Resolution 6650A - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Section 462.358, subd. 4b(b) and (c) and "[i]n any case in which compliance with the foregoing restrictions [of Subd. 4b] will create an unnecessary hardship and failure to comply does not interfere with the purpose of the subdivision regulations, the platting authority may waive such compliance by adoption of a resolution to that effect." The City adopted subdivision regulations by ordinance in 1988. These regulations are codified in Title 1200 of the City Code. The City's regulations generally require that the Planning Commission and Council review all subdivision applications and that public hearings be held on the proposed subdivision prior to the Council's approval of the application. City Code Section 1205.02 allows the City to deviate from the City's subdivision regulations "where the subdivider can show that, by reason of exceptional topography or other physical conditions, the strict compliance with ... [the subdivision] regulations could cause an exceptional and undue hardship on the substantial enjoyment of a property right; provided, such relief may be granted without detriment to the public welfare. and without impairing the intent and purpose of [the subdivision regulations]." History: The Property has historically been treated as two separate parcels. In the 1980's, State Highway No. 10 was constructed, effectively dividing the tax parcel into two pieces. Since this time, deeds and other instruments relating to the Property have routinely referred to the Property by two separate metes and bounds descriptions. In 2005, the City sought special legislation to provide for the creation of a TIF district and also for the removal of the right of reverter held by the State of Minnesota on one half of the tax parcel. After discussions with the State of Minnesota (Minnesota Department of Transportation), the description used in the special legislation mirrored the language from previous instruments even though that language includes only part of the entire tax parcel. Applicability of Subdivision Regulations on this approval: State statute and the City's Code are silent on whether the subdivision regulations apply to city-owned property. Regardless, as noted above, the City has some flexibility over the subdivision process. For example, the City may grant a variance to the subdivision regulations upon a finding that a hardship exists and that the proposed subdivision would be without detriment to the public welfare and would not impair the intent and purpose of the subdivision regulations. (See City Code Section 1205.02) In addition, Minnesota courts have held that municipalities are given discretion to decide matters related to variances and subdivisions. See VanLandschoot v. City of Mendota Heights, 336 N.W.2d 503 (Minn. 1983). In that instance, the City has substantially complied with the requirements of the City Code. The safe of the land to Medtronic necessarily contemplates the subdivision of the property. Pursuant to the Development Agreement, the City is only authorized to convey a portion of the tax parcel. The Planning Commission and Council have reviewed and considered the terms and conditions of the sale of the Property to Medtronic. At all times, this review, and the public hearings held in accordance with the SJR-269118v1 MU205-30 D-2