Legal Opinion
In Re the Denial of Certification of the Variance Granted to Haslund Ex Rel. City of St. Mary's Point
Court of Appeals of Minnesota
Decided January 27, 2009No. A08-0427PublishedCited by 3 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
SCHELLHAS, Judge.
Relator challenges respondent’s refusal to certify a city’s decision to allow relator to develop a parcel of land. We conclude that (1) the terms of the city’s zoning ordinances fail to comply with DNR’s minimum standards adopted under the Lower St. Croix Wild and Scenic River Act (Lower St. Croix Act), (2) DNR’s minimum standards require relator to obtain a variance from the city to develop an unplatted lot, (3) the variance is subject to certification by respondent, and (4) even though respondent certified the city’s zoning ordinances as being “in substantial…
2Cases cited15 opinions
- Reserve Mining Co. v. HerbstSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1977
- Contested Cases of St. Otto's Home v. Minnesota Department of Human ServicesSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1989
- Frank's Nursery Sales, Inc. v. City of RosevilleSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1980
- Mangold Midwest Co. v. Village of RichfieldSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1966
- Ridgewood Development Co. v. StateSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1980
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- In Re HaslundSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2010
- In re the Denial of Certification of the Variance Granted to HaslundSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2010
- In re the Denial of Certification of the Variance Granted to HaslundSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2010