(“gals

Date

LIBRARY
Michigan Erato

University

 

This is to certify that the
thesis entitled

THE IMPLEMENTATION OF MINNESOTA
ENERGYFRELATED LAND-USE LEGISLATION
BY LOCAL GOVERNMENTS
presented by

ROBERT LOREN WUORNOS

has been accepted towards fulfillment
of the requirements for

PH.D. degree in URBAN 8 REGIONAL PLANNING

 

 

 

Major professor

/'/ ’//— i3,

 

07639

MS U i: an Affirmative Action/Equal Opportunity Institution

 

 

MSU

LIBRARIES

“-

 

 

RETURNING MATERIALS:
Place in book drop to
remove this checkout from
your record. FINES will
be charged if book is
returned after the date
stamped below.

 

 

 

 

 

THE IMPLEMENTATION OF MINNESOTA
ENERGY-RELATED LAND-USE LEGISLATION

BY LOCAL GOVERNMENTS

by

Robert Loren Wuornos

A DISSERTATION

Submitted to
Michigan State University
in partial fulfillment of the requirements
for the degree of

DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY

Department of Urban and Regional Planning

1982

ABSTRACT

THE IMPLEMENTATION OF MINNESOTA
ENERGY-RELATED LAND-USE LEGISLATION
BY LOCAL GOVERNMENTS

BY

ROBERT LOREN WUORNOS

The purpose of this investigation was to determine the extent to
which Minnesota's energy-related land-use legislation has been imple-
mented by local units of government throughout the state. The legis-
lative focus included municipal, county and metropolitan planning,
zoning, and subdivision regulations of which some were mandatory and
some were permissive. The primary legislative concerns of this effort
were related to solar access and earth shelter structures.

This investigation was divided into three sub-problems. The first
sub-problem relates to the historic develOpment of energy legislation
in the state of Minnesota. The second sub-problem was to identify leg-
islation pertinent to this research. The third sub-problem was to
identify the degree to which this legislation has been implemented at
local levels of government. The information needed for sub-problem
three was collected by using a random sample telephone survey of city
and county governments throughout the state. Survey results were com-
piled according to five categories: 1) county, 2) small size cities,
3) mid-size cities, 4) large size cities, and 5) cities within the Twin
Cities MetrOpolitan Region.

It was discovered that the degree of implementation of the vari-
ous legislative opportunities was not substantial. The relevant state
legislation has not been effectively implemented on a statewide basis
in counties, small size cities, and mid-size cities. However, evidence
indicated that large size cities and cities within the metropolitan
region were implementing the related legislative opportunities.

To my family and friends
for their support and en-
durance throughout this
ordeal.

iii

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

Appreciation is extended to Dr. Roger Hamlin for his
skillful guidance in the preparation of this dissertation;
to Sally Anderson, Kerry Ogren and Jeanne Wuornos for their
assistance with telephone surveys; and to Dr. H. Roger Smith,
who encouraged the author to pursue higher academic goals.

iv

C O N T E N T S

List of Tables vii
List of Figures viii
Page No.
CHAPTER I. INTRODUCTION 1
A. Problem Statement 1
B. Problem Significance l
C. Delimitations 9
D. Statement of Hypothesis 10
E. Remainder of Thesis 10
CHAPTER II. RELATED LITERATURE 13
A. Introduction 13
B. Early Considerations for Energy-Efficient Land-Use 13
C. Current Focus of Energy-Efficient Land-Use 15
D. Federal Legislative Initiatives 18
E. Minnesota Initiatives 19
F. Local Government Efforts 24
G. Minnesota Community Energy Survey 26
H. Barriers to Earth-Sheltered Construction and
Solar Access 26
CHAPTER III. METHODOLOGY 34
A. General Outline 34
B. Sub-Problem Number 1 34
C. Sub-Problem Number 2 35
D. Sub-Problem Number 3 36
E. Informational Needs and Survey Development 37
F. Sample Selection 39
G. Sample Size 41
H. Survey Technique 42
I. Compilation of Results 42
J. Treatment of Data 42
CHAPTER IV. SURVEY RESULTS 45
A. Introduction 45
B. County Survey Results 45

C. Municipalities with Populations from 1,000 to 9,999 48
D. Municipalities with Populations from 10,000 to
89,999 49
E. Municipalities with Populations Greater than 90,000 50
F. Municipalities within the Twin Cities Metropolitan
Region 51

CHAPTER V.
A.
B.
C.
D.
E.

F.

INTERPRETATION OF RESULTS

Introduction

County Implementation

Implementation by Small Size Cities (Population
1,000 to 9,999)

Implementation by Medium Size Cities (Population
10,000 to 89,999)

Implementation by Large Size Cities (Population
Greater than 90,000)

Implementation by Cities within the Twin Cities
MetrOpolitan Region

CHAPTER VI. CONCLUSIONS

A. Summary of Minnesota's Energy-Related Land-Use
Legislation

B. Summary of Results

C. Results in Perspective

D. Need for Further Research
APPENDICES

A County Planning Act, Chapter 394

B Municipal Planning Act, Chapter 462

C Regional Development Act of 1969

D MetrOpolitan Government, Chapter 473
BIBLIOGRAPHY

vi

53
53
54
60
63
69
72
75
75
75

76
78

79
81
84
86

88

LIST OF TABLES

Community Energy Legislation Survey

Percent of Positive County Responses to Survey
Questions

Summary of Chi-Square Test for County Data

Percent of Positive Small City Responses to
Survey Questions

Summary of Chi-Square Test for Small Size City
Data

Percent of Posititve Medium Size City Responses
to Survey Questions

Summary of Chi-Square Test for Medium Size City
Data

Percent of Positive Large City Responses to
Survey Questions

Comparative Results to Question 11: Metropolitan
to Nonmetropolitan Cities

vii

56

57

60

61

65

66

69

71

Figure

1-1

5-1a

S-lb

LIST OF FIGURES

U.S. Energy Consumption per Capita, 1850-1973
Efficiency of Energy Utilization, 1960-85
Changing Cost of Energy Relative to Wage Rates
Baseline Primary Energy Supply and Demand

