Agenda - Planning Commission - 04/07/2011

Home

Super America Group, Inc. v City of Little Canada, 539 NW 2d 264 (Minn. Ct. App. 1995); Swanson v City of Bloomington, 421 NW 2d 307 (Minn. 1988); Larson v Washington County, 387 N.W.2d 902 (Minn. Ct. App 1986) See also LMCIT risk management memo, The Necessity of Adequate Findings /Reasons to Support Municipal Land Use Decisions and LMC information memo, Findings of Fact: Elected Officials as Policymakers. Zylka v. City of Crystal, 167 N.W.2d 45,(Minn. 1969) See Sections Vac Conditional use permits and V3d Requests for variances from the zoning ordinance, for more information on the standards of review for conditional use permits and variances. Minnetonka Congregation of Jehovah's Witnesses, Inc. v. Svee, 226 N.W.2d 306 (Minn. 1975) For more information on public opposition see LMCIT risk management memos, Land Use: The Neighbor Factor; Frolicking Between the Landmines. Findings of fact are also essential to the zoning process, because they enable a reviewing court to sustain a city's zoning decisions. When a land use decision is challenged in court, the standard of review used by the court is very limited. The city's decision will be upheld if the findings offact demonstrate a rational and legally sufficient basis for the decision that is not arbitrary or capricious. Findings of fact should state all of the relevant facts the city considered in making its decision on the zoning application. A fact is relevant if it proves or disproves that the application meets the legal standards of the city ordinance and state law for granting the zoning request. For example, applications for conditional use permits and variances are all subject to particular standards that are or should have been spelled out in city ordinances, or have been defined by state law or court decision. In evaluating any particular zoning request, the reviewing body should apply the relevant facts to the particular standards that govern the specific type of decisions being made. The basis for reviewing specific types of zoning applications is discussed more extensively later in this memo. a. Neighborhood opposition Certain zoning applications may generate vocal public opposition. Frequently, cities struggle with handling vocal neighborhood opposition in their findings of fact. However, general statements of public opposition should not be a finding of fact listed as a basis for denying a zoning application. Nor should the official record intimate that public opposition is the underlying basis for the city's findings of fact. If a zoning application meets the requirements of the ordinance, it must be granted, despite the disapproval of the neighbors. ZONING GUIDE FOR CITIES 33