Agenda - Planning Commission - 04/04/2013

Home

RELEVANT LINKS: Mohler v. City of St. Louis Park, 643 N.W.2d 623 (Minn. Ct. App. 2002). Nolan v. City of Eden Prairie, 610 N.W.2d 697 (Minn. Ct. App. 2000). Graham v. Itasca County Planning Comm'n, 601 N.W.2d 461 (Minn. Ct. App. 1999). Stotts v. Wright County, 478 N.W.2d 802 (Minn. Ct. App. 1992). Mohler v. City of St. Louis Park, 643 N.W.2d 623 (Minn. Ct. App. 2002). Minn. Stat. § 462.357, subd. 6. Kismet Investors v. County of Benton, 617 N.W.2d 85 (Minn. 2000). Kismet Investors v. County of Benton, 617 N.W.2d 85 (Minn 2000). Minn. Stat. § 462.357, subd. 6(2). Broad discretion is permitted when denying a request for a variance, but there must be legally sufficient reasons for the denial. The board must make findings concerning the reasons for the denial or approval and the facts upon which the decision was based. The findings must adequately address the statutory requirements. Best practice suggests seeking specific legal advice from the city attorney before making decisions on requests for variances. An applicant for a variance is not entitled to a variance merely because similar variances were granted in the past, although in granting variances, the city ought to be cautious about establishing precedent. Error by city staff in approving plans does not entitle a person to a variance. While the result might be harsh, a municipality cannot be estopped from correctly enforcing a zoning ordinance even if the property owner relies to his or her detriment on prior city action. As discussed above, the most common requests for variances relate to physical conditions on the property. For example, setbacks and height restrictions. On occasion a city may receive requests for variances related to uses. For example, a request to use the property for a landscaping business out of a home in a residential district. This is commonly known as a use variance. A use variance may not be granted if the use is prohibited in a zoning district. This may occur when the local zoning ordinance specifically lists prohibited uses (such as industrial uses in a residential zone) or when a zoning ordinance lists permitted uses and states that all uses not specifically listed are considered prohibited. A city may grant a use variance when a use is not prohibited in the zoning district. For example, the zoning ordinance is silent on the issue or when the use is explicitly allowed, but limited by another portion of the city ordinance. For example, when a permitted use cannot meet performance standards elsewhere in the ordinance (such as parking or screening). The requirements of unusual hardship and other statutory requirements still apply to use variances. Finally, state statute creates two use variances that a city may always choose (but is not required) to permit through a variance. State statute specifically empowers cities to grant use variances for solar energy systems where a variance is needed to overcome inadequate access to direct sunlight and for the temporary use of a single family residence as a two- family residence. League of Minnesota Cities Information Memo: 9/10/2012 Zoning Guide for Cities Page 34