HomeMy WebLinkAbout2025-06-03 P & Z Packet
CITY OF CENTERVILLE
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
MEETING AGENDA
Tuesday, June 3, 2025
6:30 p.m.
Meeting Live Streamed at:
https://northmetrotv.com/centerville-stream/
MEETING (6:30 PM)
I.CALL TO ORDER
1.Roll Call
II.PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
III.APPROVAL OF AGENDA
IV.PUBLIC HEARINGS (6:30 PM or shortly thereafter)
1.Chapter 156 Zoning Ordinance & Table of Allowed Uses (Tabled at last
meeting
2.Variance Request Î 7239 Main Street Deck Encroachment in Easement
3.Variance Request Î 7064 Centerville Road Î Detached Garage
V.AWARDS, PRESENTATIONS, APPEARANCES
1.None
VI.OLD BUSINESS
1.None
VII.NEW BUSINESS
1.Variance Request Î 7239 Main Street Deck Encroachment in Easement
VIII.APPROVAL OF MINUTES
1.May 6, 2025, Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes
1
IX.ANNOUNCEMENTS/UPDATES
1.Council Member Liaison
2.AdministratorÓs Report
X.ADJOURNMENT
INFORMATION
1.Information on Variances
2
CITY OF CENTERVILLEREQUEST
FOR ACTION
Agenda Item # Department: RequestedMeetingDate:
June 3, 2025
Planning and Zoning
IV.
TITLE OF ISSUE:
Chapter 156 Zoning Ordinance & Table of Allowed Uses
BACKGROUND AND SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION:
At the last Planning and Zoning Commission meeting a public hearing was opened to receive input on proposed
revisions to the city code. The proposed revisions provide clarification on select definitions and intent relative
to accessory structures. Since Planning staff were still preparing revised language, the public hearing was
open
See the attached memo for additional information.
COST AND SOURCE(S) OF FUNDING:
N/A
REQUESTED ACTION:
Staff
Receive
otion to Close Public Hearing
For ClerkÓs Use:
SUPPORTED DOCUMENTS ATTACHED
Motion By: ____________________________________
Resolution Ordinance Contract Minutes Plan Map
Second By: ____________________________________
Vote Record: Aye Nay
Other (specify)
______________________________________________________________
_____
_______________________________________________________________
Refer to: _________________________________
Tabled Until: ______________________________
Consent
Other: ___________________________________
Regular
3
4
733 Marquette Avenue, Suite 1000, Minneapolis, MN 55402
Memorandum
DATE: June 3, 2025
TO: Centerville Planning & Zoning Commission
FROM: Phil Carlson, AICP, Stantec
RE: Zoning Code Issues & Definitions
INTRODUCTION
Recently the Planning and Zoning Commission discussed a variance request that brought up issues
of interpreting various definitions and standards in the Zoning Code related to setbacks, accessory
buildings and swimming pools. This memorandum discusses those issues and offers possible
changes to the code to address them.
LAKESHORE LOTS Ï FRONT YARD
It was noted in the previous discussion that common law in Minnesota for lakeshore lots considers
the lake side the front yard. The City Attorney has clarified that this applies only if there are no
other zoning regulations. The City has the authority (as do all Minnesota cities) to adopt its own
land use regulations to dictate where structures are located and related definitions and
standards. In Centerville the ÑfrontÒ is defined as being on the street and the ÑrearÒ is opposite it.
Selected definitions from the current Zoning Code (red type added for emphasis) are as follows:
FRONT or FRONTAGE. That side of a lot abutting on a street or way and ordinarily regarded as the front of
the lot, but it shall not be considered as the ordinary sideline of a corner lot.
LOT LINE, FRONT. On an interior lot, the lot line abutting a street; on a corner lot, the lot lines
abutting a street; on a through lot, the lot line abutting the street providing the primary access to the lot; or, on
a flag lot, the interior lot line most parallel to and nearest the street from which access is obtained.
YARD, FRONT. A yard extending across the full width of the front lot between side lot lines and extending
from the front property line to the depth required in the yard regulations of the district in which the lot is
located. On a corner lot, both street frontages shall be considered the front.
LOT LINE, REAR. The lot line not intersecting a front lot line that is most distant from and most
closely parallel to the front lot line. A lot bounded by only three lot lines will not have a REAR LOT LINE.
YARD, REAR. The portion of the yard on the same lot with the principal building located between the rear
line of the building and the rear lot line and extending for the full width of the lot.
5
June 3, 2025
Centerville Planning & Zoning Commission
Page 2 of 7
RE: Zoning Code Issues & Definitions
From the above definitions it is clear that for a lakeshore lot with a street opposite the lake, the
front is the street side, which means the lake would be the rear. But the lakeshore requires different
setbacks Ï75-ft, or 100-ft, depending on location on Centerville Lake or Peltier Lake, or Clearwater
Creek. It would be helpful to be clear on that issue. I suggest that the Centerville code add a
separate column, highlighted in blue type below, in Appendix A Table 1 District Regulations Lot
and Yard Requirements for ÑShoreland SetbackÒ as in the portion of the table below. ÑShorelandÒ
can mean either a lake or a river/stream. This would clearly distinguish the fact that the shoreland
setback is a different situation.
District Regulations
Min.
Zoning District Min. Area Min. Min. Min. Min. Shoreland Min.
Width Front Rear Side Setback Bldg. Garage
Setback Setback Setback Size Size
Ground
Floor
Sq. Ft.
R-1 Rural 10 acres 300 ft. 35 ft. 25 ft. 10 ft. See Note 1 1,050 ft. N/A
Residential*
R-2A Single-Family 11,500 sq. ft. 80 ft. 30 ft. 25 ft. 10 ft. See Note 1 900 ft. 440 ft.
Residential*
R-2 Single-Family 15,000 sq. ft. 100 ft. 35 ft. 25 ft. 10 ft. See Note 1 1,050 ft. 440 ft.
Residential*
1
See Zoning Code Sections 156.122(A)(3) and 156.133(B)(1) and (2)
YARD, REQUIRED YARD, & BUILDING LINE
Much of confusion in the recent discussion centers on the terms ÑyardÒ and Ñrequired yardÒ. In
CentervilleÔs current code ÑyardÒ is synonymous with ÑsetbackÒ (more than a few other cites
define it this way too). When the Code references a yard it most often means the setback (but not
always), even though that is not how most of us use the word ÑyardÒ Ï meaning anywhere on the
property around the house. I suggest we replace most instances of the word ÑyardÒ in the
Definitions in the code with ÑsetbackÒ as indicated in the definitions below.
These definitions also rely on the term Ñbuilding lineÒ, which can be confusing Ï do we mean the
location of a building in place or the required setback for a building? These can be different, and
very confusing, especially when the yard/setback definition references the Ñbuilding lineÒ. It can
result in an interpretation that where the building is located is the required setback Ï definitely not
the case. Many other city codes do not have a Ñbuilding lineÒ definition, and I suggest we delete
this definition to avoid confusion. The various definitions might be amended as follows:
6
June 3, 2025
Centerville Planning & Zoning Commission
Page 3 of 7
RE: Zoning Code Issues & Definitions
BUILDING LINE. The line, parallel to the street line, that passes through the point of the principal
building nearest the front lot line.
SETBACK. The minimum horizontal distance between a lot line and a building line or use.
\[Delete this definition in favor of the one below\]
YARD SETBACK. A required open space on a lot which is unoccupied and unobstructed from the ground
upward, except as otherwise provided for herein. The measurement of a YARD SETBACK shall be
construed as the minimum horizontal distance between the lot line and the a building or structureline.
YARD SETBACK, FRONT. A yard extending across the full width of the front lot between side lot lines and
extending from the front property line to the depth required in the yard regulations of the district in which the
lot is located. On a corner lot, both street frontages shall be considered the front. The area extending along the
full length of a front lot line between side lot lines and to the depth required in the setback regulations for the
district in which it is located.
YARD SETBACK, REAR. The portion of the yard on the same lot with the principal building located
between the rear line of the building and the rear lot line and extending for the full width of the lot. The area
lying along the full length of the rear lot line between side lot lines and extending inwardly to the depth
required in the setback regulations for the district in which the lot is located.
YARD SETBACK, SIDE. A yard between the side line of the lot and the nearest line of the building and
extending from the front yard to the rear yard. The area lying between the side line of a lot and extending
inwardly to the depth required in the setback regulations for the district in which the lot is located, and which
lies between the front and rear setbacks.
YARD, REAR. The portion of the yard on the same lot with the principal building located between the rear
line edge of the building and the rear lot line and extending for the full width of the lot.
BUILDABLE AREA. The space remaining on a zoning lot after minimum yard setback and open space
requirements have been met.
7
June 3, 2025
Centerville Planning & Zoning Commission
Page 4 of 7
RE: Zoning Code Issues & Definitions
ACCESSORY BUILDINGS
The issues above led to confusion on where accessory buildings (garages, sheds, gazebos, etc.)
could be located. The current Code says that Ñ no accessory structure shall be erected or located
within any required yard other than the rear yardÒ. This phrase is ambiguous because it uses both
Ñrequired yardÒ and plain ÑyardÒ. Do we mean the setback or just some other area around the
house (which we might call the Ñgeneric yardÒ to distinguish it from the required yard)? This phrase
could be interpreted in two ways, illustrated below:
An accessory structure may be located anywhere on the property except in a required
setback, except it can located in the required rear yard/setback. This implies that it could
be located in the generic front or side yard.
No accessory structure shall be located anywhere on the property other than the rear yard
(area behind the house).
8
June 3, 2025
Centerville Planning & Zoning Commission
Page 5 of 7
RE: Zoning Code Issues & Definitions
The precedent in Centerville interpretating this code standard is
that accessory buildings are only to be located in the rear yard.
It may be reasonable to allow accessory to the side of the
principal structure, as long as they are not in front of the house.