Geographic Distribution of Counties which were
Surveyed

Geographic Distribution of Sample Cities within
the Twin Cities MetrOpolitan Region which were
Surveyed

County Data Summary

County Data Summary

Number of Positive Responses by City Population
(1,000 to 9,999)

Number of Positive Responses by City Population
(10,000 to 89,999)

Number of Positive Responses by City Population
(90,000+)

viii

45

50
53

54

59

63

68

CHAPTER I

INTRODUCTION

A. Problem Statement

The goal of this research is to answer some key questions regarding
the relationships between Minnesota energy-related land-use legislation
and the effectiveness of this legislation as it is applied at the local
levels of government. Three objectives, which are presented in the
form of sub-problems, constitute the major contribution of this research.
First, a historic perspective of energy-related land-use policy will be
developed to provide an understanding of the perceived need for such leg-
islation. This will serve as a point of departure from the subsequent
research. Second, pertinent state legislation will be identified and
categorized as either mandatory or enabling legislation. The focus of
the remaining research will be on the related legislation. Third, the
degree to which the related legislation has been incorporated into local
ordinances and regulations will be surveyed and analyzed. The results
of this research will be analyzed to formulate practical guidelines for
further deve10pment of energy-related land-use policies at the state and
local levels.

Succinctly stated, the purpose of the proposed investigation is to
determine the extent to which Minnesota's energy-related land-use legis-

lation has been implemented by local units of government.

B. Problem Significance

In 1969, the University of Minnesota Experimental City Project Pro-

gress Report stated in a brief section pertaining to energy, ”All in-
dications point toward the availability of more power at lower rates...
The promise of the future is to utilize this cheap power to free man
from many tasks which he is presently doing."1 This statement was in
reference to the use of energy in a proposed experimental city within
the state with a target population of 250,000. The statement reflects
a prevailing attitude at that time that energy was relatively inexpenr
sive and abundant. In effect, this presented a rather unusual attitude
toward energy resources which were not thought to be limited.

The energy picture has changed considerably since 1969. Traditional
energy sources such as oil and natural gas have been recognized as being
limited. The perception of the energy problem has changed to the point
where federal and state energy agencies have been formed to address the
public concerns about energy resources and energy management.

The global problems related to energy management have reached into
all aspects of human activity and constantly demand attention. It has
been determined that the peak of production in natural gas and petroleum
in the United States occurred in the early 1970's and that world produc-
tion of oil is expected to peak between 1985 and the year 2000, if pre-
sent trends continue.2 The problem of limited future energy supply is
compounded by the continuously increasing per capita and total energy
consumption patterns (Figure 1). The inferential conclusion, of course,
is that the global community is and will be faced with the problem of
distributing limited energy supplies to a market with an ever-increasing
energy demand.

A cursory review of consumption patterns reveals a rather grim pic-

ture for energy intensive societies. Will it be necessary to curtail

mm

as

:.hu«asuuonao was u>uuuu0aaH
"coaun>uomaou mwumcm: ..m cashew .maamom “condom

 

 

 

a . _ L New 0W 0% can oqm ow ow ooamfi 0% 0% CAN 0% 0mm.—
ll, .1 OOH
II CON
.1 com
.1 ooq

mamznomma .<aHm<u mum onemzamzoo wummzm .m.:

and magma»

 

9.fllfl “OTTITN

energy intensive human activities? Must production be decreased? Will
travel patterns be substantially limited? What radical changes does the
future hold in store for human activity? These are some of the questions
which have and will be addressed by politicians, technicians, and scholars.

Ultimately, probes launched by all individuals and groups concerned
with energy consumption patterns will be directed toward energy effici-
ency of human activities. This seems to be a legitimate concern since it
has been demonstrated that approximately fifty percent of all energy pro-
duced is lost (Figure 2). Essentially, this means vast amounts of energy
(an estimated forty quadrillion BTU's in 1980) could be channeled into ef-
ficient production and usage if it could be harnessed. Moreso, it has
been determined that the transportation sector is the least efficient user
of energy. With an input of mostly oil, it lost or rejected over 752 of
that energy input.3 Retrieval of the energy lost through transportation
inefficiencies alone could amount to a substantial gain to society.

The phenomena associated with increasing energy demands and limited
supplies has moved industrialized societies (the United States in par-
ticular) into a new era. With respect to the cost structure of energy,
it is an era that is characterized as being resource-limited instead of
demand-driven and involves rising rather than declining real costs of
energy.4 Until 1973, the real cost of energy with respect to wage
rates (adjusted by consumer price index) displayed a decreasing pattern
over a forty year period (Figure 3). This trend reversed itself in 1973
and has since shown an increasing real cost of energy. The current trend
is expected to continue into the indefinite future, though on a shorter
time frame a variety of political forces will attempt to mitigate against

this basic physical phenomenon through subsidies and wage negotiation.5

x.hufia:uuoano
"acquw>uomaou Amadeus

Noe
Nummzm numb
NAHZMHUHMMN

new
NQMNZM HmOA

mama
A

 

00m

was u>aumuunau
duauum .wdaoou “mouaom

oma~ smog «hag Onaa
_ llfi

nanooaz .ona<NHqHap wuumzu

«is magmas

mo NUZNHUHMMM

coma

ON

as

oo

ow

ooH

I. ONH

 

sofllfl “OTIITlpenb

:.hu«a=uuomao can m>aumuomaH
"coaum>ummaoo hwuuau: ..m cashew .waaooM ”ouuaom

 

 

 

 

mafia
oowm oama omoa 05mg ocoa ommfi ocma omm~ o~m~
. q _ _ a A d _
emu
kuaumz I.
huuowuuuoam I
new» new umow pom
Ir N~.w Nc.m I
\\l llI+|IIIIIIIAn

L
mommouucH mama owm3 I

 

mWH<M NQ<3 OH M>HH<AMM Mommzm ho Hmoo quOz<mo

«-2 atawat

 

o

N.

N.~

¢.~

o.~

 

Joqva 30 3803
‘XEEEEQ ;o 3803 T 3 01398 3809

If the rising real energy cost assumption proves correct, it will bear
significant ramifications for the future distribution of all human ac-
tivity. Personal and societal trade-offs will, out of necesity, be ad-
justed accordingly.

