7.b)3) Ordinance No. 129 to Amend Ordinance No. 122 Providing for Variances Meeting Date: 03/20/12
Agenda Item: /� �� �
/ �
City Council Agenda Report
City of Scandia
14727 209�' St. North
Scandia, MN 55073 (651) 433-2274
Action Requested: Adopt Ordinance No. 129, which would amend Ordinance No.
122,the City of Scandia Development Code Chapter One
providing for Variances, as recommended by the Planning
Commission.
Deadline/Timeline: N/A
Background: • In 201 l, the Minnesota Legislature made a change to the state law
regarding municipal authority to issue variances. The changes
were made in response to a case in which the Minnesota Supreme
Court narrowly interpreted the statutory definition of"undue
hardship" as was used in the statute.
• The new law renames the municipal variance standard from
"undue hardship"to "practical difficulties." It also clarifies the
type of conditions that may be placed on ganting of variances.
• The state law changes were effective May 6, 2011. Since then,
recommendations on variance applications have included
reference to the changes in the law. Cities were advised by the
League of Cities to review the language in their codes to ensure
then do not conflict with the statute.
• Several changes are needed to Scandia's Code language to be
consistent with the new law. An amendment has been prepared
and a public hearing scheduled. Two sections of Chapter One of
the Development Code are affected:
o Section 1 of the ordinance would amend Section 4.2,
Definitions, by revising the definition of variance. The
reference to "hardship" is removed and the purpose of a
variance is changed to alleviating a"practical difficulty in
complying with the standard."
o Section 2 of the ordinance would amend Section 6.0,
Variances, in its entirety. A redlined version of the
ordinance showing the changes has been provided. Most
of the changes are to the Purpose (6.1), and Review
Criteria(6.4) sections. A new statement stating the
prohibition on "use variances"has been added, reflecting
Page 1 of 2
03/09/12
current and prior law (6.3).
• The procedures for reviewing variance requests would not be
changed, except for a statement added to Paragraph (9) that
requires that conditions placed on variances shall be directly
related to and shall bear a rough proportionality to the impact
created by the variance, as required by the new state law.
• The draft ordinance has been reviewed by the City Attorney.
• The Planning Commission held a public hearing on the proposed
ordinance at its March 6, 2012 meeting, and has recommended
approval.
Recommendation: Staff recommends that the Council adopt the ordinance.
Attachments/ • Excerpt of Draft Planning Commission Minutes, March 6, 2012
Materials provided: . League of Minnesota Cities Memorandum, "2011 Variance
Legislation", 06/11
• Draft Ordinance No. 129 (Redlined)
• Draft Ordinance No. 129 (Clean Copy)
Contact(s):
Prepared by: Anne Hurlburt, City Administrator
(Ordinance 129 variances)
Page 2 of 2
03/09/12
• r--�_
L
March 6, 2012 � — - ----�
The Scandia Planning Commission held their regular monthly meeting on the above date.
Commission Chair Maefsky called the meeting to order at 7:02 p.m. The following were in
attendance: Commission Chair Christine Maefsky, Commissioners Jan Hogle, Tom Krinke and
Peter Schwarz. Commissioner Steve Philippi joined the meeting at 7:05 p.m. Staffpresent: City
Administrator Anne Hurlburt, City Planner Sherri Buss and Deputy Clerk Brenda Eklund.
APPROVAL OF AGENDA, MINUTES
Schwarz, seconded by Krinke, moved to approve the agenda as presented. The motion
carried 4-0.
Krinke, seconded by Schwarz, moved to approve the November 1, 2011 minutes as
presented. The motion carried 4-0.
PUBLIC HEARING: DRAFT ORDINANCE NO. 129 AMENDING ORDINANCE NO.
122, THE CITY OF SCANDIA DEVELOPMENT CODE, CHAPTER 1, PROVIDING
FOR VARIANCES
City Planner Sherri Buss presented a summary of the purpose of draft Ordinance No. 129. In
2011, the Minnesota Legislature made a change to the state law regarding municipal authority to
issue variances. The new law renames the municipal variance standard from "undue hardship"to
"practical difficulties". Since then, recommendations on variance applications have included
references to the changes in the law. The League of Cities has recommended that cities review
the language in their codes to ensure they do not conflict with the statute.
Several changes are needed to Scandia's Code language to be consistent with the new law.
Planner Buss described amendments to two sections of Chapter One of the Development Code.