These two approaches are illustrated to the right.
Rear Yard Only
If the first option above is recommended Ï that accessory
buildings be allowed only in the rear yard Ï the code
amendment would be as follows:
§ 156.107 ACCESSORY STRUCTURES AND USES.
(A) Accessory Structures Î Residential Uses
. . .
(4) No accessory structure shall be erected or located
within any required yard other than the rear
yard.except within the rear yard.
Behind the Front of the House
If the second option above is recommended Ï that accessory
buildings may be allowed up to the front edge of the house Ï
the code amendment would be as follows:
§ 156.107 ACCESSORY STRUCTURES AND USES.
(A) Accessory Structures Î Residential Uses
. . .
(5) No accessory structure shall be erected or located
within any required yard other than the rear
yard.so that any edge of the structure is in front of
the principal building.
9
June 3, 2025
Centerville Planning & Zoning Commission
Page 6 of 7
RE: Zoning Code Issues & Definitions
FENCES & FRONT YARD
There are two other instances in Section 156.111 Fences & Special Private Screening where ÑyardÒ
appears in the code that might be confusing, related to fences. The code allows fences no more
than 3 ft in height in the Ñfront yardÒ, which I believe is intended to mean within the front setback,
but fences are allowed 6 ft in height elsewhere. This is typical of other cities where fences of a
certain height are allowed out beyond the front of the house, usually 3-4 ft in height. I suggest
amending the code as detailed and illustrated below.
§ 156.111 FENCES AND SPECIAL PRIVACY SCREENING.
(A) General regulations.
(1) All fences shall be located a minimum
of two feet from any property line of
the fence owner unless the owner of
the adjoining property agrees, in
writing, that the fence may be erected
on the property line of the respective
properties. This agreement shall be
submitted at the time of building
permit application.
(a) Fences shall be located a
minimum of two feet from a
property line adjoining a street
right of way and may not be
located in any drainage or utility
easement except where permission
has been granted by the City
through an encroachment
agreement.
(b) No fence other than a decorative fence may be constructed within a front yard setback. As
used herein, the term DECORATIVE FENCE means a wrought iron fence, wood or vinyl
vertical post and wood horizontal rail fence with no more than three rails or a wood or vinyl
picket type fence with at least two inches of open space between each picket. All decorative
fences shall have at least 40% of the surface area of the fence open.
(2) No residential fence may exceed six feet in height and no decorative fence within the front yard
setback may exceed 36 inches in height.
10
June 3, 2025
Centerville Planning & Zoning Commission
Page 7 of 7
RE: Zoning Code Issues & Definitions
SWIMMING POOLS
Swimming pools are considered accessory uses. In Section 156.107(A)(10) the code stipulates:
(10) Swimming pools may exceed the size requirements for accessory structures, but shall not
exceed 50% of the rear yard.
This limits the size of swimming pools but does not explicitly state a swimming pool must be in the
back yard, which is the precedent in Centerville and my understanding of the intent of the code. I
suggest this section be amended as follows:
Swimming pools may only be located in the rear yard, and may exceed the size requirements for
accessory structures, but shall not exceed 50% of the area of the rear yard.
CONCLUSION & RECOMMENDATION
If there is consensus among the Planning and Zoning Commission on the various issues presented
here, we will bring back zoning code amendments in ordinance form for a public hearing and
recommendation to the City Council at a later meeting.
11
CITY OF CENTERVILLEREQUEST
FOR ACTION
Agenda Item # Department: RequestedMeetingDate:
June 3, 2025
Planning and Zoning
IV.2
TITLE OF ISSUE:
Public Hearing - Variance Request for Deck Encroachment in Easement - 7239 Main Street
BACKGROUND AND SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION:
A public hearing will be held at the June 3, 2025 P&Z meeting to receive input on a request for a variance for a
deck encroachment in an easement at 7239 Main Street.
See the attached memo for additional information.
COST AND SOURCE(S) OF FUNDING:
N/A
REQUESTED ACTION:
Staff Report is Given
Open Public Hearing
Receive Public Input
Motion to Close Public Hearing
For ClerkÓs Use:
SUPPORTED DOCUMENTS ATTACHED
Motion By: ____________________________________
Resolution Ordinance Contract Minutes Plan Map
Second By: ____________________________________
Vote Record: Aye Nay
Notice, memo
Other (specify) ____________
______________________________________________________________
_____
_______________________________________________________________
Refer to: _________________________________
Tabled Until: ______________________________
Consent
Other: ___________________________________
Regular
12
13
϶
14
15
MADISON CAMERONOR CURRENT OWNER7250 MAIN STCENTERVILLE, MN 55038PIN: 15-31-22-44-0003
PETERSON JOHNOR CURRENT OWNER7413 22ND ST NOAKDALE, MN 55128PIN: 15-31-22-44-0079
BUTTERFIELD, FRANK CARLOR CURRENT OWNER7246 MAIN STHUGO, MN 55038PIN: 15-31-22-44-0040
ZIMNY FRANCIS J & SHARON JOR CURRENT OWNER7252 LA VALLE DRHUGO, MN 55038PIN: 15-31-22-44-0009
SETTERHOLM CHAD E & JEANINE SOR CURRENT OWNER1694 LAKELAND CIRHUGO, MN 55038PIN: 14-31-22-33-0019
BOARD OF WATER COMM ST PAULOR CURRENT OWNER1900 RICE STST PAUL, MN 55113PIN: 14-31-22-33-0038
HERR TIMOTHY S & LISA COR CURRENT OWNER7247 MAIN STCENTERVILLE, MN 55038PIN: 15-31-22-44-0043
LOOMIS, DEANNA COR CURRENT OWNER7248 LA VALLE DRCENTERVILLE, MN 55038PIN: 15-31-22-44-0044
KNABE ROBERT COR CURRENT OWNER212 HERITAGE LNCIRCLE PINES, MN 55014PIN: 14-31-22-33-0005
JOSHUA/MARKUM BUILDERS INCOR CURRENT OWNERPO BOX 7ANOKA, MN 55303PIN: 15-31-22-44-0080
PETERSON, CHARLES HOR CURRENT OWNER7240 MAIN STCENTERVILLE, MN 55038PIN: 14-31-22-33-0035
LEE HOMES CORPOR CURRENT OWNER409 LAKE AVEWHITE BEAR LAKE, MN 55110PIN: 14-31-22-33-0014
NOTTUM, JEFFREY BOR CURRENT OWNER7238 MAIN STCENTERVILLE, MN 55038PIN: 14-31-22-33-0001
JUNGWIRTH CHARLESOR CURRENT OWNER7244 MAIN STCENTERVILLE, MN 55038PIN: 15-31-22-44-0005
NOTTUM, JEFFREY BOR CURRENT OWNER7238 MAIN STCENTERVILLE, MN 55038PIN: 14-31-22-33-0037
JOSHUA MARKUM BUILDERS, INC.ATTN: MARKUM J OLSON11375 ROBINSON DRICOON RAPIDS, MN 55433
16
17
18
19
733 Marquette Avenue, Suite 1000, Minneapolis, MN 55402
Planning Report
DATE: June 3, 2025
TO: Centerville Planning & Zoning Commission
FROM: Phil Carlson, AICP, Stantec
ADDRESS: 7239 Main Street
REQUEST: Variance Ï Deck Encroachment in Easement
OWNER: Joshua Markum Builders, Inc.
APPLICANT: Markum J. Olson
PID: 15-31-22-44-0080
INTRODUCTION
The owner of the single family lot at 7239 Main Street, Joshua Markum Builders, is proposing a new
home with a deck that would encroach into the existing sewer easement on the south side of the
property. They are requesting a variance to allow the deck to encroach.
The criteria for considering a variance include whether the use is reasonable and whether there
are circumstances unique to the property, not created by the landowner, that make it difficult to
meet the ordinance. A deck on a home is certainly reasonable; encroaching in a utility easement
is not. The proposed deck is 10 ft deep and 27 ft wide. With construction of a new home and deck
there is considerable latitude in the design and placement of the new structures and therefore it
would be up to the owner, architect, and contractor to design the site so that this kind of conflict
does not happen. A homeowner is not
guaranteed a deck of a certain size. It
appears that a deck 17 ft wide could be built
that would not encroach in the easement,
illustrated to the right.
The City Engineer has reviewed the
application and notes that the deck would be
5 ft or less from the sewer manhole, which
would likely necessitate removal of the deck
if/when that manhole needs to be replaced Ï
which it will at some point. Record plans for the
sewer were not available as of this writing but
the sewer pipe is likely at least 8 ft deep, which
would require at least a 10-ft-wide excavation
area around the structure to replace it.
20
June 3, 2025
Centerville Planning & Zoning Commission
Page 2 of 2
RE: 7239 Main Street, Variance Request Ï Deck Encroachment in Sewer Easement
The application notes that the house cannot be moved any further toward Main Street, which is
true, but the size and shape of the house could be modified within those constraints to avoid the
easement. The circumstances that lead to this variance are created by the applicant and are not
inherent characteristics of the property. The variance request should be denied, and the home
and deck plans should be revised to avoid the sewer easement.
RECOMMENDATION
I recommend that the Planning and Zoning Commission recommend denial of the variance at
7239 Main Street for encroachment of a deck into a sewer easement, with the following findings of
fact:
Findings of Fact for Denial of Variance
1) Joshua Markum Builders, Inc. (ÑOwnerÒ and ÑApplicantÒ) owns the lot at 7239 Main Street,
zoned R-2 Single Family Residential.
2) The property is identified as PID 15-31-22-44-0080 and legally described on the certificate of
survey submitted with the application.
3) The applicant wishes to build a new home with a deck on the back of the house that
would encroach about 10 feet into the existing sewer easement on the lot. Such
encroachment is not allowed per city code.
