Blaine council denies CUP amendment for Minnesota Performance after parking and code-enforcement dispute

The Blaine City Council voted to deny a proposed conditional use permit amendment for Minnesota Performance, the auto-repair business at 1550 91st Avenue NE, after debate about outdoor vehicle storage and repeated code violations.

Council member Newland had urged the council to choose the most forceful option — denying the amendment and initiating revocation of the business’s 2019 CUP — saying the applicant had a “pattern of abuse” and long-standing violations that disrupted neighboring businesses. Newland moved for revocation, and Council member Ford seconded the motion, but the motion to begin revocation failed on a voice vote.

Mayor Pro Tem Robertson then moved to deny the amendment (option 2), which would prevent the expanded use in Suite 306 until the applicant came into compliance or reapplied properly. Director Selman told the council staff had found an unpermitted removal of a wall between suites, missing certificates of occupancy for the expanded space, interior building and fire-code issues, and vehicles stored outside contrary to the CUP’s conditions. “Outdoor storage is not permitted on this site,” Selman said, and staff noted that code enforcement would continue to monitor the property.

The business owner, who identified himself as Hussain and gave the site address, said Minnesota Performance is not a body shop, that most cars are kept inside overnight and that earlier noncompliance reflected a “misunderstanding” rather than willful refusal to follow rules. “We do admit we need to do something about the parking,” he told the council.

Council members pressed staff on how vehicle ownership was determined; Selman said some cars bore the company logo and code enforcement investigators checked registrations and other indicators. Several council members expressed a desire to resolve the issue quickly while giving the business the opportunity to apply correctly for any outdoor-storage allowance.

On the motion that failed, Newland said revocation would expedite a final resolution. After the revocation motion failed, the council adopted the denial of the CUP amendment and directed staff to continue enforcement actions and to set an application deadline; Selman recommended a timeframe after which citations would proceed if the owner did not act. The denial leaves the original 2019 CUP in effect for Suite 307 while preventing the expanded occupancy of Suite 306 without an approved amendment.

The council’s action is procedural: denial of the amendment with continued code-enforcement follow-up rather than immediate revocation. Next steps for the owner are to work with staff on a parking plan or formally reapply for a CUP amendment; if the owner fails to meet any deadline set by code enforcement, citations — and potential court proceedings — could follow.