Revisions to the definition of variance were made to replace "hardship"with"practical
difficulties". Changes to Section 6.0 were reviewed, in which the language to the purpose and
review criteria were made to reflect the statute. Section 6.3 was added to prohibit use variances.
Planner Buss stated that the standards of reasonableness,uniqueness and essential character are
still factors in evaluating a variance application.
Commissioner Hogle asked how a reasonable use of the property can be determined. City
Administrator Hurlburt stated that each case can be evaluated as it seems reasonable for the
property, neighborhood and zoning district.
Planner Buss explained the "rough proportionality"basis of formulating conditions for a
variance, as written in Section 6.5(9). Conditions must be directly related and in proportion to the
impact created by the variance.
Commission Chair Maefsky questioned the addition of review criteria (7), which states a
practical difficulty includes inadequate access to direct sunlight for solar energy systems.
March 6, 2012
Scandia City Council
Page 2 of 4
Planner Buss explained that this was written into state statute years ago and is now included in
this revision to ensure that the ordinance covers everything in the state law.
Chair Maefsky opened the hearing for public comments at 7:24 p.m.
There were no comments and the hearing was closed.
Schwarz, seconded by Philippi, moved to recommend that the City Council adopt
Ordinance No. 129,An Ordinance Amending Ordinance No. 122, The Scandia
Development Code, Chapter One Providing for Variances. The motion carried 5-0.
The City Council will consider this recommendation at their March 20, 2012 meeting.
APPOINT CHAIR AND VICE CHAIR FOR 2012
Commissioner Schwarz recommended that Commission Chair Maefsky and Vice Chair Krinke
continue in their appointed positions for the remainder of 2012.
Schwarz, seconded by Hogle, moved to recommend the appointment of Christine Maefsky
as Planning Commission Chair and Tom Krinke as Planning Commission Vice Chair. The
motion carried 5-0.
The appointments will be submitted to the Council for approval at the March 20, 2012 meeting.
APPOINT REPRESENTATIVE TO WASTEWATER ADVISORY COMMITTEE
City Administrator Hurlburt described the purpose of the newly created Wastewater Advisory
Committee and summarized the issues that will come before the Committee.
Commissioner Philippi volunteered to serve as the Planning Commission representative.
SCENIC VIEWSHEDS PROJECT—WORK SESSION
Chair Maefsky presented the "Guidelines for the Protection of Scandia's Priority Scenic
Viewsheds" in its draft form. This document was prepared as an implementation task of the
City's Comprehensive Plan to protect scenic views throughout the city. Maefsky chaired the
Scenic Viewsheds Committee which had been meeting since May 2011. The Committee
identified properties and roadways throughout the city which represented significant scenic
views.
A map was assembled to identify the scenic viewshed corridors and 39 viewshed sites along
these roads. The sites have been identified by GPS coordinates. The roadways chosen were those
most traveled and which have characteristics that meet the criteria of a scenic viewshed as
outlined in the document.
The Guidelines provide an incentive based approach to preserve scenic qualities of future
development sites. The Committee recommended up to a 25% density bonus for developers who
o �
jrEAGUE oF CONNECTING & INNOVATING
MINNESOTA SINCE 1913
CITIES
2011 V�riance �,egis�atio�
The changes,which are now in effect, may require some cities to change ordinances or
statutory cross-references.
After a long and contentious session working to restore city variance authority, the final version of
HF 52 supported by the League and allies was passed unanimously by the Legislature.
On May 5, Gov. Dayton signed 2Q11 n2innesota Laws, Chapter 19, amending Minnesota
Statutes, section 462.357, subdivision 6 to restore municipal variance authority in response to
Krummenacher v. City ofMinnetonka, 783 N.W.2d 721 (Minn. June 24,2010). The law also
provides consistent statutory language between ltfinnesota Statutes, chagter�62 and the county
variance authority of 1[�innesota Statutes, section 394.27, subdivisian 7.
In Krummenacher,the Minnesota Supreme Court narrowly interpreted the statutory definition of
"undue hardship"and held that the "reasonable use"prong of the"undue hardship"test is not
whether the proposed use is reasonable, but rather whether there is a reasonable use in the absence
of the variance. The new law changes that factor back to the "reasonable manner"understanding
that had been used by some lower courts prior to the Krummenacher ruling.
