|
BRI~~~ A~~ MC~R~AN
<br />Ells liver City Council
<br />March ~ ~, ~~1ti
<br />pale S
<br />application satisfied all othe~~ relevant c~~iteria"}; ~'a~wi~x~ v, ~`~a~~ ~~ng ~`au~~, ~4~ ~,w,~d
<br />~$~, ~8~ ~~inn, 1~~~} ~"when ~. use perr~rt is ~.pproved, tae decisian~ma~ng body is always
<br />linpl~crtly giving the sa~~e masons --- all_requi~~ernent~ fox the issuance of fife pe~nzt leave been
<br />rnet'") ~einphasis added}, ove~~u~e~ a~~ a~he~ g~au~~s ~y ~o~~~~~w~s~~e~r~ ~'a~~e~~ ~v. ~'rr~ of ~~c~~~
<br />.~ir~s, X81 N.w,~d 8~5 Minn, 197},
<br />City's an.~gaing aver decade~long ~.pprav~ of the buffo outside of tlae SwF overlay
<br />district is, ~~no~yeover, 1 ~~~/fl can~is~~nt wzth its pxaviousiy stated ~u~pase fay the buffe~•
<br />requirement. In his Navembex 1 ~, ~~01 memor~ndun~. to ~ayar and City Council, City's
<br />wilding and Zoning A.d.~.~inistratox explained, ~.~ follows, the "purpose" of the buffer:
<br />The_.purpose of this buffex i~ an a~temt ta.~preserve adjacent prapert v~ and
<br />nat~u~al amenities by taking advantage of natural screeni~~g and buffering. The
<br />city's buffer also le~~res are area free of la,r~.dfill activities so that things life
<br />m.onitor~ng wells can be placed on the l~.ndfill property.
<br />lax, 1 G~ ~.t ~ (emphasis added}. ~CQntrary to Becl~'s suggestion, City staff believes th~.t tl~e
<br />monitoring wells axe supposed to "be placed an the l~.ndfill property." .~~,} As app~led to this
<br />buffer on the south end of the landfill, City's building anal ~;oning Administrator repeated on
<br />October ~~, ~aD~ this sa~~e purpose far e bu.ffe~~;
<br />The current two hundred ~~0~} foot buffer [into which it was then seeping to
<br />expands was put in place to provide adequate screening and distance between
<br />landfill activities and the ~Tiller~ prope~~ty to tlae south to__h~~~_p~:ate~t_ CTiiler's
<br />land v~.l~~ .and limit impacts on future uses of th~pc~y.
<br />lax, ~~ at ~tl~ emphasis added}.
<br />whatever subjective inte~~al "'understCan~df in~~" it may have had aver the last 11 ye~~s,
<br />City's o~b~ectivc external act up to the pxesent are all consistent with ET~.L's ~.~nwavering
<br />,'position" tl~~oughaut ~n~t the ~~at~tl~.and~.t~d ~ao~f~at buffer and other "campoll~'ntS" ~~~~,,
<br />manita~~Yn~ wells} of the landfill can, per the existing City Cade anal State law, be located outside
<br />of the Swlj overlay dist~~ict. And City is otherwise bound by lts prior ~ctians, ~`~~ ~~ ~~ ~~~~~~~
<br />a~' ~a0~ An~cua~ .~zr~o~ta~z~ ~djust~rte~t o, f ~~at~~~~ ~a~ Alr ~Iec. and ~~ ~Itili~i~~, 7~~ ~.w.~d
<br />11 ~,1 ~0 ~ll~inn, ~~~9} ~t'ar~ agency must generally conform to its prier norms and decisions ar,
<br />to the extent that It departs f~~om its prior Harms anal decisions, the agency must set forth a
<br />reasoned analysis for the dep~.r~.ire that is not arbitrary and capricious"~ quoting ~c~I~n~~y v,
<br />~on~, ~6S E,~.d 11~~,1~~2 (11th Cir.19~~}}; Pea~~es .~a~ has ~'a, v, .~~~, ~~~ N.w.~d 34~,
<br />X53 ~1Vlir~n. App. ~~~~}, ~evzew d~~tz~~ ~h~inn. April X4,1984}}.
<br />
|