6.1. SR 07-18-2011 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

f t' consideration of the entire market value of the nonconforming use of which a building is a part, not a consideration of the market value of the destroyed building alone.) When the Building burned down in 1999, Defendant claimed it could not be rebuilt because it had been destroyed beyond 50%. However, Defendant failed to take into account the market value of the entire legal, nonconforming use. At the time of the fire, the Building was worth approximately $200,000 and the entire legal, nonconforming use (Property) was worth approximately $900,000. Had Defendant considered the value of the entire legal, nonconforming use instead of the value of the Building itself, Plaintiffs would never have had to obtain an interim use permit to rebuild the Building because the value of the Building was worth substantially less than 50% of the entire legal, nonconforming use. III. The conditions associated with the renewal of the 2000 IUP imposed by the City that seek to regulate the Campground and are impermissible, arbitrary, and capricious. Of the seventeen (17) Conditions the City has required for the renewal of the 2000 IUP, few, if any, actually pertain to the use and operation of the Building. Although this seems to be an issue of first impression in Minnesota, other jurisdictions have required that any condition imposed on the issuance or renewal of a permit be reasonably related to the purpose of the permit. (See Watanbe v. City of Phoenix, 140 Ariz. 575, 683 P.2d 1177 (App. 1984) (Nonconforming uses are subject to reasonable police power...so long as the application of such regulation does not substantially impair continued use of the property for purpose used at the time the regulation takes effect"). (See also Sternaman v. County of McHenry, 454 F.Supp. 240 (N.D. Ill., 1978) (Where the zoning municipality did not require any special permit for the mining of gravel and sand, but did require a conditional use permit for onsite processing, conditions imposed upon the grant of the permit were required to bear a reasonable relation to 10