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

Home

RELEVANT LINKS: Amoco Oil Co. v. City of Minneapolis, 395 N.W.2d 115 (Minn. Ct. App.,1986). Zylka v. City of Crystal, 167 N.W.2d 45 (Minn. 1969). Minn. Stat. § 462.3595. Zylka v. City of Crystal, 167 N.W.2d 45, (Minn. 1969). Minn. Stat. § 462.3595. Minn. Stat. § 462.3595, subd. 2. Schwardt v. County of Watonwan, 656 N.W.2d 383 (Minn. 2003). Yang v. County of Carver, 660 N.W.2d 828 (Minn. Ct. App. 2003). Citizens for a Balanced City v. Plymouth Congregational Church, 672 N.W.2d 13 (Minn. Ct. App. 2003). Trisko v. City of Waite Park, 566 N.W.2d 349 (Minn. Ct. App. 1997). Hubbard Broadcasting, Inc. v. City of Afton, 323 N.W.2d 757 (Minn. 1982). See Section I -C Role of comprehensive planning in zoning ordinance adoption. SuperAmerica Group, Inc. v. City of Little Canada, 539 N.W.2d 264 (Minn. Ct. App. 1995). In re Livingood, 594 N.W.2d 889 (Minn. 1999). c. Conditional use permits The concept of a conditional use permit (CUP) was created to give cities more flexibility in zoning ordinance administration. Generally, conditional uses are uses that are often too problematic to be permitted uses as of right in a district. However, since the use is still generally favorable or necessary, outright prohibition of the use is generally not practical or desired. A classic example of such a mixed positive/negative use is a gas station in a residential area. Conditional uses seek to strike a middle ground between outright, unchecked permissive establishment and complete prohibition. Conditional uses are uses that will be allowed if certain conditions (that minimize the problematic features of the use) are met. Cities must specify conditional uses in a city ordinance. Generally, a list of conditional uses will be found alongside the permitted uses in a city ordinance. The ordinance must also establish what conditions or standards must be met to allow the conditional use. Ordinances that fail to establish standards for granting the listed conditional uses are problematic and potentially invalid. The city must grant the CUP if the applicant satisfies all the conditions established in the ordinance. A city may deny a CUP if the proposed use: • Does not meet the specific standards or conditions established in the zoning ordinance; • Is not consistent with the city's officially adopted comprehensive plan; • Endangers or is not compatible with the health, safety and welfare of the public. When a local government denies a landowner a CUP without sufficient evidence to support its decision, a court can order the issuance of the permit subject to reasonable conditions. League of Minnesota Cities Information Memo: 1/20/2015 Zoning Guide for Cities Page 30