The Blaine City Council unanimously denied Minnesota Performance’s request to expand its auto repair business at 1550 91st Ave. NE after city staff cited unresolved code violations and neighboring businesses raised complaints about noise, parking and outdoor vehicle storage.
Before denying the request, the council split 3-3 on whether to revoke the business’s existing 2019 conditional use permit altogether. Council Members Tom Newland, Leslie Larson and Richard Massoglia voted to revoke it, while Mayor Pro Tempore Jess Robertson and Council Members Chris Ford and Terra Fleming opposed doing so.
The denied request would have amended the business’s CUP to allow expansion into an adjacent suite. Community Development Director Sheila Sellman said the council had tabled the item Jan. 5 because of code enforcement issues and that, since then, staff had worked with both the business and the property owner to address them.
Sellman said unresolved interior building and fire code issues remained despite staff outreach.
She said the business received a violation notice in October 2025 after moving into the neighboring space. Building inspections found a wall had been removed between the two suites without a permit, and the business had not obtained a certificate of occupancy for the additional space, she said.
The council originally approved a conditional use permit for Minnesota Performance in 2019 for Suite 307. The property is zoned light industrial and is surrounded by other light industrial properties, Sellman said.
The proposed floor plan included 3,509 square feet of work area for auto repair, detailing, painting, tuning and upholstery services. Sellman said the site had adequate parking for the proposed use, but no outdoor storage was allowed under the permit.
Sellman said the city received six public comments opposing the request, citing noise, parking and outdoor storage of business-related materials. The Planning Commission recommended approval Dec. 9.
Newland said conversations with adjoining businesses, along with what he described as a pattern of repeated disregard for city code, led him to support revoking the business’s permit.
“We have had many businesses that have dragged out abuses and ignored community standards,” Newland said. “I don’t wish to have that continue. I wish to draw this to a conclusion rapidly.”
In response to questions from council members, Sellman said adjoining tenants had complained about noise, hours of operation and outdoor storage. She said vehicles were being stored in parking stalls and in a shared rear area.
She also said the business expanded into the additional suite without amending its conditional use permit or obtaining building permits. Some vehicles parked at the site carried the Minnesota Performance name, she said, and some were inoperable. Sellman said no outdoor vehicle storage was allowed.
Larson asked whether the business could reapply if the city revoked the 2019 permit. Sellman said it could. She added that staff had suggested the business withdraw the current application and reapply after it contacted the city about additional parking.
Fleming said revoking the 2019 permit felt harsh because it would effectively shut down the business, then asked to hear from the applicant.
Husain Alnatiei, speaking for Minnesota Performance, said the business operates in an industrial-zoned area and expected available parking to be used for the business. He said the shop has seven employees and that no parking had been specifically assigned by the association to employees rather than the business.
“We do admit that we need to do something about the parking, and that’s why I submitted an email last week saying we have to assign the parking that will help the business, and help the community,” Alnatiei said.
Alnatiei said it was difficult to store cars outside at night and that most vehicles would be kept inside. During business hours, he said, the shop needed parking spaces for customers. He also said removing the wall between the two suites had been a misunderstanding and that the business did not believe it was in violation.
Ford said he supported denying only the amendment request. Fleming asked whether the business could still reapply under that scenario, and Sellman said it could and would not have to vacate the space.
“I would suggest that we try to put some type of a timeframe on when they apply, and that if they don’t apply citations would immediately proceed if they don’t meet that deadline,” Sellman said.
The council then voted unanimously to deny the amendment request.