Preview
30-CV-17-351
Filed in District Court
State of Minnesota
2/4/2021 6:36 PM
STATE OF MINNESOTA DISTRICT COURT
COUNTY OF ISANTI TENTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT
CASE TYPE: 14, Other Civil
City of Cambridge,
Court File No.: 30- CV- 17- 351
Plaintiff,
DECLARATION OF
vs. MARCIA WESTOVER
Roger Cottrell, Jennifer Cottrell,
Defendants.
STATE OF MINNESOTA
SS.
COUNTY OF ISANTI
I, Marcia Westover, state and allege as follows:
1. I am Marcia Westover. I am currently employed by the City of Cambridge
the " City") as City Planner. I make this Affidavit based upon personal knowledge.
2. I have been employed in the City of Cambridge Community Development
Department since July 2005.
3. As part of my job duties, I administer the City' s Planning and Zoning codes
which and and Comprehensive Plan. I review
enforce the City' s zoning regulations
commercial and residential site plans for compliance with City standards such as parking,
and drainage, landscaping signage, and lighting. I draft
grading building setbacks,
of I
revisions to the City Code and oversee enforcement the City' s zoning ordinances.
1
30-CV-17-351
Filed in District Court
State of Minnesota
2/4/2021 6:36 PM
work with property owners to ensure properties remain in compliance. I field questions
from staff and the public about the City Code. I draft development agreements and
improvement bond calculations for developments. I meet with
prepare site performance-
development subdivision requests,
developers and staff after analyzing plans, plats,
Permits, and to assure compliance. I am the
Condition and Interim Use zoning requests
for Commission. I staff reports, agendas, and all
staff liaison the Planning prepare
information for these meetings.
familiar with at 509 Main Street North ( the " Property") in
4. I am the property
and oriented business that is maintained at the Property. I am familiar
the City the auto-
with the ongoing building use issues at the location and have presented to the City
Council regarding the Property' s noncompliance with the City Code.
5. The Property is located in a district zoned as " B- 2, Highway Business
District" under the City Zoning Ordinance.
6. I have reviewed this Court' s July 13, 2020 Order finding Defendants in
contempt of this Court' s October 24, 2018 Order, which found them in contempt of this
Court' s April 10, 2018 Order. Those Orders enjoined Defendants from operating an
auto- oriented business on the Property until all off-street parking is compliant with the
requirements of the City Code. The Orders also put Defendants on notice that further
violations may result in additional fines.
7. From April 2018 to the present, the City has continued to expend resources
to enforce the Court' s Orders that enjoin business at 509 Main until Defendants are
compliant with the City' s off-street parking requirements and the City Code.
2
30-CV-17-351
Filed in District Court
State of Minnesota
2/4/2021 6:36 PM
8. Defendants have not attempted to submit a conforming parking plan in
almost two years, since February 20, 2019. That submission was in violation of the City
Code because it did not provide the minimum dimensions required for maneuvering and
storing vehicles required by Sections 156. 090, 156. 060, and Appendix A of the City
Code. That plan also showed parking spaces being accessed from a public street.
9. My review of the Property layout indicates that six display vehicles may fit
on the Property in reasonable compliance with the Code, in addition to the required one
employee and two customer spaces.
10. Previously, Mr. Cottrell agreed that he would reduce the number of display
vehicles on his Property to six. A true and correct copy of that e- mail exchange, from
December 2018 and previously submitted, is reattached as Exhibit 1.
11. On August 27, 2019, Mr. Cottrell agreed, again, via e- mail, to reasonably
comply with the Code by keeping no more than six ( 6) display vehicles, two (2) customer
parking spaces, and one ( 1) employee parking space, for a maximum of nine ( 9) vehicles
parked on the Property at any given time. A true and correct copy of this e- mail,
previously submitted, is reattached as Exhibit 2.
12. Upon information and belief, on July 16, 2020, there were 21 vehicles
parked on the Property. A true and correct copy of images taken at the Property on July
16, 2020, are attached hereto as Exhibit 3.
13. Upon information and belief, on July 21, 2020, there were 23 vehicles
parked on the Property. A true and correct copy of images taken at the Property on July
21, 2020, are attached hereto as Exhibit 4.
3
30-CV-17-351
Filed in District Court
State of Minnesota
2/4/2021 6:36 PM
14. Upon information and belief, on July 28, 2020, there were over 30 vehicles
parked on the Property. A true and correct copy of images taken at the Property on July
28, 2020, are attached hereto as Exhibit 5.