The Minnesota Energy Agency has conducted research related to state
energy supply and demand to the year 2000. The resultant base-line fore-
cast indicates that the state energy supply will keep pace with energy
demand until 1989 (Figure 4). At this point in time, demand will con-
tinue to rise while supply begins to decrease. According to the Minne-
sota Energy Agency, this trend will result in three major impacts. The
first impact is rapidly rising prices. The second major impact is the
continued dependence of Minnesota and the nation on foreign oil. The
third related major impact is a slow—down and eventual termination of
economic growth in the state and a decline in employment.6

All human activity associated with energy consumption must be
scrutinized in an effort to determine the most energy efficient and cost
effective methods of reducing energy demands. One such human activity
requiring considerable research is energy consumption of transportation
as it relates to human settlement patterns. Are some settlement patterns
more efficient than others? Research conducted by Robert Peskin at North-
western University indicates that certain settlement patterns might be
more efficient. Particularly when coordinated with the existing trans-
portation network or improvements to that network, directed urban growth
can result in more energy-efficient urban forms than sprawled develop-
ment. He determined that a polynucleated city was the most energy ef-
ficient due to the close proximity of homes to work locations.7

The Minnesota Energy Agency has developed a set of policies to help

8
Figure 1-4

MINNESOTA BASELINE PRIMARY ENERGY
SUPPLY AND DEMAND TO YEAR 2000

BTU's
(Trillions)
1600 Demand

1500

1400

1300

Supply

1200

1100

 

1000

 

 

1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000

Year

Source: Minnesota Energy Agency, 1980 Energnyolicy and
Conservation Biennial Report.

 

 

offset the energy production problem. Conservation is seen as an oppor-
tunity to provide a tremendous amount of untapped potential for the state
of Minnesota. Opportunities exist, which are both technologically and
economically feasible, that can lower the state's overall demand for en-
ergy by almost 202 by the year 2000. The opportunities include:

1. Weatherproofing of existing buildings

2. Construction of energy efficient new buildings

3. Energy-efficient Operations and maintenance in commercial

and industrial buildings processes

4. Efficient energy-using appliances and industrial equipment

5. Efficient driving techniques

6. Efficient cars and trucks

7. Land-use planning and development keys to energy efficiency.8

The intent of this research is to focus on item 7 in the above para-
graph. According to interviews with officials from the Minnesota Energy
Agency, no research has been completed to date which directs its attention
to the research tapic at hand. The principal reason given for this lack
of research is the current lack of funds at the state level coupled with
personal cutbacks at the State Energy Agency. Officials of the State
Energy Agency recognize a need for this research,9 however, they also
recognize the inability of this research to be conducted by the State

Energy Agency at this time.

C. Delimitations
For purposes of this investigation, the following delimitations are
made:

1. The legislation which will be considered for this research

10

is limited to those pieces of legislation applicable to
land-use at municipal and county levels.

2. There will be no consideration of legislation related to
direct transportation energy consumption associated with
land-use patterns.

3. A survey of county government will be limited to a random
sampling of which the size of the sample will be deter-
mined by apprOpriate sampling techniques.

4. A survey of city governments will be limited to a ran-
dom sampling of which the size of the sample will be deter-
mined by apprOpriate sampling techniques.

5. The survey of cities will be limited to cities with a 1980
population greater than 1000.

6. Township governments will not be considered in this re-

search.

D. Statement of Hypothesis
It is hypothesized that Minnesota legislation related to energy-
efficient land-use planning has not been effectively implemented at the

local level on a statewide basis.

E. Remainder of This Thesis

A brief discussion of the early development of energy-related land
use (particularly Greek and Roman efforts) sets the stage for the more
recent efforts of the United States and, in particular, Minnesota. In-
cluded in Chapter Two is some of the motiviation for the development of
energy-related land use legislation of the respective governments. The

pertinent legislative acts are identified and the sections related to

11

this research are isolated. Chapter Three provides a description of
methodology employed in this research. Three sub-problems are indenti-
fied and the respective approach to the solution of each is defined.
The compilation of data gathered for each sub-problem is presented in
Chapter Four. Chapter Five discusses the interpretation of research re-
sults. Chapter Six includes a discussion of state policy implications
and presents some conclusions as to future directions for energy-related
land-use legislation.

The appendices of this report include the key state legislation to

which this research was directed.

1.

2.

5.

6.

7.

8.

9.

12

References to Chapter I

University of Minnesota/Experimental City Project, The Minnesota
Experimental City Progress Reportl May, 1969, 3rd Edition, p.6.

 

 

Herman E. Koenig, Ph.D., ”Energy Conservation: Imperative and
Opportunity,” Prepared for Energy Seminar for Michigan Legis-
lators and Staff, September 11, 1978, p.1.

Francis X. Murray, Energy: A National Issue, The Center for
Strategic and International Studies, Georgetown University,
Washington, D.C., 1976, p.6.

 

Herman C. Koenig and Thomas C. Edens, ”Evolutionary Adaptations
in Western Food Systems," Testimony to the Presidential Commis-
sion on World Hunger,” Chicago, Illinois, April 25, 1979, p.9.

Ibid. ’ p.80

Minnesota Energy Agency, 1980 Energy Policy and Conservation Bien-
nial Report, St. Paul, Minnesota, 1980, pp.l-3.

 

 

Robert L. Peskin, The Impacts of Urban Transportation and Land
Use Policies on Transportation Energy Consumption, unpublished
Ph.D. dissertation, Department of Civil Engineering, Northwestern
University, June, 1977, p.171.

 

 

OE. Cit. ’ pp. 1-50

Interviews with officials of the Minnesota Energy Agency and the
Minnesota Office of Local and Urban Affairs.

CHAPTER II

RELATED LITERATURE

A. Introduction

A preliminary literature review was performed to investigate the
availability of literature related to this inquiry. The approach was to
first begin with doctoral studies, then books and government documents,
and finally articles in scholarly journals which treated the subject
matter. An examination of Dissertation Abstracts International: Ar-The
Humanities and Social Sciences, and the Comprehensive Dissertation's In-
dex: Social Sciencies and Humanities, Part 2 revealed no doctoral disser-

tations related specifically to the proposed study.