4) The Centerville Zoning Code, in Section 156.310, has criteria for consideration of variances,
including that Ñ\[t\]here are unique circumstances to the property not created by the
landownerÒ that pose a practical difficulty to meeting the ordinance. There are no such
unique circumstances, and the property could readily accommodate a house and deck
of reasonable size and shape that would respect all setbacks and easements.
5) The request does not satisfy the requirements of Section 156.310.
60-Day Deadline
The application was received May 15, 2025. The deadline for final action by the City Council per
State statute 15.99 is July 15, 2025.
21
CITY OF CENTERVILLEREQUEST
FOR ACTION
Agenda Item # Department: RequestedMeetingDate:
June 3, 2025
Planning and Zoning
IV.3
TITLE OF ISSUE:
Public Hearing Variance Request Î
BACKGROUND AND SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION:
The owner of the single family home at 7064 Centerville Road wishes to build a new detached garage on the lot
and is requesting variances to three different provisions in the zoning code.
A notice was published for a public hearing, so the staff recommends the Commission open a public hearing to
receive input on this item and leave the public hearing open until the following meeting, when the applicant will
submit additional information to complete his submittal. The city is waiting on an accurate drawing to scale that
shows the gas line easement, the existing and proposed structures, and the property lines. We need to know the
dimensions and area of the existing house and the existing shed before providing a staff recommendation to the
Commission. This item will be discussed at the next P&Z meeting.
COST AND SOURCE(S) OF FUNDING:
N/A
REQUESTED ACTION:
Staff Report is Given
Open Public Hearing
Receive Public Input
For ClerkÓs Use:
SUPPORTED DOCUMENTS ATTACHED
Motion By: ____________________________________
Resolution Ordinance Contract Minutes Plan Map
Second By: ____________________________________
Vote Record: Aye Nay
Notice
Other (specify) ____________
______________________________________________________________
_____
_______________________________________________________________
Refer to: _________________________________
Tabled Until: ______________________________
Consent
Other: ___________________________________
Regular
22
23
϶
24
25
ANDERSON PAUL A & MARGARET AOR CURRENT OWNER7072 PROGRESS RDHUGO, MN 55038PIN: 23-31-22-24-0016
NELSON, DENNIS AOR CURRENT OWNER1744 HERITAGE STCENTERVILLE, MN 55038PIN: 23-31-22-24-0005
CITY OF CENTERVILLEOR CURRENT OWNER1880 MAIN STCENTERVILLE, MN 55038PIN: 23-31-22-23-0011
BURKE TRUSTEE PAUL JOR CURRENT OWNER508 VINE STHUDSON, WI 54016PIN: 23-31-22-23-0013
CENTERVILLE CITY OFOR CURRENT OWNER1880 MAIN STCENTERVILLE, MN 55038PIN: 23-31-22-23-0008
KILIAN DAVID POR CURRENT OWNER1695 SOREL STHUGO, MN 55038PIN: 23-31-22-23-0015
BELDEN, JOHN COR CURRENT OWNER7056 CENTERVILLE RDHUGO, MN 55038PIN: 23-31-22-24-0036
MORAVEC GARY M & MICHELLE AOR CURRENT OWNER1745 HERITAGE STHUGO, MN 55038PIN: 23-31-22-24-0014
GALLAWAY, NICHOLASOR CURRENT OWNER7072 CENTERVILLE RDCENTERVILLE, MN 55038PIN: 23-31-22-24-0034
CENTERVILLE CITY OFOR CURRENT OWNER1694 SOREL STCENTERVILLE, MN 55038PIN: 23-31-22-23-0006
PROPEL INVESTMENTS LLCOR CURRENT OWNER13973 GENEVA AVE NHUGO, MN 55038PIN: 23-31-22-23-0017
WASILOSKI, BRYCE NOR CURRENT OWNER1688 HERITAGE STCENTERVILLE, MN 55038PIN: 23-31-22-23-0046
KAECK JEYMMYOR CURRENT OWNER1740 HERITAGE STCENTERVILLE, MN 55038PIN: 23-31-22-24-0006
HILLMAN M R & REHBEIN C JOR CURRENT OWNER7086 PROGRESS RDCENTERVILLE, MN 55038PIN: 23-31-22-24-0044
CENTER LAKES PROPERTIESOR CURRENT OWNER7098 CENTERVILLE RDCENTERVILLE, MN 55038PIN: 23-31-22-24-0029
LINDSAY JULIE AOR CURRENT OWNER1687 SOREL STCENTERVILLE, MN 55038PIN: 23-31-22-23-0016
KAISER KRISTINE KAYOR CURRENT OWNER415 IGOTI LNLOUDON, TN 37774PIN: 23-31-22-24-0136
CENTERVILLE CITY OFOR CURRENT OWNER1694 SOREL STCENTERVILLE, MN 55038PIN: 23-31-22-23-0014
ACKERLEY ERIC JOHNOR CURRENT OWNER7048 PROGRESS RDCENTERVILLE, MN 55038PIN: 23-31-22-24-0012
NEKOWITSCH, JEANNEOR CURRENT OWNER7059 PROGRESS RDCENTERVILLE, MN 55038PIN: 23-31-22-24-0032
FERWERDA JONATHAN MOR CURRENT OWNER1716 HERITAGE STCENTERVILLE, MN 55038PIN: 23-31-22-24-0009
CENTERVILLE CITY OFOR CURRENT OWNER1880 MAIN STCENTERVILLE, MN 55038PIN: 23-31-22-23-0067
NICKS, CLAYTONOR CURRENT OWNER7029 CENTERVILLE RDCENTERVILLE, MN 55038PIN: 23-31-22-23-0003
SUMMIT LAKES PROPERTIES LLCOR CURRENT OWNER6625 LACASSE DRLINO LAKES, MN 55038PIN: 23-31-22-24-0041
JAYCEE SERVICES LLCOR CURRENT OWNER7240 MAIN STCENTERVILLE, MN 55038PIN: 23-31-22-24-0035
KING STEVEN D & DONNA KOR CURRENT OWNER1724 SOREL STHUGO, MN 55038PIN: 23-31-22-24-0033
CENTER LAKES PROPERTIESOR CURRENT OWNER7098 CENTERVILLE RDCENTERVILLE, MN 55038PIN: 23-31-22-24-0030
SZULIM, EDWARD BOR CURRENT OWNER1721 HERITAGE STCENTERVILLE, MN 55038PIN: 23-31-22-24-0031
DUFAULT, MICHAEL JEROMEOR CURRENT OWNER7045 CENTERVILLE RDCENTERVILLE, MN 55038PIN: 23-31-22-23-0047
SUMMIT LAKES PROPERTIES LLCOR CURRENT OWNER6625 LACASSE DRLINO LAKES, MN 55038PIN: 23-31-22-24-0026
CENTERVILLE CITY OFOR CURRENT OWNER1880 MAIN STCENTERVILLE, MN 55038PIN: 23-31-22-23-0007
ANOKA COUNTY OF HRAOR CURRENT OWNER2100 3RD AVEANOKA, MN 55303PIN: 23-31-22-24-0007
855 VILLAGE CENTER DR
HRX INVESTMENT LLCOR CURRENT OWNER#SAINT PAUL, MN 55127PIN: 23-31-22-24-0022
CENTERVILLE CITY OFOR CURRENT OWNER1880 MAIN STCENTERVILLE, MN 55038PIN: 23-31-22-23-0010
SUMMIT LAKES PROPERTIES LLCOR CURRENT OWNER6625 LACASSE DRLINO LAKES, MN 55038PIN: 23-31-22-24-0040
CULBERTSON JESSEOR CURRENT OWNER1724 HERITAGE STCENTERVILLE, MN 55038PIN: 23-31-22-24-0038
CENTERVILLE CITY OFOR CURRENT OWNER1694 SOREL STCENTERVILLE, MN 55038PIN: 23-31-22-23-0009
CHURCH OF ST GENEVIEVEOR CURRENT OWNER7087 GOIFFON STCENTERVILLE, MN 55014PIN: 23-31-22-23-0068
CULBERTSON JESSEOR CURRENT OWNER1724 HERITAGE STCENTERVILLE, MN 55038PIN: 23-31-22-24-0039
BOHL REBECCA ANNEOR CURRENT OWNER1680 SOREL STCENTERVILLE, MN 55038PIN: 23-31-22-23-0012
HIGHLAND, JOSEPHOR CURRENT OWNER1680 HERITAGE STCENTERVILLE, MN 55038PIN: 23-31-22-23-0048
CENTERVILLE CITY OFOR CURRENT OWNER1880 MAIN STCENTERVILLE, MN 55038PIN: 23-31-22-23-0005
HRX INVESTMENT LLCOR CURRENT OWNER855 VILLAGE CENTER DR #SAINT PAUL, MN 55127PIN: 23-31-22-24-0045
JOYER CHRISTINA AOR CURRENT OWNER8297 WEST RONDEAU LAKFOREST LAKE, MN 55025PIN: 23-31-22-24-0010
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
CITY OF CENTERVILLEREQUEST
FOR ACTION
Agenda Item # Department: RequestedMeetingDate:
June 3, 2025
Planning and Zoning
VII.1
TITLE OF ISSUE:
Variance Request for Deck Encroachment in Easement - 7239 Main Street
BACKGROUND AND SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION:
Earlier this evening, the P&Z held a public hearing to receive input on a request for a variance for a deck
encroachment easement at 7239 Main Street. The staff recommendation is to deny the request for a variance
based on the findings of fact outlined in the staff memo.
See the attached memo.
COST AND SOURCE(S) OF FUNDING:
N/A
REQUESTED ACTION:
Motion to recommend denial of the variance at 7239 Main Street for encroachment of a deck into a sewer
easement, based of the findings of fact outlined in the staff memo.