The new law was effective on May 6, the day following
the governor's approval. Presumably it applies to Learn More
pending applications, as the general rule is that cities are Read more about variances in:
to apply the law at the time of the decision,rather than at Land Use Variances:Frepuentiv
the time of application. Asked Questions
The new law renames the municipal variance standard
from "undue hardship"to "practical difficulties,"but otherwise retains the familiar three-factor test
of(1)reasonableness, (2)uniqueness, and(3)essential chazacter. Also included is a sentence new
to city variance authority that was already in the county statutes: "Variances shall only be
permitted when they are in hannony with the general purposes and intent of the ordinance and
when the terms of the variance are consistent with the comprehensive plan."
In addition, the new law clarifies that conditions may be imposed on granting of variances if those
conditions are directly related to and bear a rough proportionality to the impact created by the
variance.
� Consult your attwney tor advice conceming specffic situations. �
LEAGUE OF MINNESOTA CITIES 145 UNiVERSITYAVE.WEST PHONE:(651)281-1200 F�x:(6S1)281-1298
I N S U RAN C E T RU S T ST.PAUi.,MN 5 5 7 03-2 049 TOLL FREE:(HOO)92$-1122 WEB:W W W.LI�AC.ORG
In evaluating variance requests under the new law,cities should adopt findings addressing the
following questions:
. Is the variance in harmony with the purposes and intent of the ordinance?
. Is the variance consistent with the comprehensive plan?
. Does the proposal put property to use in a reasonable manner?
. Are there unique circumstances to the property not created by the landowner?
. Will the variance, if granted, alter the essential character of the locality?
Some cities may have ordinance provisions that codified the old statutory language, or that have
their own set of standards. For those cities,the question may be whether you have to first amend
your zoning code before processing variances under the new standard. A credible argument can be
made that that the statutory language pre-empts inconsistent local ordinance provisions. Under a
pre-emption theory, cities could apply the new law immediately without necessarily amending
their ordinance first. In any regard, it would be best practice for cities to revisit their ordinance
provisions and consider adopting language that mirrors the new statute.
Attached are a collection of sample documents reflecting the 2011 variance legislation. The
attached samples include a draft ordinance, application form, and fmdings of fact template. While
the attached materials may contain provisions that could serve as models in drafting your own
documents,your city attorney would need to review prior to council action to tailor to your city's
needs. Your city may have different ordinance requirements that need to be accommodated.
If you have questions about how your city should approach variances under this new statute,you
should discuss it with your city attorney or contact Jed Burkett, LMC land use attorney, at
jburkett@lmc.org or(651) 281-1247,or Tom Grundhoefer,LMC general counsel, at
tgrundho@Imc.arg or(651)281-1266.
Jed Burkett 06/11
2
f
� `` /���'���� �
CITY OF SCANDIA
ORDINANCE NO.: 129
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING
ORDINANCE NO. 122, THE SCANDIA DEVELOPMENT CODE,
CHAPTER 1 PROVIDING FOR VARIANCES
The City Council of the City of Scandia, Washington County, 1Vlinnesota hereby ordains:
Section 1. Amendment. Ordinance No. 122, the City of Scandia Development Code
("Development Code", or "Code"), Chapter One, Section 4.2, Definitions, shall be amended to
revise Definition No. 340 to read as follows:
Variance: A modification of a specific perrnitted development standa�-d required in an
official control to allow an alternative development standard not stated as acceptable in
the official control, but only as applied to a particular property for the purpose of
I alleviating a ��uractical difficulty in camplvin� with the standard.��ast�sa�
. See Chapter One, Section 6.
Section 2. Amendment. Ordinance No. 122, the City of Scandia Development Code, Chapter
One, Section 6.0 shall be amended to read as follows:
SECTION 6.0 VARIANCES
6.1 Purpose. "Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes Seciion 462.351, Subd. 6, as amended from time
to time,�the purpose of this section is to permit deviations from the'.�
��equ�reuients of fi��i��the Development Code in instances where their
stric�t enforcement v�ould cause� ' practical difficulties because of
circumstances unique to the individual property under consideration, and to grant such
variances only when it is demonstrated that such actions will be in keeping with the spirit
and intent of this Chapter. This section shall not applv to anv rec�uested deviation from
other portions of the City's code of ordinances unless so provided by such other ordinance
either directl�or bv ref�erence to this section.
