5.1. SR 08-15-2011 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

CONNECTING & INNOVATING SINCE 1913 2011 Variance Legislation The changes, which are now in effect, may require some cities to change ordinances or statutory cross-references. After a long and contentious session working to restore city variance authority, the fmal version of HF 52 supported by the League and allies was passed unanimously by the Legislature. On May 5, Gov. Dayton signed 2012 Minnesota Laws, Chapter 29, amending Minnesota Statutes, section 462.357, subdivision 6 to restore municipal variance authority in response to Krummenacher v. City of Minnetonka, 783 N.W.2d 721 (Minn. June 24, 2010). The law also provides consistent statutory language between Minnesota Statutes, chapter 462 and the county variance authority of Minnesota Statutes, section 394.27, subdivision 7. In Krummenacher, the Minnesota Supreme Court narrowly interpreted the statutory defmition of "undue hardship" and held that the "reasonable use" prong of the "undue hardship" test is not whether the proposed use is reasonable, but rather whether there is a reasonable use in the absence of the variance. The new law changes that factor back to the "reasonable manner" understanding that had been used by some lower courts prior to the Krummenacher ruling. The new law was effective on May 6, the day following the governor's approval. Presumably it applies to pending applications, as the general rule is that cities are to apply the law at the time of the decision, rather than at the time of application. Learn More Read more about variances in: The new law renames the municipal variance standard from "undue hardship" to "practical difficulties," but otherwise retains the familiar three-factor test of (1) reasonableness, (2) uniqueness, and (3) essential character. Also included is a sentence new to city variance authority that was already in the county statutes: "Variances shall only be permitted when they are in harmony with the general purposes and intent of the ordinance and when the terms of the variance are consistent with the comprehensive plan." In addition, the new law clarifies that conditions may be imposed on granting of variances if those conditions are directly related to and bear a rough proportionality to the impact created bythe variance. Consult your attorney for advice oonceming specific situations. LEAGUE OF MINNESOTA CITIES ]45 UAIIVERSITYAVE. WEST PxoNE: (651) 281-1200 FAX: {651) 281-1298 INSURANCE TRUST ST. PAUL. MN SS]03-2044 Toa FREE: (800) 925-1122 wea: www.I.irtc.oi~c Land Use Variances: Frequently Asked Questions