For ClerkÓs Use:
SUPPORTED DOCUMENTS ATTACHED
Motion By: ____________________________________
Resolution Ordinance Contract Minutes Plan Map
Second By: ____________________________________
Vote Record: Aye Nay
Memo
Other (specify) ____________
______________________________________________________________
_____
_______________________________________________________________
Refer to: _________________________________
Tabled Until: ______________________________
Consent
Other: ___________________________________
Regular
39
CITY OF CENTERVILLEREQUEST
FOR ACTION
Agenda Item # Department: RequestedMeetingDate:
June 3, 2025
Planning and Zoning
VIII.1
TITLE OF ISSUE:
May 6, 2025 Planning & Zoning Commission Minutes
BACKGROUND AND SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION:
The May 6, 2025 Planning & Zoning Commission minutes are included in the packet for the Commission's
review.
COST AND SOURCE(S) OF FUNDING:
N/A
REQUESTED ACTION:
Motion to approve the May 6, 2025 Planning and Zoning Commission meeting minutes.
For ClerkÓs Use:
SUPPORTED DOCUMENTS ATTACHED
Motion By: ____________________________________
Resolution Ordinance Contract Minutes Plan Map
Second By: ____________________________________
X
Vote Record: Aye Nay
Other (specify) ____________
______________________________________________________________
_____
_______________________________________________________________
Refer to: _________________________________
Tabled Until: ______________________________
Consent
Other: ___________________________________
Regular
40
CITY OF CENTERVILLE
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, the Regular Meeting of the Planning and Zoning
Commission was held in Council Chambers on Tuesday, May 6, 2025, at 6:30 p.m.
MEETING Î 6:30 P.M.
I. CALL TO ORDER
The meeting was called to order at 6:30p.m.
1. Roll Call
Present:
Commissioner Olson Not Approved
Commissioner Richard Nelson
Chair Dawn Kalina
Commissioner Jeannie Seppala
Commissioner Jim Carciofini
Jon Krueger
Commissioner Bruce Thompson
Absent: None
Staff: Interim City Administrator, Athanasia Lewis
Consulting City Planner, Phil Carlson
Council Council Member Russ Koski
II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
III. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
The agenda was approved as presented.
Motion by Commissioner Krueger, seconded by Commissioner Olson to Approve the Agenda.
All in favor. Motion carried.
IV. PUBLIC HEARING (6:30 PM or shortly thereafter)
1. Chapter 156 Zoning Ordinance & Table of Allowed Uses
Interim Administrator Lewis introduced this item, noting that the proposed revisions are still being
researched by planning staff and advised that the Commission open the public hearing and leave the
public hearing open for discussion at the next Planning and Zoning Commission meeting, which
rd
will be held on June 3. There were no public comments at the meeting. Proposed revisions will
aim to clarify definitions and intent pertaining to accessory structures, etc.
Motion by Commissioner Thompson, seconded by Commissioner Nelson to Open the Public
Hearing. All in favor. Motion carried.
Page 1 of 4
41
City of Centerville
Planning and Zoning Commission
May 6, 2025
2. Variance Request Î Dreamscape/AlexÓs (Sign)
Consulting Planner Phil Carlson introduced this item as presented in the packet. The applicant is
requesting a pylon sign 3.5 ft from the right-of-way (ROW) of 20th Avenue S, instead of the required
15 ft. Mr. Carlson noted that several years ago, Anoka County widened the ROW next to this
property by 20 feet. The ROW was not widened on the property to the north (Shell station, Wise
Guys Pizza, NyÓs Liquor, etc.) Mr. Carlson also noted that without the County ROW take, owner(s)
would have been able to place a pylon sign where they want it in their parking lot and easily meet
the 15-foot setback.
Discussion ensued about the placement of the sign relative to placement of other signs along the
roadway.
The public hearing was opened at 6:39p.m.
Motion by Commissioner Olson, seconded by Commissioner Carciofini to open the public
hearing. All in favor. Motion carried
There were no public comments.
Motion by Commissioner Thompson, seconded by Commissioner Olson to close the public
hearing. All in favor. Motion carried
3. Variance Request Î 1421 Mound Trail Î Accessory Structure (Garage)
Consulting City Planner Phil Carlson introduced this item as presented in the packet. Mr. Carlson
noted that the proposal is for an accessory structure (garage) at 1421 Mound Trail; he noted that the
applicantÓs request does not include a pool, as propose at an commission meeting a couple of months
ago.
The public hearing was opened.
Motion by Commissioner Thompson, seconded by Commissioner Olson to open the public
hearing. All in favor. Motion carried
Interim Administrator Lewis read public comments from an email she received from a resident at
1407 Mound Trail. The comments included a request to deny the covered patio portion of the project
for the following reasons:
exceeds 802 sf or 2% of the lot
does not meet the definition for an accessory structure
out of character for the neighborhood and the accessory structure at 1313 Mound Trail was
denied on 7/13/2021.
There were no other public comments.
Mr. Jim Heron, the applicant, addressed the Commission to review his project and answer questions.
Motion by Commissioner Thompson, seconded by Commissioner Olson to close the public
hearing. All in favor. Motion carried
Page 2 of 4
42
City of Centerville
Planning and Zoning Commission
May 6, 2025
V. AWARDS, PRESENTATIONS, APPEARANES
VI. OLD BUSINESS
1. None
VII. NEW BUSINESS
1. Variance Request Î Dreamscape/AlexÓs (Sign)
Interim Administrator Lewis introduced this item as presented in the packet. Discussion ensued
th
about the sign: what it looks like and its placement in relation to other signs along the 20 ave.
The CityÓs consulting planner reviewed the staff recommendation and findings of fact from his
memo.
Motion by Commissioner Carciofini, seconded by Commissioner Thompson to recommend
approval of a sign variance for Dreamscapes, along with the staff recommendations and
findings of fact. All in favor. Motion carried.
2. Variance Request Î 1421 Mound Trail Î Accessory Structure (Garage)
Interim Administrator Lewis introduced this item as presented. There was no further discussion by
the Commission.
Motion by Commissioner Thompson, seconded by Commissioner Carciofini to recommend
approval of a variance for an accessory structure as presented, along with staff
recommendations and findings of fact.
The applicant noted that the final drawing for the accessory structure is not included in the packet Î
his architect was still working on the drawing and he should have it next week.
Commissioner Seppala made a friendly amendment to the motion to include that the accessory
structure could be in any configuration as long as it meets the 802sf. Commissioner Thompson
accepted the friendly amendment.
Commissioner Carciofini made a friendly amendment requesting that all regulations in city
code and the staff memo are met. Commissioner Thompson accepted the friendly amendment.
Restated motion by Commissioner Seppala, seconded by Commissioner Thompson, to
recommend to city council approval of a variance for an accessory structure in any
configuration that does not exceed 802sf and meets all city codes and requirements. All in
favor. Motion carried.
VIII. APPROVAL OF MIN UTES
1. April 1, 2025, 2025, Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes
Interim Administrator Lewis introduced this item as presented. Chair Kalina noted a correction on
pg. 62, noting that the minutes should reflect Ðinterim administrator LewisÑ instead of ÐStatz.Ñ
Motion by Commissioner Krueger, seconded by Commissioner Olson to approve the April 1,
2025, Planning and Zoning Commission minutes as revised. All in favor. Motion carried.
Page 3 of 4
43
City of Centerville
Planning and Zoning Commission
May 6, 2025
IX. ANNOUNCEMENTS/UPDATES
1. Council Member Liaison
Council member Koski reported that there has been some discussion about council member Mosher
and the upcoming vacancy that is likely to occur due to his acceptance of a job in South Carolina.
Council Member Koski noted that council member MosherÓs 24 years of public service includes
several years as the chair of the Planning and Zoning Commission before becoming a council
member. Council member Koski also said that he has his deepest gratitude for the amazing work
heÓs done in the community.
2. AdministratorÓs Report
Interim City Administrator Lewis reviewed the report as presented in the packet.
X. ADJOURNMENT
Motion by Commissioner Krueger, seconded by Commissioner Olson, to adjourn the meeting
at 7:24 p.m. All in favor. Motion carried.
Page 4 of 4
44
CITY OF CENTERVILLEREQUEST
FOR ACTION
Agenda Item # Department: RequestedMeetingDate:
June 3, 2025
Planning and Zoning
IX.1
TITLE OF ISSUE:
Administrator's Report
BACKGROUND AND SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION:
The Administrator's report is included in the packet for the Commission's review.
COST AND SOURCE(S) OF FUNDING:
N/A
REQUESTED ACTION:
Information only.
For ClerkÓs Use:
SUPPORTED DOCUMENTS ATTACHED
Motion By: ____________________________________
Resolution Ordinance Contract Minutes Plan Map
Second By: ____________________________________
Vote Record: Aye Nay
Other____________
______________________________________________________________
_____
_______________________________________________________________
Refer to: _________________________________
Tabled Until: ______________________________
Consent
Other: ___________________________________
Regular
45
AdministratorÓs Report
May 28, 2025
ADMINISTRATION
City offices will be closed on May 26, 2025, in observance of Memorial Day.
The city would like to honor and remember those who made the ultimate
sacrifice for our freedom.
Accepting Applications
The city will begin accepting applications May 12, 2025, to fill an upcoming
vacancy on the City Council. This vacancy would complete the term of
Council Member Mosher and would end in January 2027. Applications can
be submitted in person at City Hall, or via email to Interim Administrator
Lewis at: alewis@centervillemn.com. Click here for an application.
PARKS & RECREATION
Parks & Recreation Proposals
Laurie LaMotte Memorial Park Play Structure Equipment
Mr. Jon Gilbertson, MWP Recreation, will be at the councilÓs upcoming meeting to provide a presentation
along with committee Chairperson Errickson-Grahek.
Disc Golf Course
A recommendation for approval of expending up to $10,000 of Park Dedication Fees for the installation of
the course at Laurie LaMotte Memorial Park at the councilÓs upcoming meeting. Chairperson Errickson-
Grahek will be on hand to answer any questions.