6.2 Board of Zonin�AdJ'ustrnents and Appeals. The City Council shall act as the Board of
Zoning Adjustrnents and Appeals.-
6.3 Use Variances Prohibited. No variance mav be �ranted that would allow any use that is not
allowed as a permitted, conditional or interim use in the zoning district in which the subject
property is located.
�6.4 Review Criteria. The Board shall
> >
�� � „';��'�'�, �" ���'���"^�_��«� '��..�'���-� ��,nly approve a variance when the
Draft Ordinance No. 129,2/21/2012 Page 1 of 5
terms of variance are consistent with the Comprehensive Plan, when it is in harmonv with
the e��neral purpose and intent of the Development Code as then in force, and when the
strict enforcement of the code would result in practical difficulties with carrving out the
strict letter of the Code. "Practical difficulties" as used in connection with the variance
means:
(1) The applicant pro�oses to use the property in a reasonable manner not permitted
bv the Development Code; ,
> >
�
•���, ...: ��o�o..„�*�,o,.o,..,i„+:,,.,� . o�„�.o „ oa ,,,,�
� a
�2 Theplight of the landowner is due to circumstances uniqus to the property not
created by the landowner;
, , .
(�}�3)The variance if Qranted will not alter the essent�al character of the localitv.
(�4)Economic conditions alone shall not constitute practical difficulties. �
1, ♦1. + ,7 l, o �,. �1,., i�for���l,.o« ol „F7.....7 ,,.7 ,
ilAS1'IVC'D'� Y.�v�.� �� ' y�
1j9�}96&�:
{�}�S,ZThat the proposed variance will not impair an adequate supply of light and air to
adjacent property, or sub�tantially increase the congestion of the public streets, or
increase the da�ger of fire, or endanger the public safety, or substantially diminish
or impair property values within the neighborhood.
�6) That the requested variance is the minimum action required to eliminate the
��k.ractical difficultv.
(7) Practical difficulties include but are not limited to, inadequate access to direct
sunlight for solar energy svstems.
�:46.5 Procedures. Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes 15.99, an application for a variance shall be
approved or denied within 60 days from the date of its official and complete submission
unless extended pursuant to Statute or a time waiver is granted by the applicant. Pursuant to
Minnesota Statutes 15.99,the City staff is hereby authorized to extend the 60 day time limit
by a time period not to exceed 60 additional days, provided written notice of such extension
Draft Ordinance No. 129,2/21/2012 Page 2 of 5
is provided to the applicant before the end of the initial 60 day period. Extensions may also
be requested by the applicant. Additional City requirements are as follows:
(1) Requests for a variance shall be filed with the Zoning Administrator on an official
application form. The applicant's signature shall be provided on the application
form. Additionally, if the applicant is not the fee owner of the property,the fee
owner's signature shall also be provided on the application form, or the applicant
shall provide separate written and signed authorization for the application from the
fee owner. Such application shall be accompanied by a non-refundable fee to pay
for staff time and indirect costs incurred by the City for processing,reviewing and
hearing the application, and an escrow deposit to be applied in reimbursement of
the City for all such out-of-pocket costs that are incurred by the City, as set forth
in City Ordinance. The application shall be cansidered as being officially
submitted complete when the applicant has complied with a11 the specified
informational requirements, which shall include the following;
(A) A written descriprion of the request for the variance, including an explanation
of compliance with the variance criteria set forth in this Section.
(B) Supporting materials, as outlined in Section 11.0 of this Chapter, as determined
by the Zoning Administrator to be necessary for the complete and clear
definition and understanding of the request.
(2) Upon receipt of a complete application, as determined by staff review, and
following preliminary staff analysis of the application and request, the Zoning
Administrator, when appropriate, shall establish a time and place for consideration
by the Planning Commission. At least 10 days before the date of the meeting, a
written notice of the meeting shall be mailed to the applicant and to all other
owners of property located within 500 feet of the boundaries of the property which
is t�e subject of the application.
(3) Failure of a property owner to receive notice shall not invalidate any such
proceedings as set forth within this Chapter.
(4) The Zoning Ad�inistrator shall cause the preparation of technical reports where
appropriate, and provide general assistance in preparing a recommendation on the
actio�to the Board.
(5) The Planning Commission and Zoning Administrator shall have the authority to
request additional information from the applicant concerning operational factors
or to obtain expert testimony with the consent and at the expense of the applicant
concerning operational factors, if such additional information is necessary to
establish performance conditions in relation to all pertinent sections of this
Chapter.
