Laserfiche WebLink
RlcxsoN, <br />ELL, <br />ECKMAN &. <br />U�NN, P.A. <br />Mr. William 7. Malinen <br />City Mana�er <br />City of Rase�ille <br />2bb� Gi�ic Center Drive <br />Rosc�ille, MN 55113 <br />1700 West Highway 36 <br />SuiCe 11�� <br />Rase�ille, MN 55113 <br />[651} 2Z3-4999 <br />(651) 2�3-4987 Fax <br />www.ebbqlaw.cam <br />Mar�h 5, 201 d <br />RE: Riac Hussain Conditional Use Permit ("CUP"} �lpplication <br />Dear Mr. Malinen: <br />Attachment A <br />James C. Eri�ksan, Sr. <br />Caroline Bell Becl�man <br />Charles R. Bartholdi <br />Kari L. Quinn <br />Mark F, Gaughan <br />]ames C. Erickson, ]r. <br />Robert C. Bell - of�our+set <br />At thc February 22, 2[]10 City C:ouncil meeting, I recommcnded that the Riaz Hussain CUP <br />Amendment Appli�ation matter be cantinued so that I could research th� law pertaining to C[]P <br />pro�isions when the property is no langer being used for the use stated in the CU�'. <br />Two propased actions were befare the City Coun�il on the 22nd. I'lI'Sl, there �°as a prapased <br />Resolution ta Deny the CUP Amer�dment Appli�ation. Second, there was a request tv issue a <br />C'ompliance Order requiring the remo�al of the parking axeas. <br />The law an the ability of the City Council to deny the Amendment Applicatian is �lear. <br />�'rotection of �eneral h�alth, safety and welfare is a �alid basis to deny a CUP. Sin�e there has <br />been factual e�idence presentcd that there are traffi� issues relating tQ the parking lot and its use <br />the City Council daes ha�e a legally sufficient basis ta deny the applicatian, irrespecti�e of the <br />current use of the site. <br />The removal of the parking areas �ased upc�n the issuance af a compliance arder is lcss clear. <br />The remcdy in the event that there is a �iolatiQn af a canditi�n in a CL7F is the re�ocation af the <br />CUP. Since the praperty is not being c�irrently used as a �cterinary clinic this may be a <br />meanin�less remedy. �I�herefore, the pursuit of a campliance order based upon the CUP may not <br />be appropriate at this time gi�en that thc property is nat currently being used as a�eterinary <br />clinic. <br />I wi]1 be glad to discuss this matter further with the City Caunci� when it next takes up the CL]F <br />Amendment Application to determine whether to praceed �vith the compliance arder. <br />