Laserfiche WebLink
Ells REQUEST FOR ACTION <br />River <br />TO ITEM NUMBER <br />Plannin Commission 5.5 <br />AGENDA SECTION MEETING DATE PREPARED BY <br />Plannin Items ul 12, 2011 erem Barnhart, Plannin Mana er <br />ITEM DESCRIPTION REVIEWED By <br />Request by City of Elk River for Ordinance Amendment to <br />Chapter 30 -Land Development Regulations, Article VI - REVIEWED BY <br />Zoning, Division 2, Administration and Enforcement, <br />Subdivision II -Appeals and Variances, Public Hearing -Case <br />No. V I I -02 <br />ACTION REQUESTED <br />Staff recommends approval of the ordinance amendments as drafted. <br />OVERVIEW <br />In June of 2010, the Minnesota Supreme Court made a decision on a variance case, stating in basic terms <br />that if a property has a reasonable use, a variance should not be granted.. This effectively made variances <br />very difficult to approve, if not impossible. <br />In response, the Minnesota Legislature amended the variance standards, adopting a standard closely <br />resembling the standards in use by Minnesota Counties. <br />The proposed ordinance would delete section 30-635 (b) and replace it with the following text: <br />(b) A variance may be granted by the board only if it finds that all of the criteria are met: <br />(1) when they are in harmony with the general purposes and intent of the ordinance and <br />(2) when the variances are consistent with the comprehensive plan <br />(c) Variances may be granted when the applicant for the variance establishes that there are Practical <br />Difficulties in complying with the zoning ordinance. <br />(d) "Practical Difficulties," as used in connection with the granting of a variance, means that <br />(1) the property owner proposed to use the property in a reasonable manner not permitted <br />by the zoning ordinance; <br />(2) the plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to the property not created by <br />the landowner; and <br />(3) the variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality. <br />Economic considerations alone do not constitute practical difficulties. Practical difficulties include, <br />but are not limited to, inadequate access to direct sunlight for solar energy systems. <br />The board of appeals and adjustments or the governing body as the case may be, may <br />not permit as a variance any use that is not permitted under the ordinance for property <br />in the zone where the affected person's land is located <br />