Laserfiche WebLink
's' ~ _ ATTACHMIIVT 3 <br />-` t., ~' <br />"~'" AUG 2z '90 14 05 JENSEN HT_CKEN GEDDE SCOTT,_P.A. <br />• JENSEN, HICKEN, GEDDE Fri SCOTT, P. A. <br />• ATTORNEYS AND COUNSELORS AT LAW <br />,ssocrt, EDM1VARD w.. j$. <br />GBDDH, ?IiOMAS A. <br />HICKEN, jBPfiHEY P. <br />Ha WARD, lt0$ERT A. <br />JENSEZ3, DAVID L. <br />MATTy;i:, PAUL F. <br />SCOTT, y(1CHAEL J. <br />300 ANOKA OFFICE CENTETt <br />2150 THIRD AV8NU8 <br />ANOKA,'.~IINNESOTA bb303~2296 <br />7£LEPHON£ (612) 421-4110 <br />7ELECOYIBIt (812) 421-1044 <br />August 22, 1990 <br />OA COUNSBL <br />I~ADtEY, Cxwlri b5 S. <br />LLTTI3FF', BICF#1lBJ~ L. <br />~IOWSE, d. C&AIG <br />Ms. Susan Hoyt <br />Falcon Heights City Planner <br />City of Falcon Heights <br />2077 West Larpenteur Avenue <br />Falcon Heights, MN 55113-5594 <br />RE: Screening Requirements <br />Dear Ms. Hoyt: <br />• I have your letter of August 24 wherein yQU raised certain <br />questions regarding Section 9-1Y.01 Subd. 5 of the Falcon <br />Heights City Code. <br />An auto repair shop is Iacated in a B-2 zone adjacent to a <br />residential neighborhood. You ask whether the City may se- <br />lectively engorce the screening requirements. As a practical <br />matter, municipalities often•enforce various Code provisions <br />' ~on a complaint basis, ratheJC than a"ctively seeking out viola- <br />tions and, generally speaking, this is not a problem.... How--: <br />ever, the best legal approach for' municipality`is to have~a <br />goal 4f enforcing all of its Code provisions. zf any existing <br />Code requirements ga beyond what, the City is comfortabhe en- <br />forcing, the best solution is to amend the Code. Otherwise, <br />it can be argued that the equal protection clause of the Con- <br />stitution is violated if the City picks and chooses violations <br />to pursue and intentionally igrlares others. <br />You also ask whether the City Council must approve alI screen- <br />ing arrangements required under this section of the Code. My <br />interpretation of Subd. 5 is that all screening must be ap- <br />proved by the Council and therefore wherever such screening is <br />required it would be appropriate for the owner to submit for <br />City approval a proposed screening plan. For new uses, this <br />issue could be dealt with when the conditional use permit or <br />• building permit is obtained. For existing uses which are not <br />in compliance, but where the owner is willing to submit a <br />plan, no public hearing is necessary. For existing uses where <br />