Annual Fete des Lacs Logo Contest Winners
Mayor Golden presented the Centerville Elementary Logo Contest winners with their Certificates and a
Redeemable Coupon for their corresponding prize winnings on May 16 and Chairperson Errickson-Grahek
and the Mayor Golden will both present the Centennial Middle Logo Contest winners with their Certificates
and Coupons February 23, 2025.
The committee thanks the participants, the mayor, the teachers and administrative staff from both schools
for their diligent work on this project. Photos of the winners will be available upon their receipt of their
cash winnings.
46
2025 Main Street Market
Main Street Market will take place every Thursday at 5:30p.m. from
thst
July 17-August 21. The location: 1721 Westview Street, Centerville,
next to Centerville Elementary parking lot. To date we have 24 vendors
that will be participating throughout the market season.
Several school groups have been scheduled for Community Night
scheduled for July 24, 2025.
Registration remains open for vendors, click here:
https://rb.gy/1yxx6z
RD
33 Annual Garage Sale Days
Here is the link for registering for Garage Sale Days: https://forms.gle/6Fsbox1tq65VhzsS9. This yearÓs
sales days are June 6 & 7, 2025. Please look for the flyer as many sales begin earlier. Registration remains
open and signs are now available. If you registered, one city sign is available to you with an expectation of
return following your sale.
Annual Cleanup Day
This is scheduled for June 14, 2025, from 8 a.m. Î noon at Laurie LaMotte Memorial Park in the parking
lot. Detailed information was contained in your recent newsletter. If you need any additional information
or need a coupon, please contact City Hall.
CENTENNIAL FIRE DISTRICT
Accepting Applications
The Centennial Fire District is currently hiring for Paid On-
Call positions.
If you are interested in becoming a Centennial Fire District
Firefighter/EMT, please visit the CFD webpage for more
information: JOIN US | Centennial Fire
If you know of someone who may be interested in joining the Centennial Fire District then please help us
spread the word.
CENTENNIAL LAKES POLICE
CLPD had the opportunity with Lino
Lakes Police Department to take part in
the Career Fair event at Pines School
several days ago. Officer Stepan and CSO
Smith appreciated the chance to share
what they do with many students and
enjoyed talking with the students in a
casual environment
PUBLIC WORKS
We have hired our seasonal staff, and both
employees have started this week. Staff
have completed spring hydrant flushing.
Lamotte Ballfields are being used by
Centennial Lakes Little League.
47
Meeting and City Hall Schedule
May 26, 2025 Î City Offices Closed in Observance of Memorial Day
May 28, 2025, 5:00 & 6:30 p.m. Î City Council Work Session & Council Meeting
June 3, 2025 Î P & Z
June 4, 2025 Î P & R
June 11, 2025, 5:00 & 6:30 p.m. Î City Council Work Session & Council Meeting
June 18, 2025, EDA
*All meetings begin at 6:30 p.m. unless otherwise noted.
CENTERVILLE CARES
Domestic Abuse & Violence Resources
The Alexandra House is one of the largest domestic and sexual violence
organizations in Minnesota, and the only one in Anoka County, with locations
in Blaine and Andover. Their primary goals are to keep individuals and families
safe; change perception and acceptance of domestic abuse and violence; prevent
violence from occurring and intervene to provide ongoing support to those in
need.
Alexandra House Serves in Our Communities Via:
24-hour Emergency Shelter and Helpline
Civil Legal Advocacy program(s)
Criminal Justice Intervention/Lethality Assessment Program(s)
Health Care Advocacy initiative(s)
Housing and Supportive Services
Youth Services
To learn more about Alexandra House, click here.
FINANCE
Staff is preparing for an upcoming work session, scheduled on May 28, 2025, with the City Council on the
cityÓs capital improvement program funds.
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
Calendar of Events:
May 28, 2025, Centennial Area Social Î 5:00pm-7:00pm Î MCÓs Taphouse ion Lino Lakes
Senior Expo Recap
The annual Senior Expo was held on May 15, 2025, and it was a huge success. There were more than 150
attendees and about 30 vendors. Chamber staff received input from attendees on how to enhance the event
next year.
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
Development Inquiries
Two
48
Planning & Zoning
At the June 3, 2025, P&Z meeting, the Commission tabled a previous public hearing to receive input on
amendments to the zoning ordinance. The intent of the proposed revisions is to clarify existing definitions
related to yard(s), setbacks, accessory structures in residential areas. There will also be two public hearings
for variance requests: 7239 Main Street Î request for placement of deck post within the City drainage/utility
easement and 7064 Centerville Road Î request for construction of a detached garage in the front yard, less
than 6Ó from the principle structure and to retain the existing accessory structure on the parcel as the 2% or
200 square feet maximum would be exceeded. The meeting starts at 6:30p.m. and the public is welcome to
attend.
COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT (April 2025)
Website
2k users
1.8k new
6k page views
Website (Featured News)
City Offices Closed in Observance of Memorial Day
rd
33 Annual Garage Sale Day Registration
Inflow & Infiltration Program
Centerville Cares
Main Street Market Registration
Smart Irrigation Controller Rebate
Planning & Zoning Public Hearings
Council Vacancy
Follow Us on Social Media
Stay Connected
49
Reader Board (11,000+ cars/day)
Meeting Schedules
Hiring Seasonal P.W. Technician
Parade Registration Open
Council Pending Vacancy
Social Media (568 X; 945 FB Followers) (2273 Post Reach)
City Accounts
o 5/15 Council Pending Vacancy (621/60)
o 5/9 City Council Agenda/Packet Link (280/26)
o 5/8 Logo Contest Winners (474/68)
o 5/5 Senior Expo (192/59)
o 5/2 SCAM Î Anoka County Assessor (1256/45)
50
Community Email List (301 email addresses)
Upcoming Meeting Agendas, Admin. Report, Newsletter, Registrations Open & Upcoming Events
Business Email List
Promote local businesses via promotional swag at summer events
Google Business Profile
165 profile views
81 people asked for directions
30 calls
54 website visits
Sign up to Receive Text Messages and/or to be Added to the CityÓs E-Blast
Receive text messages about upcoming events on the city calendar and the parks calendar. From the
CityÓs Website Click on the ÐNotify MeÑ icon to receive texts messages with information about upcoming
events on the city calendar and the parks calendar. Click here to be taken directly to this page.
Sign up to be added to the cityÓs e-blast list to receive meeting agendas, meeting packets, newsletters,
the AdministratorÓs Report, and other pertinent information via email. Click here to sign up via a Google
Doc form. Once your information is submitted, your email will be added to our email distribution list. Click
here to be taken to the ÐStay ConnectedÑ page where you can then create an account and complete the Google
Docs form.
51
LandUseVariances
Published:May21,2021
Mhh\[dd~{\[|p|n{~fhzf~d{h|chz~.
Thiscontentconveysgeneralinformation.Donotuseitasasubstituteforlegaladvice.Anyattorney
generalopinionscitedareavailablefrom theLeaguesResearchsta.
Whatisa variance?
Avarianceisawaythatcitiesmayallowanexceptiontopartofazoningordinance.Itisa
permitteddeparturefromstrictenforcementoftheordinanceasappliedtoaparticularpiece
ofproperty.Avarianceisgenerallyforadimensionalstandard(suchassetbacksorheight
limits).Avarianceallowsthelandownertobreakadimensionalzoningrulethatwould
otherwiseapply.
Sometimesalandownerseeksavariancetoallowauseoftheirpropertythatisnotpermissible
underthezoningordinance.Suchvariancesareo=FL=JE=<ȆMK=N9JA9F;=Kȇ9KGHHGK=<LG
Ȇ9J=9N9JA9F;=Kȇ>JGE<AE=FKAGF9DKL9F<9J<KǷ3K=N9JA9F;=K9J=FGL?=F=J9DDQ9DDGO=<AF
Minnesota.Statelawprohibitsacityfrompermittingbyvarianceanyusethatisnotpermitted
undertheordinanceforthezoningdistrictwherethepropertyislocated(
Minn.Stat.§462.357,
subd.6).
Grantinga varianceGrantingavariance
MinnesotalawprovidesforabodycalledtheboardofadjustmentandappealstohearrequestsMinnesotalaaawprovidesffforabodycalledtheboardofaddjustmentandappealstohearrequests
forvariances(ffforvariances(Minn.Stat.§462.357,subd.6).Inmanysmallercommunities,theplanningMinn.Stat.§§462.357,subd.6).Inmanysmallercommunities,theplanning
commissionoreventhecitycouncilmayservethatfunction.Avariancedecisionisgenerallycommissionoreventhecitycouncilmaaayservethatfffunction.Avariancedecisionisgenerally
appealabletothecitycouncil.appealabletothecitycouncil.
Acitymaygrantavarianceifenforcementofazoningordinanceprovision,asappliedtoaAcitymaaaygrantavarianceifenffforcementofazoningordinanceprovision,asappliedtoa
H9JLA;MD9JHA=;=G>HJGH=JLQǸOGMD<;9MK=L@=D9F<GOF=JȆHJ9;LA;9D<Aparticularpieceofpropertyyy,wouldcausethelandownerȆpracticaldi;MDLA=KǷȇ$GJL@=culties.ȇForthe
variancetobegranted,theapplicantmustsatisfythestatutorythree-factortestforpracticalvariancetobegranted,theapplicantmustsatisfffythestatutorythree-fffactortestffforpractical
didiculties(culties(Minn.Stat.§462.357,subd.6).IftheapplicantdoesnotmeetallthreefactorsoftheMinn.Stat.§§462.357,subd.6).Iftheapplicantdoesnotmeetallthreefffactorsofthe
statutorytest,thecityshouldnotgrantthevariance.Also,variancesareonlypermittedwhen:statutorytest,thecityshouldnotgrantthevariance.Also,variancesareonlypermittedwhen:
Theyareinharmonywiththegeneralpurposesandintentoftheordinance,andTheyareinharmonywiththegeneralpurposesandintentoftheordinance,and
Thetermsofthevarianceareconsistentwiththecomprehensiveplan.Thetermsofthevarianceareconsistentwiththecomprehensiveplan.
