Agenda - Planning Commission - 04/20/2015 - Joint with EPB

Home

RELEVANT LINKS: Johnson v Cook County, 786 N.W.2d 291 (Minn. 2010). Minn. Stat. § 15.99, subd. 2(c). Hans Hagen Homes, Inc. v. City of Minnetrista,728 N.W. 2d 536 (Minn. 2007). Minn. Stat. § 15.99, subd. 2(b). Minn. Stat. § 15.99, subd. 3(f). American Tower, L.P. v. City of Grant, 636 N.W.2d 309(Minn. 2001). Northern States Power Co. v. City of Mendota Heights, 646 N.W.2d 919 (Minn. Ct. App. 2002). Minn. Stat. § 15.99, subd. 3(g). Minn. Stat. § 15.99, subd. 3(g). When a multimember governing body such as a city council denies a request, it must state the reasons for denial on the record and provide the applicant with a written statement of the reasons for denial. The written statement of the reasons for denial must be consistent with reasons stated in the record at the time of denial. The written statement of reasons for denial must be provided to the applicant upon adoption. State statute provides that the failure of a motion to approve an application constitutes a denial, provided that those voting against the motion state on the record the reasons why they oppose the request. This situation usually occurs when a motion to approve fails because of a tie vote, or because the motion fails to get the required number of votes to pass. 4. Extensions The law allows a city the opportunity to give itself an additional 60 days (up to a total of 120 days) to consider an application, if the city follows specific statutory requirements. In order to avail itself of an additional 60 days, the city must give the applicant: • Written notification of the extension before the end of the initial 60 -day period; • The reasons for extension; and • The anticipated length of the extension. The courts have been particularly demanding on local governments with regard to this requirement and have required local governments to meet each element of the statute. An oral notice or an oral agreement to extend is insufficient. The reasons stated in the written notification should be specific in order to inform the individual applicant exactly why the process is being delayed. Needing more time to fully consider the application may be an adequate reason. As demonstrated in one Minnesota Supreme Court case, the written notification should not take the form of a blanket statement on the zoning application that the city will need the extension. An applicant may also request an extension of the time limit by written notice. If a city receives an applicant request for an extension, this should be thoroughly documented. Once the city has granted itself one 60 day extension, additional extensions must be negotiated with the applicant. A city can only go beyond 120 days if it gets the approval of the applicant. The city must initiate the request for additional time in writing and have the applicant agree to an extension in writing. The applicant may also ask for an additional extension by written request. League of Minnesota Cities Information Memo: 1/20/2015 Zoning Guide for Cities Page 22