B. Early Considerations for Energy-Efficient Land-Use

The consideration of energy efficiency in human settlement patterns
is hardly a revolutionary activity stemming from recent petroleum short-
ages in the marketplace. Rather, there is evidence that the need for
warmth in housing has influenced settlement patterns and dwelling unit
type and orientation in EurOpean and Asian societies many centuries ago.

The conscious application of passive solar technology has been traced
by Butti and Perlin to the Socratic era in Greece. Houses were designed
for passive solar heating as is evidenced by the following:

During this time period, the Greeks built their homes so the

winter sunlight could easily enter the house through a south-

facing portico similar to a covered porch. Not only were the

main rooms in the house warmed by the rays of the sun stream-

ing through the portico, but they were sheltered from the

north to keep out the cold winds.

There is also evidence that thought was given to solar access for

13

14

the dwelling units by planning cities to maximize southern exposure for
these units. The city of Olynthus in Greece was one such city. This
city was designed with an east~west orientation such that each housing
unit had maximum access to the sun's energy.2 By orienting the housing
to the south, it was possible to take advantage of the low angle of the
sun during the colder winter months. It was also possible to effective-
ly prevent the heat of the sun's rays from penetrating the interior dur-
ing the hot summer months.

Although the concept of south-facing dwelling units is generally
accepted by modern day solar housing theorists, this concept has not
been commonly adhered to throughout the historical settlement patterns
of cultures. A case in point is the Zeilenbau (rowbhouse) plan in Ger-
many of the 1920's. Many of these rowbhouses faced east and west, with
the intent of providing maximum orientation to the sun. Initially, this
concept met with favor amongst planners and architects. Unfortunately,
the Zielenbau plan proved to be less advantageous than originally be-
lieved. The following account describes the folly:

The winter sun is in the south all day -- rising in the south-

east, and moving due south at noon, and settling in the south-

west. Thus, the east and west windows received only modest

amounts of sunlight on winter days because the sun's rays

struck them at a glancing angle. And, in the summer, just

the opposite occurred - the bright rays of the morning and

afterngon sun came straight into the east and west facing
rooms.

Another case in which solar access was apparently poorly considered
was in the laying out of cities in the United States. Most of the cities
whose street patterns were layed out prior to 1950 are predominately or-
iented such that houses face east or west. One result of such lack of

consideration for solar effects is that a large portion of the housing

15

stock in the United States is subject to the same disadvantages of the
Zielenbau plan. This housing stock is, in most instances, unable to take
advantage of solar technologies which increase the heating and cooling ef-
ficiency of the individual units.

As with solar access, earth shelter housing has its origins in cen-
turies bygone. Prehistoric cave dwellers sought refuge in natural cav-
erns. Later, early Asian and EurOpean societies actively developed earth
shelter housing. In the Scandinavian countries, sod houses provided a
particular type of earth sheltering which was adapted by some settlers
of the midwestern plains of the United States during the 19th century.4
In China, courtyard-type houses dot the landscape. They were dug into
soil to combat hot summers and bitterly cold winters.5

The sum and substance of the preceeding discussion is that the use
of solar access and earth shelter housing are not recent deve10pments.
Bash has its own history of develOpment and use. However, since the oil
embargo in 1973 and again in 1978, the increasing cost of non-renewable
energy sources has caused a resurgent interest in these types of struc-

tures in the United States.

C. Current Focus of Energy-Efficient Land-Use

The current focus of energy-efficient land-use can be divided into
two categories: energy conservation, and energy conversion. Conserva-
tion and conversion opportunities in land-use planning can be grouped
into two areas: Opportunities for individual building, and opportunities
for comprehensive patterns of deve10pment.6 The following is a list of
some of these opportunities identified by the Oregon Department of Ener-

gy:6’7

16

Individual Buildings

 

1. Increase weatherization Of existing structures

2. Increase use Of rOOf overhangs for shading

3. Limit glazed areas

4. Increase use Of reflective glazing in commercial and
public buildings

5. Reduce commercial lighting use (decorative and adver-
tising)

6. Increase use Of landscaping and shading

7. Optimize building orientation on site

8. Increase use Of on-site alternative energy sources (solar
and wind)

9. Increase use Of two story houses

10. Increase use Of common walls and cluster houses

11. Increase use Of earth sheltering

Comprehensive Patterns Of Development

 

1. Reduce paved area on streets

2. Increase use Of bicycle/pedestrian mode

3. Increase use of mass transit

4. Discourage private vehicle use by limiting parking spaces
5. Increase use of mixed, multi-use facilities

6. Locate housing near employment and services

7. Increase building Of local recreational facilities

8. Increase use of industrial process heat

9. Increase densities

The strategies identified by Mackie and Mackie8 to implement the
listed Opportunities include zoning ordinances, subdivision regulations,
property tax credits, building code amendments, planned unit development
ordinances, and municipal capital facilities program. Similar sets of
Opportunities and strategies have been identified by other agencies in-
cluding the Minnesota Energy Agency6 and the Northeastern Illinois Plan-
ning Commission.9

During the late 1970's, the American Planning Association prepared
two comprehensive documents which address the problems associated with

solar access and land use. Site Planning for Solar Access: A Guidebook

 

for Developers and Site Planners was intended to assist develOpers, site

planners and builders in the design Of residential developments for solar

17

access.

The other document, Protective Solar Access for Residential

 

Development: A Guidebook for Planning Officials, was written to show

 

planners how to use conventional land-use controls to protect solar
access in new residential develOpment for space heating and cooling
and domestic hot water.

The former document, Site Planning for Solar Access, provides

 

guidelines for building orientation on site to minimize shadow inter-
ference and to maximize the solar energy absorption through passive

and active solar systems. Many types Of structures, including a vari-
ety Of single and multi-family residential structures in various spatial
arrangements, have been provided as sample techniques.

Consideration has also been given to use of vegetation and ter-
rain tO enhance solar access in site planning. This document suggests
two methods by which develOpers or landowners can protect solar access:
restrictive covenants and easements. Each can be used as a strategy
to ensure that adjacent landowners do not erect structures or plants
and vegetation which would create a negative externality to the property
owner.