Legalstandards
5@=F;GFKA<=JAF?9N9JA9F;=9HHDA;9LAGFǸ9;ALQ=P=J;AK=KȆIM9KAȎBM<A;A9Dȇ9ML@GJALQǷ2@AKE=9FK
thecityactslikeajudgeinevaluatingthefactsagainstthelegalstandard.Thecitysroleis
limitedtoapplyingthelegalstandardofpracticaldicultiestothefactspresentedbythe
application.Iftheapplicantmeetsthestandard,thenthecitymaygrantthevariance.
52
In contrast, when the city writes the rules in the zoning ordinance, the city is exercising
ȆD=?AKD9LAN=ȇ 9ML@GJALQ 9F< @9K EM;@ :JG9<=J <AK;J=LAGFǷ
Practical difPractical difcultiesculties
Ȇ.J9;LA;9D <AȆPractical di;MDLA=Kȇ AK 9 D=?9D KL9F<9Jcultiesȇ is a legal standard that cities must d that cities must apply apply when considering applicationswhen considering applications
for variances. It is a three-factor test and applies to all requests for variances. To constitutefor variances. It is a three-factor test and applies to all requests for variances. To
constitute
practical dipractical diculties, all three factors of the test must be satisculties, all three factors of the test must be satis ƼƼ ed.ed.
ReasonablenessReasonableness
The The ƼƼ rst factor is that the property owner proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner.rst factor is that the property owner proposes to use the property in a reasonable
manner.
This factor means that the landowner would like to use the property in a particular reasonableThis factor means that the landowner would like to use the property in a particular reasonable
way but cannot do so under the rules of the ordinance.way but cannot do so under the rules of the ordinance.
It does not mean that the land cannot be put to any reasonable use whatsoever without theIt does not mean that the land cannot be put to any reasonable use whatsoever without the
variance. For example, if the variance application is for a building too close to a lot line or doesvariance. For example, if the variance application is for a building too close to
a lot line or does
not meet the required setback, the focus of the not meet the required setback, the focus of the ƼƼ rst factor is whether the request to place arst factor is whether the request to place
a
building there is reasonable.building there is reasonable.
UniquenessUniqueness
The second factor is that the landownerThe second factor is that the landowners problem is due to circumstances unique to thes problem is due to circumstances unique to the
property not caused by the landowner.property not caused by the landowner.
The uniqueness generallThe uniqueness generally rely relates to the physical characteristics ates to the physical characteristics of the particular piece ofof the particular piece of
property, that is, to the land and not personal characteristics or preferences of the landowner.property, that is, to the land and not personal characteristics or preferences of the
landowner.
When considering the variance for a building to encroach or intrude into a setback, the focusWhen considering the variance for a building to encroach or intrude into a setback, the focus
of this factor is whether there is anything physically unique about the particular piece ofof this factor is whether there is anything physically unique about the particular piece of
property, such as sloping topography or other natural features like wetlands or trees.property, such as sloping topography or other natural features like wetlands or trees.
Essential characterEssential character
The third factor is that the variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of theThe third factor is that the variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character
of the
locality.locality.
Under this factor, consider whether the resulting structure will be out of scale, out of place, orUnder this factor, consider whether the resulting structure will be out of scale, out
of place, or
otherwise inconsistent with the surrounding area.otherwise inconsistent with the surrounding area.
For example, when thinking about the variance for an encroachment into a setback, the focusFor example, when thinking about the variance for an encroachment into a setback, the focus
is how the particular building will look closer to a lot line and if that is how the particular building will look closer to a lot line and if that ƼƼ ts in with the character ofts in
with the character of
the area.
the area.
Undue hardship
Ȇ3F<M= @9J<K@AHȇ O9K L@= F9E= G> L@= L@J==Ȏ>9;LGJ L=KL HJAGJ LG 9 +9Q DžǃDŽDŽ ;@9F?= G> D9O Ȗ2011
Minn. Laws, ch. 19, amending Minn. Stat. § 462.357, subd. 6).
The 2011 law restored municipal variance authority in response to a Minnesota Supreme Court
case (Krummenacher v. City of Minnetonka, 783 N.W.2d 721 (Minn. June 24, 2010)). The law now
does both of the following:
Provides consistent statutory language between city land use planning statutes (Stat. §
462.357, subd. 6) and county variance authority (Minn. Stat. § 394.27, subd. 7).
53
Clari Ƽ es 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.
2@= DžǃDŽDŽ D9O J=F9E=< L@= EMFA;AH9D N9JA9F;= KL9F<9J< >JGE ȆMF<M= @9J<K@AHȇ LG ȆHJ9;LA;9D
di;MDLA=KǸȇ :ML GL@=JOAK= J=L9AF=< L@= >9EADA9J L@J==Ȏ>9;LGJ L=KL G>
reasonableness
uniqueness
essential character
The League has developed models that re ƽ ect current variance law. Your city attorney should
review these models with you prior to council action to tailor them for your citys needs.
View the League model ordinance on issuance of a zoning variance (doc)
View the League model variance application form (doc)
View the League model resolution adopting Ƽ ndings of fact (doc)
Other considerations
Harmony with other land use controls
1L9L= D9O K9QKǸ Ȇ49JA9F;=K K@9DD GFDQ := H=JEALL=< O@=F L@=Q 9J= AF @9JEGFQ OAL@ L@= ?=F=J9D
purposes and intent of the ordinance and when the terms of the variance are consistent with
L@= ;GEHJ=@=FKAN= HD9Fȇ ȖMinn. Stat. § 462.357, subd. 6). This is in addition to the three-factor
practical diculties test. So, a city evaluating a variance application should make Ƽ ndings on
whether:
The variance is in harmony with the purposes and intent of the ordinance.
The variance is consistent with the comprehensive plan.
The proposal puts the property to use in a reasonable manner.
There are unique circumstances to the property not created by the landowner.
The variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality.
For more about Ƽ ndings of fact, see Taking the Mystery out of Findings of Fact
Economic factors
Sometimes landowners insist they deserve a variance because they have already incurred
substantial cost. They may also argue they will not receive expected revenue without the
variance. State statute speci Ƽ cally notes that economic considerations alone cannot create
practical diculties (Minn. Stat. § 462.357, subd. 6). Rather, practical diculties exist only
when the three statutory factors are met.
Neighborhood opinion
Neighborhood opinion alone is not a valid basis for granting or denying a variance request.
While city ocials may feel their decision should re ƽ ect the overall will of the residents, their
task is limited to evaluating how the variance application meets the statutory practical
diculties factors.
54
Residents can oen provide important facts to help the city address these factors, but
unsubstantiated opinions and reactions to a request are not a legitimate basis for a variance
decision. If neighborhood opinion is a signi Ƽ cant basis for the variance decision, it could be
overturned by a court if challenged.
Conditions
A city may impose conditions when it grants a variance. Conditions must be directly related to
and bear a rough proportionality to the impact created by the variance (Minn. Stat. § 462.357,
subd. 6). For instance, if a variance is granted to exceed a height limit, any conditions attached
should presumably relate to lessening the eect of excess height.
Variance procedural issues
Public hearings
Minnesota statute does not clearly require a public hearing before a variance is granted or
denied. Many practitioners and attorneys agree that the best practice is to hold public hearings
on all variance requests. A public hearing allows the city to establish a record and elicit facts to
help determine if the application meets the practical diculties factors.
Past practices
While past practice may be instructive, it cannot replace the need for analysis of all three of the
practical diculties factors for each and every variance request. In evaluating a variance
request, cities are not bound by decisions made for prior variance requests. If a city Ƽ nds it is
issuing many variances to a particular zoning standard, the city should consider amending the
ordinance to change the standard.
Time limit
A written request for a variance is subject to Minnesotas 60-day rule. It must be approved or
denied within 60 days of the time it is submitted to the city. A city may extend the time period
for an additional 60 days, but only if it does so in writing before expiration of the initial 60-day
period. Under the 60-day rule, failure to approve or deny a request within the statutory time
period is considered an approval (Minn. Stat. § 15.99).
Documentation
Whatever its decision, a city should create a record that supports it.
If denying the variance, the 60-day rule requires the reasons for the denial be put in writing
within the statutory time period (Minn. Stat. § 15.99, subd. 2). Even if the variance is approved,
a written statement explaining the decision is advisable.
The written statement should address each of the three practical diculties factors and list the
relevant facts and conclusions for each factor.
For more about Ƽ ndings of fact, see Taking the Mystery out of Findings of Fact
Variances once granted
N9JA9F;= AK 9 HJGH=JLQ JA?@L L@9L ȆJMFK OAL@ L@= D9F<Ƿȇ 2@9L AKǸ AL 9LL9;@=K LG 9F< :=F=Ƽ ts the
land and is not limited to a particular landowner. A variance is typically Ƽ led with the county
55
recorder. Even if the property is sold to another person, the variance applies.
