The Minnesota Legislature is currently considering a number of bills aimed at limiting long-standing city authority over land use and development.  These bills include:

• SF 2229 / HF 1987 (“Minnesota Starter Home Act”)
• SF 2231 / HF 2140 (“More Homes Right Places Act”)
• SF 2286 / HF 2018 (“Transforming Main Street Act”)
• SF 1268 / HF 1309 (“People Over Parking Act”)

These bills, if adopted, would greatly restrict local government zoning and land use authority and would remove public input in the residential development process.  It would also authorize land development contrary to the City's adopted 2040 Comprehensive Plan. For these reasons, it is recommended that the City consider a resolution supporting the retention of city zoning authority and officially opposing proposed legislation seeking to limit local land use decision making.

The proposed bills focus on the elimination of local control relative to zoning and land use regulations to allow housing developers to build housing with greater density in traditional single-family neighborhoods and elsewhere in the community.

If adopted, the legislation could significantly affect the character of existing single-family neighborhoods in the community by allowing added housing density on each residential lot.  It would also force administrative approvals of projects that meet the standards in the bill language and would prohibit public input on the approval process. Development proposals in Apple Valley have traditionally followed a very public process with deliberation by the Planning Commission and City Council and public input has always been encouraged.  The proposed legislation would move such approvals to the staff level which would limit public transparency and would be contrary to traditional democratic principles.

Specific provisions of concern in each of the proposed bills include:

SF 2229, Port - “Starter Homes” bill
• Requires duplexes, ADUs, and townhouses be permitted in any zoning district that permits residential use, with some restrictions for townhomes only in newly platted districts and vacant lots. 
• Sets strict setback limitations, minimum lot sizes, and maximum lot coverage requirements.
• Limits a city from imposing minimum parking requirements and limits a city’s ability to condition approval of a residential permit related to the creation of an HOA, or the inclusion of a service, feature, or common property necessitating an HOA.
• Establishes an administrative approvals process, allowing for only one community meeting before approval of a request and limits a city’s ability to use a planned unit development agreement, among other provisions.
 
SF 2286, Clark – Multifamily Housing in Commercial Districts
• Requires that residential development be permitted use in any zoning district that authorizes commercial uses (except for heavy industrial). 
• Sets strict standards related to floor area ratios and height limitations.
• Limits requirements related to construction materials, architectural elements, durability, energy efficiency, building egress, or light access, except as required by the State Building Code, and limits a city from imposing minimum parking requirements.
• Requires a city to establish an administrative approval process related to these developments, requires approval in a strict time frame, and allows for only one community meeting prior to approval of the request.
 
SF 2231, Boldon – Mixed-Use Housing Zones Bill
• Requires municipalities to enact ordinances creating mixed-use housing zones and to create commercial corridor districts that encompass every lot in the city with frontage on a municipal state-aid street.
• Requires cities to authorize the following housing types in residential mixed-use zones: single-family, townhouse, duplex, triplex, four-plex and ADUs.
• “Urban” municipality is defined as cities other than a city of the first class adjacent to or has a border within one mile of the border of a city greater than 150,000 population. “Non urban” municipality is a city greater than 10,000 population and not an urban municipality or city of the first class.
• Required housing types must be allowed on at least 50 percent of the area within a city zoned to permit residential use for “non urban” municipalities, and 75 percent of the area zoned residential for “urban” municipalities.  
• Requires establishing an administrative approvals process. Cities may not require more than one community meeting prior to approving a request.

• Sets a failure to comply section. If a city fails to adopt new standards that meets requirements by certain dates based on city type, any type of mixed housing would then be allowed without restriction on any lot zoned to allow residential use.

SF 1268, Fateh - Minimum Parking Mandate Prohibited
• Removes the ability for cities to set minimum parking mandates, except for ordinances related to disability parking spaces.

Land development within the City of Apple Valley is currently guided by our 2040 Comprehensive Plan which was developed in collaboration with citizens, community and business organizations, school districts and many others, and which was approved by the Metropolitan Council. This legislation would negate important provisions in our approved 2040 Comprehensive Plan and would jeopardize long-range planning efforts involving the City’s essential infrastructure (roads, water mains, sewer lines and stormwater management systems), threatening to overwhelm these systems. 

The legislation places no limits on the number of units a given community would be forced to add and significant increases in housing density would result in added infrastructure costs which should not become the responsibility of existing residents and businesses. We are also concerned about possible environmental harm caused by excessive storm water flow caused by increased impervious surface related to the incremental densification of our housing stock.

We are also concerned that the appropriation of commercially guided property, which would be allowed for multi-family housing development with no restriction on the number of units, would also have long-term impacts on the City's commercial/industrial tax base and would limit the City's attraction of head of household jobs to the community.

Due to the negative impacts of this proposed legislation, it is recommended that the City Council adopt the attached resolution supporting the retention of city zoning authority and opposing proposed legislation seeking to limit local land use decision making.