisions in a way that precludes automatic approval of applications filed when the AUAR was underway. When the core issues in O',�'��,�� were raised again (outside of the context of an AUAR) in Allen v. City of`Mendotu Heights, we successfully represented Mendora Heights and established an i.tx�portat�t precedent regarding the relationship between environmental review and land-use planning. See 694 l�i.�J.2d 799 (Mti�. Ct. App. 2005). -��tti~ 708 N.W.2d 162 (Mir�n. 2006).