Protecting Solar Access for Residential Development addresses

 

the legislative Opportunities for a community. These include Oppor-
tunities for planning, zoning, subdivision regulations, regulating
trees and landscaping, site plan and environmental review, and restric-
tive covenants and easements. It is suggested that communities ac-
knowledge the importance Of solar access in the comprehensive plan

and develOp a set of policies which protect solar energy systems.

18

Zoning for solar access, as presented, requires that a community
remove barriers from the existing ordinance (see Section H Of this
chapter) and then write prescriptive zoning provisions to protect
solar access such as height limitations, setback requirements and
space requirements. The suggested subdivison regulations for solar
access pertain to building orientation, lot orientation, street ori-
entation and street layout to enhance solar access.

Performance standards are also suggested as a possible means of
protecting solar access rather than providing specific regulations.

By using the performance standards approach, the community allows the
develOper to use whatever techniques are available to meet the com-
munity's standards.

Another valuable tool available to a community is a site plan
and environmental review. This allows the community to review develOp-
ment plans to ensure that they conform to community standards for solar

800888 o

D. Federal Legislative Initiatives

During the first session of the Ninety-Fifth Congress, hearings
took place before the Subcommittee on the City of the Committee on
Banking, Finance and Urban Affairs, House of Representatives.10 The
subject of these hearings was Energy and the City. These hearings
included presentations from members Of a variety Of local, regional,
and state planning agencies and research institutes. Many Of the
testimonies received indicated that aggregate urban energy consumption
could be reduced by implementing the various energy-effiency Opportuni-

ties identified in the preceeding section Of this chapter, although

19

further research was needed to determine the extent Of the savings

and the cost-effectiveness Of each Opportunity.

E. Minnesota Initiatives

In 1974, the Minnesota legislature created the Minnesota Energy
Agency (MBA).ll The initial responsibilities of the MEA were primarily
to provide information and to educate the citizens of the state as to
the benefits Of voluntary conservation.

The MEA's responsibilities were expanded to include regulatory
responsibilities in 1976 and energy grants administration in 1979. In
1980, the Minnesota legislature passed a bill which provided for grants
and assistance for community energy planning at the local level. The
MEA.was directed to administer these additional programs.

With respect to energy-efficient land-use planning, the involve-
ment of the MBA in community energy planning was designed to improve
the energy planning capability of local units of government. In con-
junction with this effort, two types Of grants were provided: 1)
community energy planning grants and 2) community energy plan imple-
mentation grants.

The purposes of these two grants are described in a Statement of

Needs and Reasonableness12 as follows:

A. Community Energy Planning Grants

 

Planning grants shall be used for developing local
energy plans related to such issues as, but not lim-
ited to: citywide or countywide conservation; use of
renewable resources through technologies currently
available, conservation Of energy used in buildings
owned by the local unit Of government, of energy used
for buildings and street lighting, and of energy used
in building space heating and cooling; and energy con-

20

siderations in traffic management, in land-use plan-
ning, in capital improvement programming/budgeting,

in municipal Operating budgets, and in economic de-

velOpment plans.

B. Community Energy Plan Implementation Grants

 

Implementation grants shall be used for purposes of
implementing all or portions of a local community
energy plan. Local units of government may apply
for implementation grants whether or not the com-
munity energy plan was prepared under the Community
Energy Planning Grant Program provided the community
energy plan has been submitted and approved by the

Agency.

The grants program is currently funding planning efforts in a
limited number Of communities due to limited availability of state
funds. The 1982 grants program was allocated $200,000 which was al-

located in individual grants of no greater than $20,000 per communi-

ty.13

At the encouragement of the MBA and other proponents Of energy-
efficient land-use, some fundamental changes have been enacted in
Minnesota planning laws. The laws pertain to energy planning, solar

access, protection of solar rights, and earth-sheltered construction.
14

These changes are found in the Municipal Planning Act, the County
Planning Act,15 the Estates in Real Property Act,16 and the Metropol-
17

itan Government Act.

The municipal planning legislation takes the form of permissive
legislation which allows the local units of government to perform
certain planning tasks. The zoning component Of the act allows that
a municipality may by ordinance regulate, among other items, the

location, height, bulk, and number Of stories Of buildings. Zoning

21

may also regulate size of yards and spent spaces, and the density
and distribution of population. Each of the regulatory items could be
used to promote aggregate community energy efficiency. In addition, a
1978 amendment was attached to the legislation which allows municipal-
ities to regulate access to direct sunlight for solar energy systems.
Variances may be applied for by individuals if the zoning ordinance
causes undue hardship. Specifically mentioned, an unusual hardship in-
cludes inadequate access to direct solar access for solar energy systems.
Municipal subdivision regulations may, by state statute, set standards
and requirements to address land-use energy efficiency. This includes
the planning and design of sites, and access to solar energy.

The county planning act includes provisions for zoning controls
of land-use in a predominately agricultural, forested, or Open space
use. However, in 1978, the Act was amended to specifically include
solar considerations. As with the municipal act, the county act is
permissive rather than mandatory. It allows the county zoning ordinance
to protect and encourage access to direct sunlight for solar energy
systems. Variances may be applied for in such cases where the prevailing
ordinance causes unusual hardship to an individual. Specifically men-
tioned, the inability to use solar energy systems may be considered a
hardship.

Subdivision 3 of the County Planning Legislation was amended in
1980 to prohibit disallowing earth sheltering. According to this amend-
ment, no provision may prohibit earth sheltered construction as defined
in Section 116H.02, Subdivision 3, that complies with all other zoning
ordinances promulgated pursuant to this section. In this instance, the

amendment is mandatory rather than permissive. Earth shelter cannot be

22

denied on the basis of zoning. Earth-sheltered, as referenced, means con-
structed so that more than 50 percent of the exterior surface area Of the
building, excluding garages or other accessory buildings, is covered with
earth and the building code standards promulgated pursuant to Section
16.85 are satisfied; partially completed buildings shall not be considered
earth-sheltered.18

The intent of the earth shelter legislation is to distinguish be-
tween earth shelter construction and basement housing. The former is
constructed according to code and with generally acceptable aesthetic
quality and provides a means for energy conservation. The latter is of-
ten a structure used as temporary living quarters until the superstruc-
ture is completed. Local objections to the basement dwelling are Often
with regard to a lack Of design for habitation. They generally do not
meet code requirements for natural lighting, ventilation, entrances and
exits, or egress from bedrooms in case of fire.