15. On August 3, 2020, the City delivered a letter to Mr. Cottrell, stating that he
continues to have many more cars than can reasonably fit on the Property in compliance
with the City Code. The letter also reminded him that the Court' s Orders enjoined him
from doing business under those conditions. The letter indicating that continued non-
compliance would result in barricades being placed on the Property again on August 31,
2020. A true and correct copy of this letter is attached hereto as Exhibit 6.
16. Upon information and belief, on August 6, 2020, there were over 30
vehicles parked on the Property. A true and correct copy of images taken at the Property
on August 6, 2020, are attached hereto as Exhibit 7.
17. Upon information and belief, on August 11, 2020, there were 32 vehicles
parked on the Property. A true and correct copy of images taken at the Property on
August 11, 2020, are attached hereto as Exhibit 8.
18. Upon information and belief, on August 19, 2020, there were 18 vehicles
parked on the Property. A true and correct copy of images taken at the Property on
August 19, 2020, are attached hereto as Exhibit 9.
19. Upon information and belief, on August 26, 2020, there were 30 vehicles
parked on the Property. A true and correct copy of images taken at the Property on
August 26, 2020, are attached hereto as Exhibit 10.
4
30-CV-17-351
Filed in District Court
State of Minnesota
2/4/2021 6:36 PM
20. On or about September, 2, 2020, the City placed jersey barriers on the
Property due to the consistent non- compliance with the City Code and the Court' s
Orders.
On September 14, 2020, Attorney sent Mr. Cottrell
21. the City' s
correspondence in an attempt to coordinate timely and orderly removal of the excess cars
and the barricades. A true and correct copy of this correspondence is attached hereto as
Exhibit 11.
22. Upon information and belief, Mr. Cottrell has been routinely parking and
storing display vehicles in City right of way for longer than the six continuous hours
allowed under City Code Section 71. 01, while continuing to do business in violation of
the Court Orders. A true and correct example of this activity, in a photo taken on or
about October 6, 2020, is attached hereto as Exhibit 12.
23. On September 22, 2020, the City Attorney sent Mr. Cottrell another
correspondence, reminding him of the limits on parking in the right of way, and of the
City Code provisions regarding towing of illegally parked cars. A true and correct copy
of this correspondence is attached hereto as Exhibit 13.
24. In late December 2020, the City sent Mr. Cottrell correspondence
informing him to cease and desist from parking vehicles or making any vehicle repairs in
the City right of way, City streets, or any adjoining parcel in which he does not have
permission. This activity violates the City' s storm water standards. The City also
warned Mr. Cottrell that he was to cease removing the barricades that have been placed to
enforce the Court Orders.
5
30-CV-17-351
Filed in District Court
State of Minnesota
2/4/2021 6:36 PM
25. Throughout December 2020 and January 2021, Mr. Cottrell has continued
of Code and the Court Orders. True
operating an auto- oriented business in violation City
and correct copies of images showing the ongoing violations, taken on January 11, 2020,
are attached hereto as Exhibit 14.
26. Public images on social media also advertise that an auto oriented business
of Code and Court Orders. True and
is operating at the Property in violation the City
attached hereto Exhibit 15, 16, 17, and 18. These
correct copies of these images are as
images show that an auto- oriented business was operating at the Property on January 25,
26, 27, and February 3, 2021.
27. Upon information and belief, Defendants have operated an auto oriented
business at the Property throughout August, September, October, November, December
2020, and January 2021, in violation of the City Code, the Court' s previous Orders in this
case, and the City' s efforts to enforce the same. There are consistently at least 20 display
vehicles parked on the Property, where only 6 can reasonably fitunder the Code.
and belief, cars are consistently parked in non-
28. Upon information
conforming proximity on the Property, and are thus continually shuffled into right-of-
on the lawn, or onto adjacent property lines. Defendants continue to maintain too
way,
much inventory on the Property, requiring the use of lawn and public right of way to
maneuver. Defendants continue to store more vehicles on the Property than allowable
under Section 156 of the City Code.
29. I declare under penalty of perjury that everything I have stated in this
document istrue and correct.
