Laserfiche WebLink
<br />land Use and Zoning - legal Review <br />Planning Commission Meeting <br />May 13, 2003 <br />Page 17 <br /> <br />validate the potential contract or conditional zoning. See City of <br />Mahtomedi v. Spychalla, 243 N.W.2d 31 (M:inn., 1976); Housing and <br />Redevelopment Authority for Lincoln County v. Jorgenson, 328 <br />N.W.2d 740 (M:inn., 1983). The Minnesota courts have not reversed <br />or invalidated a local government zoning action by finding it an illegal <br />contract or conditional zoning. Furthermore, the Attorney General <br />has issued an opinion concluding that the amendment of a zoning <br />ordinance conditioned upon the successful annexation of land lying <br />outside the corporate limits of the city is valid. (Op., A.G. 59-a-32, <br />October 8, 1970). <br />2.Planned Unit Developments. Although Minnesota law does not <br />expressly authorize Planned Unit Development ("PUD") <br />Agreements, Minn. Stat. ~462.3593 does authorize the approval of <br />PUDs as conditional uses, and Minn. Stat. ~ 462.358, subd. 2(a) and <br />3(c) authorize municipalities to enter into development agreements, <br />including agreements which provide for "planned and staged <br />development". The courts have also acknowledged the validity of <br />PUDs as conditional uses or overlay zones, and there is little doubt <br />PUDs are a valid planning tool in Minnesota. <br /> <br />GP:930289 v1 <br />