+G<=DK MK=< AF L@AK <AK;MKKAGFǹ
Issuance of Variances, LMC model ordinance (doc)
Variance Application, LMC model form (doc)
Adopting Findings of Fact, LMC model resolution (doc)
W~ =>* Lh~dh
Jed Burkett
Loss Control/Land Use Attorney
(651) 281-1247 or (800) 925-1122
jburkett@lmc.org
56
Office of the Revisor of Statutes
462.357 OFFICIAL CONTROLS: ZONING ORDINANCE.
Subdivision 1.Authority for zoning. For the purpose of promoting the public health, safety, morals, and general welfare, a
municipality may by ordinance regulate on the earth's surface, in the air space above the surface, and in subsurface areas, the location,
height, width, bulk, type of foundation, number of stories, size of buildings and other structures, the percentage of lot which may be
occupied, the size of yards and other open spaces, the density and distribution of population, the uses of buildings and structures for
trade, industry, residence, recreation, public activities, or other purposes, and the uses of land for trade, industry, residence, recreation,
agriculture, forestry, soil conservation, water supply conservation, conservation of shorelands, as defined in sections 103F.201 to
103F.221, access to direct sunlight for solar energy systems as defined in section 216C.06, flood control or other purposes, and may
establish standards and procedures regulating such uses. To accomplish these purposes, official controls may include provision for
purchase of development rights by the governing body in the form of conservation easements under chapter 84C in areas where the
governing body considers preservation desirable and the transfer of development rights from those areas to areas the governing body
considers more appropriate for development. No regulation may prohibit earth sheltered construction as defined in section 216C.06,
subdivision 14, relocated residential buildings, manufactured homes built in conformance with sections 327.31 to 327.35, or
industrialized or modular buildings for residential use built in conformance with Minnesota Rules, chapter 1361, that comply with all
other zoning ordinances promulgated pursuant to this section. The regulations may divide the surface, above surface, and subsurface
areas of the municipality into districts or zones of suitable numbers, shape, and area. The regulations shall be uniform for each class or
kind of buildings, structures, or land and for each class or kind of use throughout such district, but the regulations in one district may
differ from those in other districts. The ordinance embodying these regulations shall be known as the zoning ordinance and shall
consist of text and maps. A city may by ordinance extend the application of its zoning regulations to unincorporated territory located
within two miles of its limits in any direction, but not in a county or town which has adopted zoning regulations; provided that where
two or more noncontiguous municipalities have boundaries less than four miles apart, each is authorized to control the zoning of land
on its side of a line equidistant between the two noncontiguous municipalities unless a town or county in the affected area has adopted
zoning regulations. Any city may thereafter enforce such regulations in the area to the same extent as if such property were situated
within its corporate limits, until the county or town board adopts a comprehensive zoning regulation which includes the area.
Subd. 1a.Certain zoning ordinances. A municipality must not enact, amend, or enforce a zoning ordinance that has the effect
of altering the existing density, lot-size requirements, or manufactured home setback requirements in any manufactured home park
constructed before January 1, 1995, if the manufactured home park, when constructed, complied with the then existing density, lot-size
and setback requirements.
Subd. 1b.Conditional uses. A manufactured home park, as defined in section 327.14, subdivision 3, is a conditional use in a
zoning district that allows the construction or placement of a building used or intended to be used by two or more families.
Subd. 1c.Amortization prohibited. Except as otherwise provided in this subdivision, a municipality must not enact, amend, or
enforce an ordinance providing for the elimination or termination of a use by amortization which use was lawful at the time of its
inception. This subdivision does not apply to adults-only bookstores, adults-only theaters, or similar adults-only businesses, as defined
by ordinance.
Subd. 1d.Nuisance. Subdivision 1c does not prohibit a municipality from enforcing an ordinance providing for the prevention
561.01, or eliminating a use determined to be a public nuisance, as defined in section
or abatement of nuisances, as defined in section
617.81, subdivision 2, paragraph (a), clauses (i) to (ix), without payment of compensation.
Subd. 1e.Nonconformities. (a) Except as otherwise provided by law, any nonconformity, including the lawful use or
occupation of land or premises existing at the time of the adoption of an additional control under this chapter, may be continued,
including through repair, replacement, restoration, maintenance, or improvement, but not including expansion, unless:
(1) the nonconformity or occupancy is discontinued for a period of more than one year; or
57
(2) any nonconforming use is destroyed by fire or other peril to the extent of greater than 50 percent of its estimated market
value, as indicated in the records of the county assessor at the time of damage, and no building permit has been applied for within 180
days of when the property is damaged. In this case, a municipality may impose reasonable conditions upon a zoning or building permit
in order to mitigate any newly created impact on adjacent property or water body. When a nonconforming structure in the shoreland
district with less than 50 percent of the required setback from the water is destroyed by fire or other peril to greater than 50 percent of
its estimated market value, as indicated in the records of the county assessor at the time of damage, the structure setback may be
increased if practicable and reasonable conditions are placed upon a zoning or building permit to mitigate created impacts on the
adjacent property or water body.
(b) Any subsequent use or occupancy of the land or premises shall be a conforming use or occupancy. A municipality may, by
ordinance, permit an expansion or impose upon nonconformities reasonable regulations to prevent and abate nuisances and to protect
the public health, welfare, or safety. This subdivision does not prohibit a municipality from enforcing an ordinance that applies to
adults-only bookstores, adults-only theaters, or similar adults-only businesses, as defined by ordinance.
(c) Notwithstanding paragraph (a), a municipality shall regulate the repair, replacement, maintenance, improvement, or expansion
of nonconforming uses and structures in floodplain areas to the extent necessary to maintain eligibility in the National Flood Insurance
Program and not increase flood damage potential or increase the degree of obstruction to flood flows in the floodway.
(d) Paragraphs (d) to (j) apply to shoreland lots of record in the office of the county recorder on the date of adoption of local
shoreland controls that do not meet the requirements for lot size or lot width. A municipality shall regulate the use of nonconforming
lots of record and the repair, replacement, maintenance, improvement, or expansion of nonconforming uses and structures in shoreland
areas according to paragraphs (d) to (j).
(e) A nonconforming single lot of record located within a shoreland area may be allowed as a building site without variances
from lot size requirements, provided that:
(1) all structure and septic system setback distance requirements can be met;
(2) a Type 1 sewage treatment system consistent with Minnesota Rules, chapter 7080, can be installed or the lot is connected to a
public sewer; and
(3) the impervious surface coverage does not exceed 25 percent of the lot.
(f) In a group of two or more contiguous lots of record under a common ownership, an individual lot must be considered as a
separate parcel of land for the purpose of sale or development, if it meets the following requirements:
(1) the lot must be at least 66 percent of the dimensional standard for lot width and lot size for the shoreland classification
consistent with Minnesota Rules, chapter 6120;
(2) the lot must be connected to a public sewer, if available, or must be suitable for the installation of a Type 1 sewage treatment
system consistent with Minnesota Rules, chapter 7080, and local government controls;
(3) impervious surface coverage must not exceed 25 percent of each lot; and
(4) development of the lot must be consistent with an adopted comprehensive plan.
(g) A lot subject to paragraph (f) not meeting the requirements of paragraph (f) must be combined with the one or more
contiguous lots so they equal one or more conforming lots as much as possible.
(h) Notwithstanding paragraph (f), contiguous nonconforming lots of record in shoreland areas under a common ownership must
be able to be sold or purchased individually if each lot contained a habitable residential dwelling at the time the lots came under
common ownership and the lots are suitable for, or served by, a sewage treatment system consistent with the requirements of section
115.55 and Minnesota Rules, chapter 7080, or connected to a public sewer.
(i) In evaluating all variances, zoning and building permit applications, or conditional use requests, the zoning authority shall
require the property owner to address, when appropriate, stormwater runoff management, reducing impervious surfaces, increasing
setback, restoration of wetlands, vegetative buffers, sewage treatment and water supply capabilities, and other conservation-designed
actions.
(j) A portion of a conforming lot may be separated from an existing parcel as long as the remainder of the existing parcel meets
the lot size and sewage treatment requirements of the zoning district for a new lot and the newly created parcel is combined with an
adjacent parcel.
Subd. 1f.Substandard structures. Notwithstanding subdivision 1e, Minnesota Rules, parts 6105.0351 to 6105.0550, may
allow for the continuation and improvement of substandard structures, as defined in Minnesota Rules, part 6105.0354, subpart 30, in
the Lower Saint Croix National Scenic Riverway.
Subd. 1g.Feedlot zoning controls. (a) A municipality proposing to adopt a new feedlot zoning control or to amend an existing
feedlot zoning control must notify the Pollution Control Agency and commissioner of agriculture at the beginning of the process, no
later than the date notice is given of the first hearing proposing to adopt or amend a zoning control purporting to address feedlots.
58
(b) Prior to final approval of a feedlot zoning control, the governing body of a municipality may submit a copy of the proposed
zoning control to the Pollution Control Agency and to the commissioner of agriculture and request review, comment, and
recommendations on the environmental and agricultural effects from specific provisions in the ordinance.
(c) The agencies' response to the municipality may include:
(1) any recommendations for improvements in the ordinance; and
(2) the legal, social, economic, or scientific justification for each recommendation under clause (1).
(d) At the request of the municipality's governing body, the municipality must prepare a report on the economic effects from
specific provisions in the ordinance. Economic analysis must state whether the ordinance will affect the local economy and describe
the kinds of businesses affected and the projected impact the proposal will have on those businesses. To assist the municipality, the
commissioner of agriculture, in cooperation with the Department of Employment and Economic Development, must develop a
template for measuring local economic effects and make it available to the municipality. The report must be submitted to the
commissioners of employment and economic development and agriculture along with the proposed ordinance.
(e) A local ordinance that contains a setback for new feedlots from existing residences must also provide for a new residence
setback from existing feedlots located in areas zoned agricultural at the same distances and conditions specified in the setback for new
feedlots, unless the new residence is built to replace an existing residence. A municipality may grant a variance from this requirement
under section 462.358, subdivision 6.
Subd. 1h.Comprehensive plans in greater Minnesota; open spaces. When adopting or updating a comprehensive plan in a
municipality located within a county that is not a greater than 80 percent area, as defined in section 103G.005, subdivision 10b, and
that is located outside the metropolitan area, as defined by section 473.121, subdivision 2, the municipality shall consider adopting
goals and objectives for the preservation of agricultural, forest, wildlife, and open space land and the minimization of development in
sensitive shoreland areas. Within three years of updating the comprehensive plan, the municipality shall consider adopting ordinances
as part of the municipality's official controls that encourage the implementation of the goals and objectives.
