Laserfiche WebLink
3 <br />CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION <br />Topic Report: MN Supreme Court Ruling <br />in Regards to Board of Adjustment and <br />Issuance of Variances <br />By: Tim Gladhill, Associate Planner <br />Background: <br />The Minnesota Supreme Court recently issued a decision in regards to the process cities must <br />take in reviewing Variance requests. Per City Code, all requests for Variances are reviewed and <br />decided by the Board of Adjustment, subject to appeal to the City Council. The Board of <br />Adjustment is a quasi judicial board that must factor in the following when reviewing requests for <br />Variances (from MN Stat. §462.357 Subd. 6.(2): <br />• Can the Subject Properly be put to a particular reasonable use without a Variance? <br />• Is the plight due to circumstances unique to the Subject Property not created by the <br />Property Owner? <br />• Will the Variance, if granted, alter the locality's essential character? <br />• Economic circumstances alone cannot create undue hardship. <br />The recent Supreme Court decision examined the statutory definition of "undue hardship" and <br />concluded that the city authority to issue a variance is limited to those very rare cases where the <br />property cannot be put to a "reasonable use" without the variance. A copy of a response from the <br />League of Minnesota Cities is attached for your review. Previously, prior case law upheld that <br />cities had to prove that the request was simply reasonable. The standard that the parcel cannot be <br />put to use without the variance is now the new standard. This decision restricts the ability to <br />grant variances except in the most extreme circumstances. <br />City staff recommends amending City Code in conjunction with a required update of Chapter 117 <br />following the approval of the 2030 Comprehensive Plan. The City could explore options of <br />minor deviations to setbacks as a conditional use or the use of form-based zoning code. City <br />Code currently does allow for the expansion of non-conforming uses is the R-2 and R-3 <br />Residential Districts. <br />Action Statement: <br />Based on discussion; direction mend City Code and explore opportunities for additional <br />flexibility in bulk standar desi <br />Reviewed by: <br />City Adminis for <br />Planning Manager <br />CCWS:09/07/20 0 <br />Attachments: <br />a) MN Stat. §462.357 Subd. 6.(2) <br />b) MN Supreme Court Ruling <br />c) League of Minnesota Cities Response <br />