Laserfiche WebLink
<br />. <br /> <br />326,220 N.W.2d 256 (1974). The courts have held that the denial <br /> <br /> <br />of a request for rezoning is a legislative act which must be upheld <br /> <br /> <br />unless the existing classification is not supported by any rational <br /> <br /> <br />basis related to the public health, safety or welfare. Kern v. City of <br /> <br /> <br />Roseville, 426 N.W.2d 233 (Minn. App., 1988); Freundshuh v. <br /> <br /> <br />City of Blaine, 385 N.W.2d 6 (Minn., App. 1986). Generally, <br /> <br /> <br />denial of a rezoning request will not be found arbitrary when at <br /> <br /> <br />least one of the reasons given for the denial satisfies the rational <br /> <br /> <br />basis test, S1. Croix Development, Inc. v. City of Apple Valley, <br /> <br /> <br />446 N.W.2d 392 (Minn. App., 1989). Although the burden on the <br /> <br /> <br />landowner is high, in some circumstances the courts have found <br /> <br /> <br />that there was no rational basis to support the denial of a proposed <br /> <br /> <br />rezoning, and have ordered the rezoning approved. <br /> <br />Communications Properties Inc. v. County of Steele, 506 N.W.2d <br /> <br />670 (Minn. App,. 1993). <br /> <br />2. Challenges to Rezoning Actions. On the other hand, a decision to <br /> <br />rezone will be upheld unless opponents prove that the new <br /> <br />classification is unsupported by any rational basis related to <br /> <br />promoting public health, safety, morals or general welfare. Where <br /> <br />a rational basis for the rezoning can be found in the record, the <br /> <br />rezoning will be upheld. Krmpotich v. City of Duluth, 474 <br />N.W.2d 392 (Minn. App., 1991); Reversed on other grounds, 483 <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />. <br />