Agenda - Council - 11/07/2011 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

MEMORANDUM TO: City of Ramsey Planning Commission FROM: William K. Goodrich, City Attorney RE: Conditional Use Permit for 16101 Ramsey Boulevard NW DATE: October 20, 2011 FACTS By its Resolution # 00-11-309 on November 28, 2000 the City issued a conditional use permit (the "CUP") granting the right to maintain a second dwelling on the residentially zoned property located at 16101 Ramsey Boulevard (the "Subject Property"). The CUP required that the occupants of the second dwelling can be only "relatives" of the permittee. In addition, the CUP provided that the permittee may not lease the premises in exchange for consideration. At the time of the issuance of the CUP accessory dwellings were not permitted in residential districts, thus the CUP. Currently, accessory dwellings are still not permitted in the City's residential zones. Subsequent to the issuance of the CUP title to the Subject Property has transferred to another party. The new Subject Property owner (the "Applicant") has properly applied to the City to lease for payment the accessory dwelling which is the subject of the CUP to a non -relative. The CUP did not expire with the Subject Property's title transfer and may continue in effect as to the property so long as its conditions are complied with. ISSUE The issue now is can the City enforce the "relative only" and "no lease for consideration" provisions both of which are requirements of the CUP. OPINION There is conflicting authority on the requirement that residents of single family properties be related by blood or marriage or be "relatives" as used in the CUP. The U.S. Supreme Court in 1974 case of Belle Terre v. Boraas, 416 U.S.1 (1974) found no evidence of infringement of constitutional rights by allowing an ordinance which prohibited six unrelated college students from renting a house in a single family neighborhood. The Supreme Court in that case found that the legitimate objectives of ordinances to protect family residential zoning are to maintain: A quiet place where yards are wide, people few, and motor vehicles restricted are legitimate guidelines in a land use project addressed to family needs. This goal is a permissible one within Berman v. Parker ... The police power is not confined to elimination of filth, stench, and unhealthy places. It is ample to lay out zones where family values, youth values, and the blessings of quiet seclusion, and clean air make the area a sanctuary for people.