At the MetrOpOlitan Government level (Minneapolis-St. Paul Metro-
politan Area), there are two recent amendments to the enacted legisla-
tion which address the issue Of planning for energy-efficient land-use.
Both amendments pertain tO solar access. The MetrOpOlitan Government
is directed to make plans for the physical, social, and economic develop-
ment of the metrOpOlitan area and to provide guidance for accomplishing
the harmonious development of the area. One amendment suggests that
such plans may include methods for protection and assuring access to di-
rect sunlight for solar energy systems.19 The second amendment relates
to the land-use plan. It states that a land-use plan shall contain a
protection element, as appropriate, for protection and development of

access to direct sunlight for solar energy systems.20 It should be

23

noted that this function is mandated. It requires communities in the
metropolitan region to include a solar access element in their compre-
hensive plans. The strength of this amendment lies in the fact that the
MetrOpOlitan Council serves as a review agency for the local community
plans. If the local plans do not meet with the requirements of the
Metropolitan Council, state and federal revenues directed to the com-
munities can be refused approval. This tends to encourage cooperation

of the communities to comply with the metropolitan regulations.

In Minnesota, the state's real estate property laws are explicit
with regard to solar access and easements. They specifically define
solar easements and the contents thereof. The pertinent sections and
subdivisions of the legislation are contained in the following:

500.30 Solar Easements. Subdivision 1. ”Solar easement"
means a right, whether or not stated in the form Of a re-
striction, easement, covenant, or condition, in any deed,
will, or other instrument executed by or behalf of any
owner of land or solar skyspace for the purpose Of ensuring
adequate exposure Of a solar energy system as defined in
Section 116H.02, subdivision 11, to solar energy.

Subd. 2. Any prOperty owner may grant a solar easement in
the same manner and with the same effect as a conveyance Of
an interest in real property. The easements shall be cre-
ated in writing and shall be filed, duly recorded, and in-
dexed in the office Of the recorder Of the county in which
the easement is granted. NO duly recorded solar easement
shall be unenforceable on account Of lack Of privity of
estate or privity Of contract; such easements shall run
with the land or lands benefited and burdened and shall
constitute a perpetual easement, except that a solar
easement may terminate upon the conditions stated therein
or pursuant to the provisions of section 500.20.

Subd. 3. Any deed, will, or other instrument that creates
a solar easement shall include, but the contents are not
limited to:

(a) a description Of the real property subject
to the solar easement a description of the real
prOperty benefiting from the solar easement;

F.

24

(b) a description of the vertical and horizontal
angles, expressed in degrees and measured from the
site of the solar energy system, at which the solar
easement extends over the real property subject to
the solar easement, or any other description which
defines the three dimensional space, or the place
and times of day in which an obstruction to direct
sunlight is prohibited or limited;

(c) any terms or conditions under which the solar
easement is granted or may be terminated;

(d) any provisions for compensation of the owner
of the real property benefiting from the solar
easement in the event of interference with the en-
joyment of the solar easement, or compensation of
the owner of the real prOperty subject to the solar
easment for maintaining the solar easement;

(e) any other provisions necessary or desirable to
execute the instrument.

Subd. 4. A solar easement may be enforced by injunction or
proceedings in equity or other civil action.

Subd. 5. Any depreciation caused by any solar easement which

is imposed upon designated property, but not any appreciation
caused by any solar easement which benefits designated property,
shall be inclgded in the valuation of the property for property
tax purposes.

Local Government Efforts

Many cities within Minnesota have taken action to promote energy

efficiency within the community. Among these are the cities of Champlin,

Minneapolis, and Mborhead. A resolution has been presented to the Cham-

plin City Council to establish a Champlin Energy Commission for the pur-

pose of monitoring data to the community on effective conservation and

the efficient use of energy resources, and matters relevant to energy

conservation in Champlin.

22

The City of Minneapolis is in the process of preparing an energy

component for its Plan for the 1980's. Because it is an Older and rela-

tively intensely develOped city, it is concentrating on multi-family

25

housing, weatherization Of existing housing stock, and accessibility
through public transportation. One stated objective is that the City of
Minneapolis should insure that major energy-effiency improvements are
made in all existing housing and assure that new housing be as energy-ef-
ficient as possible.23

The City of Moorhead has adOpted a zoning ordinance amendment which
exempts solar energy systems from lot coverage restrictions. This city
also has a zoning ordinance for planned unit design and solar access. It
states:

For purposes of flexibility, uniqueness, innovative design,
energy conservation and the encouragement of the use of re-
newable energy sources, it is hereby established that a mod-
ification of yard requirements may be granted if the applicant
files and receives approval in accordance with Section 8.00

as it relates to the Conditional Use Permits. The prOposal
shall meet the following criteria:

a. The parcel shall be a minimum of one (1) acre
in size.

b. The prOposal shall be compatible with adjacent
land use 0

c. Minimum side yard requirements of the parent
district shall be maintained on its perimeter lot
lines when abutting adjacent lots.

d. The proposal shall not increase the overall
density as regulated by the requirements of the
parent district, except that a density bonus of 202
may be granted in the Rel single and limited two fam-
ily district and Rr2 single and two family district
for developments that Optimize creative and effici-
ent use of land and housing to promote energy con-
servation and alternative energy sources. Approaches
may include active and/or passive solar systems,
earth-shelter structures, cluster units of up to four
per structure (in the R91 district), landscaping and
energy construction standards that will achieve a
heating load of not more thanzghree BTU-s per square
foot per degree day per year.

As is evidenced by the above extraction, Moorhead has essentially

26

launched a three-pronged effort to achieve energy-efficient land-use:
solar access, earth sheltering, and planned unit develOpment. The Moor-
head ordinance is thought to be an ecellent example of how to incorpor-
ate energy efficiency into zoning ordinances. For this reason, it is

Offered as an example in the Minnesota Energy Agency's Planning Tools

 

Libragy.

