03/12/1983 Council Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Search

i 3 B It ' s 7 : 30 and the next item on the agenda will be the public hearing on Special Use Permits Number 27 and 81-05 . Open the public hearing and I want to express before we begin this is strictly a discussion on the Special Use Permit , it has no bearing on any building of buildings or anything along those lines . We are i strictly going to deal with the special use permit at this time . It has been a concern of mine that information of this came down over the 'last year and has , I think is , a way of updating . Presently we do see from the different courts their judgements that the special use per- mit process at that point was valid and that the builder E L Rehbein at that point was allowed to build under the special use permit according to their judgement and to my knowledge the homeowners did not follow through with any additional lawsuits that I know of and this council indicated that they would deal with the special use permit after that decision was handed down . I guess, you know , if you want to start off (Bill) and update us . I had an opportunity to review this following the last decision in an effort to evaluate at this point in time the decisions that were used in the process under the section of the ordinance 6 . 21 (which deals with) all the special use permits . I got an opportunity to review both of the decisions to determine the (scope ) issued by Judge Dablo and the last one issued by Judge Kameyer and based on those decisions the only issue at this point in time as I see it before city council concerns the activities undertaken and the applicability of section 6 . 21 . As I have indicated in my letter I sent out to you revealing the court decisions and the section of activities that were undertaken on behalf of the permitee , it is my feeling that individual that was granted or company that was granted the special use permit has done sufficient activities based on my discussions with city administrator and my review of the records to enable them to proceed under that permit , that they have complied with the ordinance and that they have vested rights to continue with their activities as were approved by the district court at this time . There is not sufficient basis for the city to base their activities to declare the permit void under section 6 . 21 , at this time . B I ' ll take any inputs from the audience at this time . Good evening , my name ' s David Cody . I live at 6773 East Shadow Lake Drive . I 'm a member of the Reshnau area Homeowners Association \ -1-