Subd. 1i.Airport safety zones on zoning maps. Airport safety zones must be included on maps that illustrate boundaries of
zoning districts and that are adopted as official controls.
Subd. 2.General requirements. (a) At any time after the adoption of a land use plan for the municipality, the planning agency,
for the purpose of carrying out the policies and goals of the land use plan, may prepare a proposed zoning ordinance and submit it to
the governing body with its recommendations for adoption.
(b) Subject to the requirements of subdivisions 3, 4, and 5, the governing body may adopt and amend a zoning ordinance by a
majority vote of all its members. The adoption or amendment of any portion of a zoning ordinance which changes all or part of the
existing classification of a zoning district from residential to either commercial or industrial requires a two-thirds majority vote of all
members of the governing body.
(c) The land use plan must provide guidelines for the timing and sequence of the adoption of official controls to ensure planned,
orderly, and staged development and redevelopment consistent with the land use plan.
Subd. 3.Public hearings. No zoning ordinance or amendment thereto shall be adopted until a public hearing has been held
thereon by the planning agency or by the governing body. A notice of the time, place and purpose of the hearing shall be published in
the official newspaper of the municipality at least ten days prior to the day of the hearing. When an amendment involves changes in
district boundaries affecting an area of five acres or less, a similar notice shall be mailed at least ten days before the day of the hearing
to each owner of affected property and property situated wholly or partly within 350 feet of the property to which the amendment
relates. For the purpose of giving mailed notice, the person responsible for mailing the notice may use any appropriate records to
determine the names and addresses of owners. A copy of the notice and a list of the owners and addresses to which the notice was sent
shall be attested to by the responsible person and shall be made a part of the records of the proceedings. The failure to give mailed
notice to individual property owners, or defects in the notice shall not invalidate the proceedings, provided a bona fide attempt to
comply with this subdivision has been made.
Subd. 4.Amendments. An amendment to a zoning ordinance may be initiated by the governing body, the planning agency, or
by petition of affected property owners as defined in the zoning ordinance. An amendment not initiated by the planning agency shall
be referred to the planning agency, if there is one, for study and report and may not be acted upon by the governing body until it has
received the recommendation of the planning agency on the proposed amendment or until 60 days have elapsed from the date of
reference of the amendment without a report by the planning agency.
Subd. 5.Amendment; certain cities of the first class. The provisions of this subdivision apply to the adoption or amendment
of any portion of a zoning ordinance which changes all or part of the existing classification of a zoning district from residential to
either commercial or industrial of a property located in a city of the first class, except a city of the first class in which a different
process is provided through the operation of the city's home rule charter. In a city to which this subdivision applies, amendments to a
zoning ordinance shall be made in conformance with this section but only after there shall have been filed in the office of the city clerk
a written consent of the owners of two-thirds of the several descriptions of real estate situate within 100 feet of the total contiguous
59
descriptions of real estate held by the same owner or any party purchasing any such contiguous property within one year preceding the
request, and after the affirmative vote in favor thereof by a majority of the members of the governing body of any such city. The
governing body of such city may, by a two-thirds vote of its members, after hearing, adopt a new zoning ordinance without such
written consent whenever the planning commission or planning board of such city shall have made a survey of the whole area of the
city or of an area of not less than 40 acres, within which the new ordinance or the amendments or alterations of the existing ordinance
would take effect when adopted, and shall have considered whether the number of descriptions of real estate affected by such changes
and alterations renders the obtaining of such written consent impractical, and such planning commission or planning board shall report
in writing as to whether in its opinion the proposals of the governing body in any case are reasonably related to the overall needs of
the community, to existing land use, or to a plan for future land use, and shall have conducted a public hearing on such proposed
ordinance, changes or alterations, of which hearing published notice shall have been given in a daily newspaper of general circulation
at least once each week for three successive weeks prior to such hearing, which notice shall state the time, place and purpose of such
hearing, and shall have reported to the governing body of the city its findings and recommendations in writing.
£Subd. 6.Appeals and adjustments. Appeals to the board of appeals and adjustments may be taken by any affected person upon
compliance with any reasonable conditions imposed by the zoning ordinance. The board of appeals and adjustments has the following
powers with respect to the zoning ordinance:
(1) To hear and decide appeals where it is alleged that there is an error in any order, requirement, decision, or determination made
by an administrative officer in the enforcement of the zoning ordinance.
(2) To hear requests for variances from the requirements of the zoning ordinance including restrictions placed on
nonconformities. Variances shall only be permitted when they are in harmony with the general purposes and intent of the ordinance
and when the variances are consistent with the comprehensive plan. Variances may be granted when the applicant for the variance
establishes that there are practical difficulties in complying with the zoning ordinance. "Practical difficulties," as used in connection
with the granting of a variance, means that the property owner proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner not permitted by
the zoning ordinance; the plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to the property not created by the landowner; and the
variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality. Economic considerations alone do not constitute practical
difficulties. Practical difficulties include, but are not limited to, inadequate access to direct sunlight for solar energy systems. Variances
216C.06, subdivision 14, when in harmony with the ordinance.
shall be granted for earth sheltered construction as defined in section
The board of appeals and adjustments or the governing body as the case may be, may not permit as a variance any use that is not
allowed under the zoning ordinance for property in the zone where the affected person's land is located. The board or governing body
as the case may be, may permit as a variance the temporary use of a one family dwelling as a two family dwelling. The board or
governing body as the case may be may impose conditions in the granting of variances. A condition must be directly related to and
must bear a rough proportionality to the impact created by the variance.
Subd. 6a.Normal residential surroundings for persons with disabilities. It is the policy of this state that persons with
disabilities should not be excluded by municipal zoning ordinances or other land use regulations from the benefits of normal
residential surroundings. For purposes of subdivisions 6a through 9, "person" has the meaning given in section 245A.02, subdivision
11.
Subd. 7.Permitted single family use. A state licensed residential facility, including an assisted living facility under chapter
144G, serving six or fewer persons, a licensed day care facility serving 12 or fewer persons, and a group family day care facility
licensed under Minnesota Rules, parts 9502.0315 to 9502.0445 to serve 14 or fewer children shall be considered a permitted single
family residential use of property for the purposes of zoning, except that a residential facility whose primary purpose is to treat
juveniles who have violated criminal statutes relating to sex offenses or have been adjudicated delinquent on the basis of conduct in
violation of criminal statutes relating to sex offenses shall not be considered a permitted use.
Subd. 8.Permitted multifamily use. Except as otherwise provided in subdivision 7 or in any town, municipal or county zoning
regulation as authorized by this subdivision, a state licensed residential facility serving from 7 through 16 persons or a licensed day
care facility serving from 13 through 16 persons shall be considered a permitted multifamily residential use of property for purposes of
zoning. A township, municipal or county zoning authority may require a conditional use or special use permit in order to assure proper
maintenance and operation of a facility, provided that no conditions shall be imposed on the facility which are more restrictive than
those imposed on other conditional uses or special uses of residential property in the same zones, unless the additional conditions are
necessary to protect the health and safety of the residents of the residential facility. Nothing herein shall be construed to exclude or
prohibit residential or day care facilities from single family zones if otherwise permitted by a local zoning regulation.
Subd. 9.Development goals and objectives. In adopting official controls after July 1, 2008, in a municipality outside the
metropolitan area, as defined by section 473.121, subdivision 2, the municipality shall consider restricting new residential,
commercial, and industrial development so that the new development takes place in areas subject to the following goals and
objectives:
(1) minimizing the fragmentation and development of agricultural, forest, wildlife, and open space lands, including consideration
of appropriate minimum lot sizes;
(2) minimizing further development in sensitive shoreland areas;
60
(3) minimizing development near wildlife management areas, scientific and natural areas, and nature centers;
(4) encouraging land uses in airport safety zones that are compatible with the safe operation of the airport and the safety of people
in the vicinity of the airport;
(5) identification of areas of preference for higher density, including consideration of existing and necessary water and
wastewater services, infrastructure, other services, and to the extent feasible, encouraging full development of areas previously zoned
for nonagricultural uses;
(6) encouraging development close to places of employment, shopping centers, schools, mass transit, and other public and private
service centers;
(7) identification of areas where other developments are appropriate; and
(8) other goals and objectives a municipality may identify.
1965 c 670 s 7; 1969 c 259 s 1; 1973 c 123 art 5 s 7; 1973 c 379 s 4; 1973 c 539 s 1; 1973 c 559 s 1,2; 1975 c 60 s 2;
History:
1978 c 786 s 14,15; Ex1979 c 2 s 42,43; 1981 c 356 s 248; 1982 c 490 s 2; 1982 c 507 s 22; 1984 c 617 s 6-8; 1985 c 62 s 3; 1985 c
194 s 23; 1986 c 444; 1987 c 333 s 22; 1989 c 82 s 2; 1990 c 391 art 8 s 47; 1990 c 568 art 2 s 66,67; 1994 c 473 s 3; 1995 c 224 s
95; 1997 c 113 s 20; 1997 c 200 art 4 s 5; 1997 c 202 art 4 s 11; 1997 c 216 s 138; 1999 c 96 s 3,4; 1999 c 211 s 1; 2001 c 174 s 1;
2001 c 207 s 13,14; 2002 c 366 s 6; 2004 c 258 s 2; 2005 c 56 s 1; 1Sp2005 c 1 art 1 s 92; art 2 s 146; 2007 c 140 art 12 s 14; 2008 c
297 art 1 s 60,61; 2009 c 149 s 3; 2011 c 19 s 2; 1Sp2019 c 3 art 3 s 110,111; 2023 c 37 art 6 s 7; 2024 c 85 s 104
61