G. Minnesota Community Energy Survey

During the Spring of 1981, the Minnesota Energy Agency conducted a
community energy survey to determine energy interests and needs of Minne-
sota communities. Surveys were mailed to 850 communities which was
equivalent to a 1002 survey. Of this, a 32.7 percent response rate was
generated. The summary of survey resultszs was based on those communi-
ties which responded. Of those communities responding, 15.IZ had energy
committees, 43.52 had organized energy activities, and 82.3% indicated a
desire for outside assistance with their energy problems. The types of
assistance desired included information and education, help in organiza-
tion, help in energy planning, and help in energy technologies.

Information gathered from this survey indicates that local interest
does exist for the promotion Of community energy efficiency activities.
Particular to this research, there was an interest in energy planning
assistance. There was a 46.7 percent response desiring help with this

activity.

H. Barriers to Earth-Sheltered Construction and Solar Access
Barriers to earth-sheltered construction and solar access exist de-
spite an apparent increase in interest for these methods of energy con-

servation. While limited research has been conducted with respect to

27

barriers to earth-sheltered construction, substantial research has been
conducted with respect to solar access.

The Minnesota Energy Agency has identified three barriers to earth-
sheltered construction. These include: 1) basement ordinances and defin-
itions of basements and cellars may exclude earthrsheltered construction;
2) interpretation of setback requirements, minimum floor area and lot
size requirements, and maximum lot coverage requirements may inhibit
earth-sheltered construction; and 3) earth-sheltered construction is a
type of construction and not a use, a fact which must be kept in mind
when revising zoning ordinances.26 The primary barrier, however, seems
to be one of definition as pertaining to acceptable housing standards.

Typically, a city's Objection to earth-sheltered housing has been
targeted to basement housing, which was not designed for habitation.
These structures have Often provided inadequate natural light and venti-
lation. They have only one entrance/exit, and the egresses from bed-
rooms in case of fire have been non-existent. Another Objection has
been directed toward the aesthetic quality of the dwellings. To pro-
hibit basement housing, cities have implemented zoning ordinances and
other land-use regulations which may also inhibit construction of earth-
sheltered buildings.27

As discussed in Section E of this Chapter, earth-sheltered con-
struction cannot be denied on the basis of zoning. A local government
must allow earth-sheltered construction as long as it adheres to local
building codes. In keeping with the laws, the MEA has recommended that
local governments do the following: 1) assess physical barriers to

earth-sheltered construction in the community and develop a policy on

earth sheltering for inclusion into the comprehensive plan; and 2) re-

28

view the existing zoning ordinance and remove barriers to earth-sheltered
construction, and add language necessary to insure appropriate control of
earth-sheltered construction.28

Attention is now turned to solar access barriers. According to a
study conducted by the United States Department of Energy in 1979, there
are three major barriers to solar energy use. These are: 1) limited pub-
lic awareness of and confidence in solar technologies; 2) widespread use
of solar energy is also hindered by federal and state policies and mar-
ket imperfections that effectively subsidize competing energy sources
(oil and gas price controls), and 3) financial barriers faced by users
and small producers are among the most serious Obstacles to increased
solar energy use (i,e., high initial cost cannot be spread over useful
lives).29

Certain land-use restrictions may present barriers to solar access.
These barriers have been identified as follows:

1. Land-use restriction barriers

a. Height restrictions may require variances.

b. Aesthetic regulations may require all structures
to be architecturally compatible.

c. Detached solar collector units may not comply
with setback requirements or a percent of land
covered by structures may be exceeded.

d. lot line angle requirements may not allow
maximum solar orientation.

2. Nuisance law

Nuisance law examines the reasonableness of a par-
ticular land use in relation to surrounding land uses.
There are two conceivable ways in which a solar col-
lector could be considered a nuisance. The first

would be where a collector is perceived by surrounding
land owners as an aesthetic nuisance. Another conceiv-
able nuisance theory would claim that a collector is

29

producing excessivsoglare and is discomforting neigh-
boring landowners.

Solar access law has been studied extensively as a result of re-
search sponsored by the U. S. Department of Housing and Urban Develop-
ment in OOOperation with the U. S. Department of Energy. Two of the
important conclusions from this study relate to legal barriers to solar
access, These are: 1) there is no single "ideal" solar access law since
different communities or parts of communities may need different legal
approaches, and 2) poorly conceived solar access laws could have adverse
effects on develOpment patterns, property values, and public attitudes
toward solar energy.31 This increases the difficulty of drafting appro-
priate amendments to local zoning ordinances.

One problem with drafting an appropriate solar access law pertains
to externalities which might be created. Solar access could adversely
impact adjacent lots if they were granted solar access protection. On
the other hand, special permits could be used to protect the permitted
use from activities on adjacent land. The whole issue revolves around
who is casting a shadow on whom. Consequently, the major legal con-
straints on solar access law are, in order of importance: the constitu-
tional requirements of public purpose, of equal protection, and of pay-
ment of compensation if property is so severely regulated that due pro-
cess requirements are violated.32

Even if a community is successful at drafting and adOpting solar ac-
cess legislation, barriers to implementation still exist. There is an ap-
parent delay or time lag by as much as ten years before: 1) solar access
is adopted by residential and commercial development industries, 2) pub-

lic and local government acceptance of new aesthetic standards, and 3)

30

legal issues of solar access, easements, and use of public lands for

solar technology installations are unraveled.33

1.

3.

4.

5.

6.

9.

10.

ll.

12.

13.

31

References to Chapter II

Ken Butti and John Perlin, A Golden Thread: 2500 Years of Solar
Architecture and Technology, Cheshire Books, Palo Alto, California,
1980, pp.4-5.

 

 

Ibid., p.6.
Ibid., p.168.

Donna Ahrens, Tom Ellison, and Ray Sterling, Ray, Earth Sheltered
Homes: Plans and Design, Underground Space Center, University

of Minnesota, Van Nostrand Reinhold Company, New York, New York,
1981, p.15.

 

 

Ibid., p.15.

Minnesota Energy Agency, 1980 Energy Polioy and Conservation Bi-
ennial Report, St. Paul, Minnesota pp.3-41.