(6) The applicant or a representative thereof may appear before the Planning
Commission in order to present and answer questions concerning the proposed
request.
Draft Ordinance No. 129,2/21/2012 Page 3 of 5
(7) The Planning Commission shall make a finding of fact and shall make a
recommendation to the City Council on such actions or conditions relating to the
request as it deems necessary to carry out the purposes of this Chapter.
(8) The Board shall not act upon the request until it has received a report and
recommendation from the Planning Commission and the City staff or unti160
days after the first regular Planning Commission meeting at which the request was
considered.
(9) Upon receiving the report and recommendation of the Planning Commission, the
Board may grant the variance. Approval of a request shall require passage by a
majority vote of the entire Board. In granting any major variance under the
provisions of this Section, the Board shall designate sueh conditions in connection
therewith as will, in its opinion, secure substantially the obrectives of the
regulations or provisions to which the adjustment or variance is granted, as to
light, air, and the public health, safety, comfort, convenience and general welfare.
Conditions shall be consistent with section 6.4 and shall be directly related to and
shall bear a rough proportionalitv to the impact created by the variance.
(10) Where variances are granted under the provisions of this Section,the Board shall
require such evidence and guarantee as it may deem necessary to insure
compliance with the conditions designated in connection therewith. Following the
approval of a variance as required by this Section and prior to the issuing of any
building permits or the commencing of any work, the applicant may be required to
guarantee to the City the completion of landscaping and any other private exterior
amenities or improvements as shown on the approved site plan and as required by
the variance approval. The guarantee shall be made by means of a site
improvement performance agreement and a financial guarantee as specified in
Section 11.0 of this Chapier.
(i 1) The Zoning Administrator shall serve a copy of the final order of the Board upon
the petitioner by mail.
(12) Whenever an applicatiori for a variance has been considered and denied by the
Board, a similar application for a variance affecting substantially the same
property shall not be considered again by the Planning Commission or Board for
at least 6 months from the date of its denial, unless a decision to reconsider such
matter is made by a majority vote of the entire Board.
� �36.6 Appeal of Board Rulin�. Any person or persons, any private or public board, or taxpayer
of the City aggrieved by any decision of the Board shall have the right to seek review of the
decision with a court of record in the manner provided by the laws of the State of
Minnesota, and particularly Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 462, as such statutes may be from
time to time amended, supplemented or replaced.
I �6.7 Expiration. Unless the variance was approved prior to the effective date of this Chapter,
or the Board specifically approves a different time when action is officially taken on the
Draft Ordinance No. 129,2/21/2012 Page 4 of 5
request, approvals which have been issued under the provisions of this section shall expire
without further action by the Planning Commission or the Board, unless the applicant
commences the authorized use or improvement within 1 year of the date the variance is
issued; or,unless before the expiration of the 1 year period; the applicant shall apply for an
extension thereof by completing and submitting a request for extension, including the
renewal fee as set forth in City Ordinance. The request for extension shall state facts
showing a good faith attempt to complete or utilize the approval permitted in the variance.
A request for an extension not exceeding 1 year shall be subject to the review and approval
of the Zoning Administrator. Should a second extension of time or any extension of time
longer than 1 year be requested by the applicant, it shall be presented to the Planning
Commission for a recommendation and to the Board for a decision.
I �6.8 Certification of Taxes Paid. Prior to approval of an application for a variance,the
applicant shall provide certification to the City that there are no delinquent property t�es,
special assessments, interest, or City utility fees due upon the parcel of land to which the
variance application relates.
Secdon 3. Effective Date. This ordinance shall be in fu11 force and effect upon its adoption and
publication according to law.
Passed and adopted by the City Council of the City of Scandia this day of ,
2012.
Randall Simonson, Mayor
ATTEST`.
Anne Hurlburt,Administrator/Clerk
Draft Ordinance No. 129,2/21/2012 Page 5 of 5
c� ;< �;
!..�:���`.`�,�``d�
CITY OF SCANDIA
ORDINANCE NO.: 129
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING
ORDINANCE NO. 122, THE SCANDIA DEVELOPMENT CODE,
CHAPTER 1 PROVIDING FOR VARIANCES
The City Council of the City of Scandia, Washington County, Minnesota hereby ordains:
Section 1. Amendment. Ordinance No. 122, the City of Scandia Development Code
("Development Code", or "Code"), Chapter One, Section 4.�, Definitions, shall be amended to
revise Definition No. 340 to read as follows:
Variance: A modification of a specific permitted development stand�d required in an
official control to allow an alternative development standard not stated as acceptable in
the official control, but only as applied to a particular property for the purpose of
alleviating a practical difficulty in complying with the standard. See Chapter One,
Section 6.
