2021-03-03 PC - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Mounds View Planning Commission February 3, 2021 Regular Meeting Page 6 ________________________________________________________________________ 6. Other Planning Activity A. Annual Review of Planning Commission Bylaws Community Development Director Sevald requested the Commission review and adopt the Planning Commission Bylaws. Commissioner Monn recommended Gary Stevenson’s name be removed from Page 5. Community Development Director Sevald explained these Bylaws were amended in 2020. The Chair’s name would not be changed until the next amendment. MOTION/SECOND: Commissioner Munson/Commissioner Nelson. To approve the Planning Commission Bylaws as presented. A roll call vote was taken. Ayes – 7 Nays – 0 Motion carried. ______________________________________________________________________________ B. Discussion – Tulien v. City of Minneapolis (Case Law) Community Development Director Sevald stated in January, 2021, the Minnesota Court of Appeals ruled against the City of Minneapolis in its approval of a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) and Variances for an apartment building. The Court’s decision hinged on the Planning Commission’s lack of Findings in support of the project. Staff reviewed a memo from the City Attorney with more details and emphasized a couple of points. In the Court’s opinion, the City erred on two items: 1. Variances are to be approved when the City makes Findings of “practical difficulties” that are unique to the property, and not created by the property owner. In this case, the Planning Commission’s Findings were that the City Code is the Practical Difficulty, which is not unique to the property, but applies city-wide. 2. Conditional Use Permits (CUP) are to be approved when the City makes Findings based on a list of criteria. The CUP was to allow a building taller than four stories. During the Public Hearing, a neighbor objected to the proposed six stories (would cast shadows on their yard). The Findings for approval included a generic statement, similar to; The conditional use will not be injurious to the use and enjoyment of other property in the vicinity. The Appeals Court found no record in the Findings, nor in the meeting minutes, that the Commission considered the neighbor’s objections, thus the Finding was not supported. Community Development Director Sevald commented points that Staff would like to make: