PL PACKET 05202003 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

• Cities can apply architectural and aesthetic requirements to manufactured homes only if the same architectural and esthetic requirements also apply to all other single family homes in the zoning district, not just to manufactured homes. See M. S. 327.32, Subdivision 5. 10. Manufactured home parks. Likewise, many ordinances inconsistent with the state law and rules concerning manufactured home parks. • A manufactured home park is, by law, a conditional use in any zoning district that allows the construction or placement of a building used or 'intended to be used by two or more families. M. S. § 462.357, Subd. 1 b. • Cities can not enact, amend, or enforce a zoning ordinance that has the effect of altering the existing density, lot-size requirements, or „ manufactured home set back requirements in any manufactured home park constructed before January 1, 1995, if the manufactured home park, when constructed, complied with the then existing density, lot-size and setback requirements, if any. See M. S. 462.357, Subdivisionsl a and 1 b. • If a city has enacted an ordinance requiring that manufactured homes within the city be secured by an anchoring system, a manufactured home can not be installed in a manufactured home park unless the manufactured home is secured by the anchoring system prescribed by the manufactured home building code. See M. S. 327.32. Subdivision 6. • Manufactured home parks are licensed by the State Department of Health under M. S. §-327.15 and Minn. Rules parts 4630.0200 to 4630.2210. Cities are prohibited from licensing manufactured home parks by M. S. § 327.26. Cities in their zoning ordinances should establish a conditional use permit process including requirements not inconsistent with the state rules. The City of=Faribaaat.established an ".Operation: SafeNobile-Homes" - ordinance (Faribault Ord. 90-03) which establishes a time of sale inspection process and is available from the League or that city. 11. Procedures which are inconsistent with the Municipal Planning Act. In addition to the mistakes mentioned above, land use ordinances often contain procedures that are inconsistent with state law. These may involve requiring a super majority vote where state law contemplates a simple majority, but other inconsistences dre common. State law provides "a uniform procedure for adequately conducting and implementing municipal planning". M.S. 462.352. A city can not in its charter or ordinances vary from these procedures, contained in the Municipal Planning Act, M. S. 4632.352 through 462.365. See Attorney General Opinion 59a-32 dated January 25, 2002, a copy of which can be found at http://www.ag.state.mn.us/opinions/012502.htm and Nordmarken v. City of Richfield, 641 N. W. 2d 343 (Minn. Ct. App. 2002), a copy of which can be found at http://www.Iawlibrary.state.mn.us/archive/ctappub/0204/c6011698.htm 6 .