6
30-CV-17-351
Filed in District Court
State of Minnesota
2/4/2021 6:36 PM
Date:
Date: . J31)
413/;02/ L ; / By: WWU CV
MarciWestover
Westover
Cl/
Mail-
3mm V
Isanti County, Minnesota
Minnesota
7
Preview
30-CV-17-351 Filed in District Court State of Minnesota 2/4/2021 6:36 PM STATE OF MINNESOTA DISTRICT COURT COUNTY OF ISANTI TENTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT CASE TYPE: 14, Other Civil City of Cambridge, Court File No.: 30- CV- 17- 351 Plaintiff, DECLARATION OF vs. MARCIA WESTOVER Roger Cottrell, Jennifer Cottrell, Defendants. STATE OF MINNESOTA SS. COUNTY OF ISANTI I, Marcia Westover, state and allege as follows: 1. I am Marcia Westover. I am currently employed by the City of Cambridge the " City") as City Planner. I make this Affidavit based upon personal knowledge. 2. I have been employed in the City of Cambridge Community Development Department since July 2005. 3. As part of my job duties, I administer the City' s Planning and Zoning codes which and and Comprehensive Plan. I review enforce the City' s zoning regulations commercial and residential site plans for compliance with City standards such as parking, and drainage, landscaping signage, and lighting. I draft grading building setbacks, of I revisions to the City Code and oversee enforcement the City' s zoning ordinances. 1 30-CV-17-351 Filed in District Court State of Minnesota 2/4/2021 6:36 PM work with property owners to ensure properties remain in compliance. I field questions from staff and the public about the City Code. I draft development agreements and improvement bond calculations for developments. I meet with prepare site performance- development subdivision requests, developers and staff after analyzing plans, plats, Permits, and to assure compliance. I am the Condition and Interim Use zoning requests for Commission. I staff reports, agendas, and all staff liaison the Planning prepare information for these meetings. familiar with at 509 Main Street North ( the " Property") in 4. I am the property and oriented business that is maintained at the Property. I am familiar the City the auto- with the ongoing building use issues at the location and have presented to the City Council regarding the Property' s noncompliance with the City Code. 5. The Property is located in a district zoned as " B- 2, Highway Business District" under the City Zoning Ordinance. 6. I have reviewed this Court' s July 13, 2020 Order finding Defendants in contempt of this Court' s October 24, 2018 Order, which found them in contempt of this Court' s April 10, 2018 Order. Those Orders enjoined Defendants from operating an auto- oriented business on the Property until all off-street parking is compliant with the requirements of the City Code. The Orders also put Defendants on notice that further violations may result in additional fines. 7. From April 2018 to the present, the City has continued to expend resources to enforce the Court' s Orders that enjoin business at 509 Main until Defendants are compliant with the City' s off-street parking requirements and the City Code. 2 30-CV-17-351 Filed in District Court State of Minnesota 2/4/2021 6:36 PM 8. Defendants have not attempted to submit a conforming parking plan in almost two years, since February 20, 2019. That submission was in violation of the City Code because it did not provide the minimum dimensions required for maneuvering and storing vehicles required by Sections 156. 090, 156. 060, and Appendix A of the City Code. That plan also showed parking spaces being accessed from a public street. 9. My review of the Property layout indicates that six display vehicles may fit on the Property in reasonable compliance with the Code, in addition to the required one employee and two customer spaces. 10. Previously, Mr. Cottrell agreed that he would reduce the number of display vehicles on his Property to six. A true and correct copy of that e- mail exchange, from December 2018 and previously submitted, is reattached as Exhibit 1. 11. On August 27, 2019, Mr. Cottrell agreed, again, via e- mail, to reasonably comply with the Code by keeping no more than six ( 6) display vehicles, two (2) customer parking spaces, and one ( 1) employee parking space, for a maximum of nine ( 9) vehicles parked on the Property at any given time. A true and correct copy of this e- mail, previously submitted, is reattached as Exhibit 2. 12. Upon information and belief, on July 16, 2020, there were 21 vehicles parked on the Property. A true and correct copy of images taken at the Property on July 16, 2020, are attached hereto as Exhibit 3. 13. Upon information and belief, on July 21, 2020, there were 23 vehicles parked on the Property. A true and correct copy of images taken at the Property on July 21, 2020, are attached hereto as Exhibit 4. 3 30-CV-17-351 Filed in District Court State of Minnesota 2/4/2021 6:36 PM 14. Upon information and belief, on July 28, 2020, there were over 30 vehicles parked on the Property. A true and correct copy of images taken at the Property on July 28, 2020, are attached hereto as Exhibit 5. 