Laserfiche WebLink
<br />expanded in any direction, then the purpose of the non-conforming <br /> <br />use ordinances become ineffective. <br /> <br />Finally, Mr. Kadrie claims that the City of Roseville is <br />equitably estopped from denying the variance. Mr. Kadrie applied <br /> <br />for a variance to allow the construction of the kitchen addition <br /> <br />and the deck in 1993. The City Council granted the variance for <br /> <br />the kitchen adHition but denied the variance for the construction <br /> <br />of the deck. <br /> <br />Mr. Kadrie began construction of the deck prior to obtaining <br />approval for it. He now claims that the City should be estopped <br /> <br />from enforcing a valid Zoning Code. Minnesota courts are "hesitant <br />to apply estoppel in zoning matters, and will apply the doctrine <br />sparingly". Deqe v. Citv of MaDlewood, 416 N.W.2d 854, 856 (Minn. <br />App. 1987) citing Ridqewood DeveloDment Co. v. State, 294 N.W.2d <br /> <br />288 (Minn. 1980). <br /> <br />The Ridqewood court ruled that a municipality could be <br /> <br />estopped only if it had acted wrongfully: <br /> <br />[E]stoppel is available as a defense against the <br />government if the government's wrongful conduct threatens <br />to work a serious injustice and if the public's interest <br />would not be unduly damages by the imposition of <br />estoppel. <br />* * * <br /> <br />Under [this test], the court must first look for the <br />government's wrongful conduct. Only if it is found to <br />exist does the balancing begin. <br /> <br />Ridqewood, 294 N.W.2d 288 (Minn. 1980). <br /> <br />6 <br />