Mendota Heights Prepares for New Variance Law

Gov. Mark Dayton signed a bill into law May 5 changing the standard by which Minnesota cities may grant to property owners.

After the Minnesota State Supreme Court ruled last summer that cities must adhere to a far when granting variance requests–effectively ending cities’ ability to grant most variances–the new law allows cities to employ something closer to the standards developed over time prior to the Supreme Court’s June 24, 2010 decision. The bill passed unanimously.

“This was obviously a point of concern for our city. When it comes down to it, the recently passed legislation regarding variances changes the way that the city of Mendota Heights processes variances,” said Jake Sedlacek, assistant city administrator.

Variances, which cities grant in order to allow residential and commercial property owners to deviate from municipal zoning ordinances, will be easier to approve under the bill’s less restrictive language. The new law changes the standard a city must use in approving a variance from the “undue hardship” definition demanded by last summer’s Supreme Court decision to one where a request must demonstrate “practical difficulties.”

As reported by the Pioneer Press, a number of resident and business interests were dismayed by last summer’s decision and have been working with lawmakers during this legislative session to craft the bill. The new law was supported by a number of local lobbying groups, including the League of Minnesota Cities, an organization Mendota Heights looks to for recommendations about issues of governance.

Regardless of the new law, final decisions about granting variance requests remain in the hands of local officials. In Mendota Heights, variance requests are heard by the planning commission, which then makes recommendations to the city council. The city saw a sharp decline in variance requests in 2010, with variance approvals falling from thirteen in 2009 to just three last year.

Stephen Norton, chair of the Mendota Heights planning commission, couldn’t speculate whether the decline had anything to do with the Supreme Court ruling. He reported that the commission would be examining the new law at their next meeting, scheduled for May 24 at .

“We’ve certainly received input from counsel (in the past), but haven’t yet sat down and had a meeting (with Mendota Heights City Attorney Tammera Diehm) about the recent development,” Norton said.

As , officials in Mendota Heights anticipated that the court’s prior ruling wouldn’t affect property owners in Mendota Heights as much as in other cities. Mendota Heights has traditionally maintained a policy of granting variances under exceptional circumstances.

“For us, we’ve always held the standard that we’ve got these setbacks and zoning rules for a reason, and if we’re going to allow a variance to that, it has to be for an undue hardship, has to be a really unique set of circumstances around the property,” Sedlacek said.

Where other cities grant variances, Mendota Heights has often granted conditional use permits to property owners. Sedlacek said that at the May 24 planning commission meeting, he expected the city planner would be on hand with his interpretation of the new code. 

"We’ll work with what the legislation has provided and do our best to protect property values in Mendota Heights," he said.