Cities, towns, and counties have legal authority to approve to zoning applications, but not all of these governmental bodies exercise this power.  Some towns leave zoning up to the county.  Some cities and town have zoning ordinances but contract with some other governmental body to handle zoning applications.  Sorting this out may be challenging, but is critical to obtaining approval, and also critical to preserving the right to appeal a bad decision.

When a city employee injures someone, the city must be notified.  Under state law, this notice must occur within six months after the injury, if the city is being asked to pay a claim.  Does this bar someone from bringing a lawsuit later?

No.  The notice requirement in Minn. Stat. § 466.05, Subd. 1, is designed to make sure a city gets a chance to investigate matters, in a timely fashion.  If the injured party fails to give notice to a city, the city may raise this as a defense in a lawsuit, but the city has to prove that it was prejudiced by the failure to give the notice.

Who should pay for new sewers or for fixing the streets? Cities usually pay part of the bill with general tax dollars (that is, everyone pays for it), and requires the nearby property owners to pay the rest through “special assessments”.

Courts favor settlement. It reduces their case load, provides a means for resolving multiple issues in a case when only the legal issues can be resolved at trial, allows more creativity in solving problems, and can open the door to better subsequent relationships between parties. Unfortunately, not every settlement is well done. Sometimes clients do not fully comprehend the details or the consequences of the settlement. Attorneys might have conflicting understandings of what was discussed. Memories may differ on critical details. When the problems are minor, the courts consistently enforce settlement agreements. When the problems are major, however, competent client representation may require an attorney to return to court and seek to have a settlement set aside. A truly bad settlement may be brought back to court under a number of different arguments.

    Most parcels of land lie next to a street.  Sometimes a property owner will split a parcel, creating an “interior” lot, without access to a street.  This interior lot, surrounded on all sides by other property, is considered “landlocked”.
    In Minnesota, the courts have recognized that a property owner has the legal right to create a landlocked parcel.  Lake George Park, LLC v. IBM Mid-Am. Employees Fed. Credit Union, 576 N.W. 2d 463 (Minn. App. 1998), review denied (Minn. June 17, 1998).  Problems arise, however, when the owner of the landlocked parcel wants to cross another person’s property in order to get access to a road.  In those situations, the courts look to see whether the property owners have a written or unwritten agreement about access.  If a written agreement or an unwritten easement exists, the court will enforce it.  If no such agreement or easement exists, then the only way to get access to the landlocked parcel will be by purchasing an adjacent parcel of land, or by purchasing an easement across a neighbor’s land.

    Different people call different parcels of land “outlots”.  County surveyors (and often courts) use “outlot” to describe large undivided parcels of land that could be divided into lots and blocks.  City planners call oddly-shaped parcels and left-over remnants “outlots”.  Mall developers call spaces reserved by the street for drive-through restaurants “outlots”.

    When a city allows a developer to create an outlot, the city needs to recognize that a court may consider the “outlot” to simply be a lot by another name.  As such, a court will grant the owner the right to further divide the parcel, construct a building, put in a driveway, and generally use the outlot as if it were a platted lot.  If the city intended for the outlot to be kept as open space, or later attached to another parcel of land, the city must impose these restrictions on the land.  Merely assuming this, or placing restrictions in a contract with the current owner, will not protect the city and the neighbors from future development.

Moving a small business home may be a good way to reduce overhead expenses. Most cities restrict homes to, well, use as homes, with narrow exceptions. Would your small business fit in the exceptions?

Generally, if a city employee could not tell your business was in your home, it is fine. If you have a truck, employees, or customers who would come to your house, you may have a zoning problem. Check your city’s zoning ordinance for regulation of “home occupations”. This may be in its own section, in the restrictions applicable to your zoning district, or even in the definition section.