My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Search
03/10/2021 P&Z Packet
LinoLakes
>
Advisory Boards & Commissions
>
Planning & Zoning Board
>
Packets
>
2021
>
03/10/2021 P&Z Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
4/21/2021 10:59:28 AM
Creation date
3/9/2021 8:19:05 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
P&Z
P&Z Document Type
P&Z Packet
Meeting Date
03/10/2021
P&Z Meeting Type
Regular
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
40
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
23 <br />over 5,000 square feet of wetland. Under state law, the maximum amount that <br />the city could have authorized was 400 square feet. The city failed to act on <br />Breza’s application within the deadline of Minn. Stat. § 15.99. While the court <br />held that the application was approved as a matter of law, it was only approved <br />for the 400 square feet. <br /> <br />6. Procedure to approve or deny. In a 60-day rule case, the Court of Appeals held that <br />a failed motion to approve a permit was not a denial of the application. Therefore, <br />the permit was approved as a matter of law pursuant to the 60-day rule. Demolition <br />Landfill Services v. City of Duluth, 609 N.W.2d 278 (Minn. App. 2000). <br /> <br />a. The legislature addressed this issue in the 2003 amendments. The statute <br />provides that a rejection of a motion to approve constitutes a denial if those <br />voting against approval “state on the record the reasons why they oppose the <br />request.” Minn. Stat. § 15.99, subd. 2(b). <br /> <br />7. What constitutes a denial. <br />a. In Moreno v. City of Minneapolis, 676 N.W.2d 1 (Minn. App. 2004), the Court <br />held that a zoning application is not approved or denied for purposes of the 60- <br />day rule until the City has decided all appeals challenging the approval of the <br />zoning application. <br /> <br />b. In Carda v. Kanabec County, 2007 WL 3343017 (Minn. App. 2007), the Court of <br />Appeals upheld the notion that rejection of a permit as improper, on an <br />administrative level, constituted a denial under the 60 day rule. <br /> <br />c. In Mesenbrink Construction v. Rice County, 2008 WL 5334251 (Minn. App. <br />2008), the court held that the return of an application that was subject to a <br />moratorium that stated no application of that nature would be processed or <br />approved satisfied the requirement of denial. <br /> <br />C. Conducting the Public Hearing. <br /> <br />1. The Open Meeting Law. <br /> <br />a. The Open Meeting Law applies to City Council and Planning Commission <br />meetings. <br /> <br />b. The definition of a meeting for purposes of the law has been said by the Courts to <br />be a gathering of a quorum or more of the body at which members discuss, <br />decide or receive information as a group on issues relating to the official business <br />of the body. See Moberg v. ISD No. 281, 336 N.W. 2d 510 (Minn. 1983).
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.