Section 2. Amendment. Ordinance No. 122, the City of Scandia Development Code, Chapter
One, Section 6.0 shall be amended to read as follows:
SECTION 6.0 VARIANCES
6.1 Purpose. "Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes Section 462.351. Subd. 6, as amended from time
to time, the purpose of this section is to permi"t deviations from the requirements of the
Development Code in instances where their strict enforcement would cause practical
diffic�lties because af circumstances unique to the individual property under consideration,
a�d to grant such variances on�y when it is demonstrated that such actions will be in
keeping with the spirit and intent of this Chapter. This section shall not apply to any
requested deviation frorn other portions of the City's code of ordinances unless so provided
by such other ordinance either directly or by reference to this section.
6.2 Board of Zonin�Adju:stments and Appeals. The City Council shall act as the Board of
Zoning Adjustments and Appeals
6.3 Use Variances Prohibited. No variance may be granted that would allow any use that is not
allowed as a permitted, conditional or interim use in the zoning district in which the subject
property is located.
6.4 Review Criteria. The Board shall only approve a variance when the terms of variance are
consistent with the Comprehensive Plan, when it is in harmony with the general purpose
and intent of the Development Code as then in force, and when the strict enforcement of the
Draft Ordinance No. 129,2/21/2012 Page 1 of 5
code would result in practical difficulties with carrying out the strict letter of the Code.
"Practical difficulties"as used in connection with the variance means:
(1) The applicant proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner not permitted
by the Development Code;
(2) The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to the property not
created by the landowner;
(3) The variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality.
(4) Economic conditions alone shall not constitute practical difficulties.
(5) That the proposed variance will not impair an adequate supply of light and air to
adjacent property, or substantially increase the congestion of the public streets, or
increase the danger of fire, or endanger the public safety, or substantially diminish
or impair property values within the neighborhood.
(6) That the requested variance is the minimum action required to eliminate the
practical difficulty.
(7) Practical difficulties include,but are not limited to, inadequate access to direct
sunlight for solar energy systems.
6.5 Procedures. Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes 15.99, an application for a variance shall be
approved or denied v�ithin 60 days from the date of its official and complete submission
unless extended pursuant to Statute or a time waiver is granted by the applicant. Pursuant to
Minnesota Statutes 15.99, the City staff is hereby authorized to extend the 60 day time limit
by a time period not to exceed 60 additional days, provided written notice of such extension
is provided to the applicant befor�the end of the initial 60 day period. Extensions may also
be requested by the applicant. Additional City requirements are as follows:
(1) Requests for a variance�hal�be filed with the Zoning Administrator on an official
application form. The applicant's signature shall be provided on the application
form. Additionally, if the applicant is not the fee owner of the property,the fee
owner's signature shall also be provided on the application form, or the applicant
shall provide separate written and signed authorization for the application from the
fee owner. Such application sha11 be accompanied by a non-refundable fee to pay
for staff time and indirect costs incurred by the City for processing, reviewing and
hearing the application, and an escrow deposit to be applied in reimbursement of
the City for all such out-of-pocket costs that are incurred by the City, as set forth
in City Ordinance. The application shall be considered as being officially
submitted complete when the applicant has complied with all the specified
informational requirements,which shall include the following:
(A) A written description of the request for the variance, including an explanation
of compliance with the variance criteria set forth in this Section.
Draft Ordinance No. 129,2/21/2012 Page 2 of 5
(B) Supporting materials, as outlined in Section 11.0 of this Chapter, as determined
by the Zoning Administrator to be necessary for the complete and clear
definition and understanding of the request.
(2) Upon receipt of a complete application, as determined by staff review, and
following preliminary staff analysis of the application and request, the Zoning
Administrator, when appropriate, shall establish a time and place for consideration
by the Planning Commission. At least 10 days before the date of the meeting, a
written notice of the meeting shall be mailed to the applicant and to all other
owners of property located within 500 feet of the boundaries of the property which
is the subject of the application.
