Agenda - Planning Commission - 11/04/2004

Home

League of Minnesota Cities Insurance Trust !45 University Avenue WesL St. Paul. MN 55103-2044 (651) 281-!200 , (800) 925-1122 Fax: (652.) 281-1298 , fDD: (651) 281-1290 www.lmnc, org LMClT RISK MANAGEMENT MEMO FROLICKING BETWEEN LANDMINES IN THE DEVELOPMENT PROCESS Current Problems in Municipal Development and Redevelopment The development process is olken mined with problems that can get the most experienced of city, councils in legal hot water. This memo explores the most common issues your ci~ council can encounter in the development process--how to deal with neighborhood opposition, who should pick up the tab for development costs, and how to recognize the warning signs of possible litigation. Problem #1: Neighborhood Opposition There are tnany misperceptions in the'world. One of them is that city,' council members should always vote the way the citizens want them To vote. But city, council (and planning commission) members also carry out certain quasi-judicial t\mctions. City, zoning laws establish criteria a landowner must satis[:2', in order to get permission To do something he or she wants. When the question before the council ts whether a landowner has satisfied those criteria, then councilors must make decisions like judges do. They must conduct hearings, take in evidence, and determine what outcome tt~e zoning laws prescribe in the circumstances found to exist. These quasi-judicial decisions can of course be challenged in court. To keep them from being overturned, the city, needs to show that it followed the correct process and based [ts decision on the taw and the evidence. These requirements for quasi-judicial decisions sound simple. But keeping both eyes focused on the law and the facts can be anything but easy. People, as you might guess, are the complicating factor. What the zoning laws allow--and what the neighbors' think should be allowed--are sometimes polar opposites. A proposal for a group home, hall:way house, or new fast food store may stir emotions only slightly less pitched than those that touched off the Revolutionau War. By virtue of your otkqce, you will hear the voices of protest and cries of discontentment. But the dut-y of your office is ~o uphold the law and apply it fairly to the facts and evidence. Yourjob is to stay the quaM-judicial course even in the face of strong opposition. Consider the following strategies for attaining success and remaining sane: Listen ~br relevant evidence no matter who is testifying. Opponents may ve~,'y well have valid points to offer. While expressions of dismay about "those kind of people" in a neighborhood group home may be off the mark, specific concerns about traffic problems around a proposed shopping center migt~t merk further inquiry and consideration. 60