15. On August 3, 2020, the City delivered a letter to Mr. Cottrell, stating that he continues to have many more cars than can reasonably fit on the Property in compliance with the City Code. The letter also reminded him that the Court' s Orders enjoined him from doing business under those conditions. The letter indicating that continued non- compliance would result in barricades being placed on the Property again on August 31, 2020. A true and correct copy of this letter is attached hereto as Exhibit 6. 16. Upon information and belief, on August 6, 2020, there were over 30 vehicles parked on the Property. A true and correct copy of images taken at the Property on August 6, 2020, are attached hereto as Exhibit 7. 17. Upon information and belief, on August 11, 2020, there were 32 vehicles parked on the Property. A true and correct copy of images taken at the Property on August 11, 2020, are attached hereto as Exhibit 8. 18. Upon information and belief, on August 19, 2020, there were 18 vehicles parked on the Property. A true and correct copy of images taken at the Property on August 19, 2020, are attached hereto as Exhibit 9. 19. Upon information and belief, on August 26, 2020, there were 30 vehicles parked on the Property. A true and correct copy of images taken at the Property on August 26, 2020, are attached hereto as Exhibit 10. 4 30-CV-17-351 Filed in District Court State of Minnesota 2/4/2021 6:36 PM 20. On or about September, 2, 2020, the City placed jersey barriers on the Property due to the consistent non- compliance with the City Code and the Court' s Orders. On September 14, 2020, Attorney sent Mr. Cottrell 21. the City' s correspondence in an attempt to coordinate timely and orderly removal of the excess cars and the barricades. A true and correct copy of this correspondence is attached hereto as Exhibit 11. 22. Upon information and belief, Mr. Cottrell has been routinely parking and storing display vehicles in City right of way for longer than the six continuous hours allowed under City Code Section 71. 01, while continuing to do business in violation of the Court Orders. A true and correct example of this activity, in a photo taken on or about October 6, 2020, is attached hereto as Exhibit 12. 23. On September 22, 2020, the City Attorney sent Mr. Cottrell another correspondence, reminding him of the limits on parking in the right of way, and of the City Code provisions regarding towing of illegally parked cars. A true and correct copy of this correspondence is attached hereto as Exhibit 13. 24. In late December 2020, the City sent Mr. Cottrell correspondence informing him to cease and desist from parking vehicles or making any vehicle repairs in the City right of way, City streets, or any adjoining parcel in which he does not have permission. This activity violates the City' s storm water standards. The City also warned Mr. Cottrell that he was to cease removing the barricades that have been placed to enforce the Court Orders. 5 30-CV-17-351 Filed in District Court State of Minnesota 2/4/2021 6:36 PM 25. Throughout December 2020 and January 2021, Mr. Cottrell has continued of Code and the Court Orders. True operating an auto- oriented business in violation City and correct copies of images showing the ongoing violations, taken on January 11, 2020, are attached hereto as Exhibit 14. 26. Public images on social media also advertise that an auto oriented business of Code and Court Orders. True and is operating at the Property in violation the City attached hereto Exhibit 15, 16, 17, and 18. These correct copies of these images are as images show that an auto- oriented business was operating at the Property on January 25, 26, 27, and February 3, 2021. 27. Upon information and belief, Defendants have operated an auto oriented business at the Property throughout August, September, October, November, December 2020, and January 2021, in violation of the City Code, the Court' s previous Orders in this case, and the City' s efforts to enforce the same. There are consistently at least 20 display vehicles parked on the Property, where only 6 can reasonably fitunder the Code. and belief, cars are consistently parked in non- 28. Upon information conforming proximity on the Property, and are thus continually shuffled into right-of- on the lawn, or onto adjacent property lines. Defendants continue to maintain too way, much inventory on the Property, requiring the use of lawn and public right of way to maneuver. Defendants continue to store more vehicles on the Property than allowable under Section 156 of the City Code. 29. I declare under penalty of perjury that everything I have stated in this document istrue and correct. 6 30-CV-17-351 Filed in District Court State of Minnesota 2/4/2021 6:36 PM Date: Date: . J31) 413/;02/ L ; / By: WWU CV MarciWestover Westover Cl/ Mail- 3mm V Isanti County, Minnesota Minnesota 7