(3) Failure of a property owner to receive notice shall not invalidate any such
proceedings as set forth within this Chapter.
(4) The Zoning Administrator shall cause the preparation of technical reports where
appropriate, and provide general assistance in pre,�aring a recommendation on the
action to the Board.
(5) The Planning Commission and Zoning Administrator shall have the authority to
request additional information from the applicant concerning operational factors
or to obtain expert testimony with the consent and at the expense of the applicant
concerning operational factors, if such additional information is necessary to
establish performance conditions in relation to all pertinent sections of this
Chapter.
(6) The applicant or a representative thereof may appear before the Planning
Commission in order to present and answer questions concerning the proposed
request.
(7) The Planning Commission shall make a finding of fact and shall make a
recommendation to the City Council on such actions or conditions relating to the
request as it deems necessary to carry out the purposes of this Chapter.
(8) The Board shall not act upon the request until it has received a report and
recommendation from the Planning Commission and the City staff or until 60
days after the first regular Planning Commission meeting at which the request was
considered.
(9) Upon receiving the report and recommendation of the Planning Commission,the
Board may grant the variance. Approval of a request shall require passage by a
majority vote of the entire Board. In granting any major variance under the
provisions of this Section,the Board shall designate such conditions in connection
therewith as will, in its opinion, secure substantially the objectives of the
regulations or provisions to which the adjustment or variance is granted, as to
light, air, and the public health, safety, comfort, convenience and general welfare.
Conditions shall be consistent with section 6.4 and shall be directly related to and
shall bear a rough proportionality to the impact created by the variance.
Draft Ordinance No. 129,2/21/2012 Page 3 of 5
(10) Where variances are granted under the provisions of this Section, the Board shall
require such evidence and guarantee as it may deem necessary to insure
compliance with the conditions designated in connection therewith. Following the
approval of a variance as required by this Section and prior to the issuing of any
building permits or the commencing of any work, the applicant may be required to
guarantee to the City the completion of landscaping and any other private exterior
amenities or improvements as shown on the approved site plan and as required by
the variance approval. The guarantee shall be made by means of a site
improvement performance agreement and a financial guarantee as specified in
Section 11.0 of this Chapter. '
(11) The Zoning Administrator shall serve a copy of the final order of the Board upon
the petitioner by mail.
(12) Whenever an application for a variance has been considered and denied by the
Board, a similar application for a variance affecting substantially the same
property shall not be considered again by the Planning Commission or Board for
at least 6 months from the date of its denial, unless a decision to reconsider such
matter is made by a majority vote of the entire Board.
6.6 Appeal of Board Ruling. Any person or persons, any private or public board, or taxpayer of
the City aggrieved by any decision of the Board shall have the right to seek review of the
decision with a court of record in the manner provided by the laws of the State of
Minnesota, and particularly Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 462, as such statutes may be from
time to time amended, supplemented or replaced.
6.7 Expiration. Unless the variance was approved prior to the effective date of this Chapter, or
the Board specifically approves a different tirrle when action is officially taken on the
request, approvals which have been issued under the provisions of this section shall expire
without further action by the Planning Commission or the Board,unless the applicant
commences the authorized use or improvement within 1 year of the date the variance is
issued; or, unless before the expiration of the 1 year period; the applicant shall apply for an
extension thereof by completing and submitting a request for extension, including the
renewal fee as set fortfi in City Ordinance. The request far extension shall state facts
showing a good faith attempt to complete or utilize the approval permitted in the variance.
A request for an extension not exceeding 1 year shall be subject to the review and approval
of the Zoning Administrator. Should a second extension of time or any extension of time
longer than 1 year be requested by the applicant, it shall be presented to the Planning
Commission for a recommendation and to the Board for a decision.
6.8 Certification of Taxes Paid. Prior to approval of an application for a variance, the applicant
shall provide certification to the City that there are no delinquent property taxes, special
assessments, interest, or City utility fees due upon the parcel of land to which the variance
application relates.
Draft Ordinance No. 129,2/21/2012 Page 4 of 5
Section 3. Effective Date. This ordinance shall be in full force and effect upon its adoption and
publication according to law.
Passed and adopted by the City Council of the City of Scandia this day of ,
2012.
Randail Simonson, Mayor
ATTEST:
Anne Hurlburt, Administrator/Clerk
Draft Ordinance No. 129,2/21/2012 Page 5 of 5