Easing zoning variance restrictions

A 2010 court decision made it next to impossible for cities and townships to grant variances, except in rare circumstances. The House passed a bill 79-52 April 4 that would allow greater latitude to grant zoning variances.

Sponsored by Rep. Joyce Peppin (R-Rogers), HF52 now goes to the Senate, where Sen. Gen Olson (R-Minnetrista) is the sponsor.

The bill is designed as a response to a Minnesota Supreme Court decision. In Krummenacher v. City of Minnetonka, the court interpreted state law to say that cities cannot grant variances to property owners if their properties could be put to reasonable use without a variance.

Supporters say the bill would merely clarify the current law so that local governments can go on using the same standards that have been in place for decades.

“The Krummenacher case actually took what was in practice here for a number of years in the state of Minnesota and made it illegal,” said Rep. Tim O'Driscoll (R-Sartell). He added that $45 million in construction projects in the state are being held up because of the decision.

Opponents said the bill does not have support from key stakeholders like the League of Minnesota Cities, who argue the bill’s language creates disparities in the relative authority of cities, counties and townships to grant variances. They argue the legislation would trigger more court cases.

“What we should be doing is actually getting the compromise worked out… creating a bill that’s ‘peace in the valley,’” said Rep. Ryan Winkler (DFL-Golden Valley).

Rep. Mike Beard (R-Shakopee) said the relevant interest groups are negotiating a compromise. He said the plan is to incorporate their agreement into the Senate version of the bill, which would then be sent back to the House for approval.