Laserfiche WebLink
<br />. <br /> <br />consider the market value of the entire non-conforming use. Buss <br /> <br />v. Johnson, 624 N.W.2d 781 (Minn. App., 2001). <br />5. Amortization. Prior to 2001, zoning ordinances often established <br />an amortization period for pre-existing, non-conforming uses. <br />These ordinances typically provided that at the expiration of the <br />amortization period the use must cease. Courts typically upheld <br /> <br /> <br />such amortization periods, holding that the adoption of an <br /> <br /> <br />ordinance establishing an amortization period is a legislative act to <br /> <br /> <br />which the courts should afford great deference, even when the <br /> <br />amortization period was as short as two years. See A VR Inc. v. <br />City ofSt. Louis Park, 585 N.W.2d 411 (Minn. App., 1998). <br />However, the 2001 Legislature also addressed the issue of <br />amortization, enacting Minn. Stat. S462.357, Subd. l(c), which <br />provides as follows: <br />Except as otherwise provided in this subdivision, a <br />municipality must not enact, amend or enforce an <br />ordinance providing for the elimination or <br /> <br />termination of a use by amortization which use was <br /> <br />lawful at the time of its inception. This subdivision <br />does not apply to adults-only bookstores, adults- <br /> <br />only theaters, or similar adults-only businesses, as <br /> <br />defined by ordinance. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />. <br />