Laserfiche WebLink
<br />. <br /> <br />O'Neill v. City of Bloomington, Hennepin County District Court <br />File No. MC02-17684, August 12,2003. <br />8. The statute provides that failure to deny a request within 60 days is <br />approval ofthe request. Prior to 2003, failure of a motion to <br />approve an application had been found by the courts not to be a <br />denial. Therefore, if another motion was not made and adopted to <br /> <br /> <br />deny the application, the 'application was deemed approved by the <br /> <br /> <br />statute. Manco of Fairmont, Inc. v. Town Bd. of Rock Dell Tp., <br /> <br /> <br />583 N.W.2d 293 (Minn. App., 1998); Demolition Landfill <br /> <br /> <br />Services, LLC v. City of Duluth, 609 N.W.2d 278 (Minn. App., <br /> <br /> <br />2000). The 2003 Legislature changed this result by adding 915.99, <br /> <br /> <br />Subd. 2(b), which provides that failure of a motion to approve a <br /> <br /> <br />request constitutes a denial, provided that those voting against state <br /> <br />their reasons. <br /> <br /> <br />9. The 60 day rule supercedes all other time limits in local zoning <br /> <br /> <br />ordinances and in the Land Planning Acts. Therefore, local <br /> <br /> <br />ordinances and procedures should be revised as necessary to insure <br /> <br /> <br />that the 60 day rule is complied with. For example: <br /> <br /> <br />. Periods for staff review, notice and hearing as well as for any <br /> <br />internal city appeals, should be shortened so that final review <br /> <br />can occur within the 60 days mandated by statute. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />. <br />