 

 

Marsha Mackie and Bill Mackie, Community Energy Planning, Ore-
gon Department of Energy, November, 1979, pp.3-5.

 

Ibid., pp. 3-5.

NOrtheastern Illinois Planning Commission, Guidelines: Energy-Ef-
ficient Community Development, Site Planning and Subdivision De-
sign, Illinois Energy Conservation Program, April, 1981.

 

 

Ninety-Fifth Congress, First Session, Energy and the City, Hear-
ings before the Subcommittee on the City of the Committee on Bank-
ingand Urban Affairs, House of Representatives, Soptember 14L 15,
and 16, 1977, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C.,
1977.

 

 

 

 

”Minnesota Energy Agency,” Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 116B (1974).

 

Minnesota Energy Agency, ”Statement of Needs and Reasonableness,”
In the Matter of the PrOposed AdOption of Rules of the Minnesota
Energy Agency Government the Community Energy Planning Grants Pro-
gram, 6MCAR S S 2.2401-2.409, pp.7-8.

Thompson, Janice, Community Energy Planner for the Minnesota
Energy Agency, interviewed Jan. 20, 1982.

14.

15.

16.

17.

18.

19.

20.

21.

22.

23.

24.

25.

26.

27.

28.

29.

30.

32

Municipal Planning Act, Chapter 462, Minnesota Statutes, 1978.

 

County Planning Act, Chapter 394, Minnesota Statutes, 1978.

 

Estates in Real PrOperty, Solar Easement Legislation, Chapter
500, Minnesota Statutes, 1978.

 

MetrOpOlitan Government, Chapter 473, Minnesota Statutes, 1978.

 

”Minnesota Energy Agency,” Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 116H.02,
Subdivision 3.

 

MetrOpOlitan Government Act, Chapter 473, Minnesota Statutes,
Section 473.05, Subdivision 1.

 

Ibid., Section 473.859, Subdivision 2.

Estates in Real Property, Chapter 500, Minnesota Statutes, Sec-
tion 500. 30

 

Minnesota Energy Agency, Energy Planninngools Library, St. Paul,
Minnesota, p. 8.1.

 

City of Minneapolis, Office of the Mayor, Planning Department,
Plan for the 1980's, Hearing Draft, p.8.

Op. Cit., p.8.8.

Minnesota Energy Agency, ”Results of the Minnesota Community
Energy Survey," April 13, 1981.

Minnesota Energy Agency, Energy Planning Tools Library, p.1.4.

 

Ibid., p.1.9.
Ibid, p.1.9.

U.S. Department of Energy, Domestic Policy Review Of Solar En?
ergy, A response memorandum to the President of the United
States, TID-22834, February, 1979.

Paul Spivak, Land Use Barriers and Incentives to the Use of
Solar Energy, Solar Energy Research Institute, Golden, Colorado,
August, 1979, pp.3—4.

 

 

33

31. Gail Boyer Hayes, Solar Access Law: Protecting Access to Sun-
light for Solar Energy Systems, Ballinger Publishing Company,
Cambridge, Massachusetts, 1979, p.2.

32. Ibid., p.2.

33. Marilyn Duffey and Joe E. Armstrong, Community Impediments to Im-
plementation of Solar Energy, prepared for Energy and Environment
Division, Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory, Berkeley, California,
November, 1979, p.S-2.

CHAPTER III

METHODOLOGY

A. General Outline

This investigation was divided into three sub-problems related to
the hypothesis. The first sub-problem relates to the historic develop-
ment of energy legislation in the state of Minnesota. The second sub-
problem was to identify legislation pertinent to this research. The
third sub-problem was to identify the degree to which this legislation
is implemented at local levels of government. A thorough investigation
of each of these sub-problems served to provide information related to
the effectiveness of state planning legislation as it pertains to energy

efficiency of land-use.

B. Sub-Problem Number 1.

The purpose of sub-problem number 1 was to survey the origins of
early develOpment of state energy-related land-use legislation. The
solution of this sub-problem has been incorporated into Chapter Two and
has provided the background against which the state energy-related land-
use legislation was studied. Descriptive data related to the origins,
objectives, and develOpment of the said legislation have been collected
and analyzed. Sources of data included books, periodicals, scholarly
journals, and interviews devoted either in whole or in part to a con-
sideration of state energy-related land-use legislation. These sources
were selected so as to include the writings of a widely diversified
group of authorities.

The collection of data was analyzed for information applicable to

34

35

this study. The synthesis of data followed a tOpical but chronological
order. Preliminary research indicated the following tOpics be used for
guides in the collection and synthesis of the data:
1. A brief history of energy concerns in land-use.
a. Early settlement patterns
b. U. 8. concern, pre-1973
c. U. 3. concern, post-1973
d. Minnesota energy concerns related to land-use
2. Energy Strategies of Land-use and Energy Conservation and Pro-
duction
a. Federal
b. Other states

c. Minnesota

C. Sub-Problem Number 2.

The purpose of sub-problem number 2 was to identify Minnesota legis-
lation directed towards energy-related land-use policies. The solution
of this sub-problem was central to the exploration of the hypothesis. It
was the identified legislation which was analyzed and determined effec-
tive or ineffective in achieving the desired result. The kind of data
which was retrieved for this sub-problem included Minnesota legislative
acts pertaining to energy-related land-use policies. The sources for
this data were the Minnesota Statutes and policies of the Minnesota
Energy Agency. Each legislative act pertaining to energy-related land-
use policies was identified and those portions of each act directly re-
lated to the proposed research were outlined. The following tOpics served

as guides in the collection and synthesis of data:

36

1. Municipal Planning Acts

2. County Planning Acts

3. Regional DevelOpment Acts

4. MetrOpOlitan Government Acts

5. Solar Access Legislation

6. Earth Shelter Construction Legislation
7. Building Orientation

8. Land DevelOpment Patterns

D. Sub-Problem Number 3.

The purpose of sub-problem number 3 was to analyze the implementa-
tion of Minnesota energy-related land-use legislation by local units of
government. These local levels of government included city and county
governments. By solving this sub-problem, it was possible to assess the
effectiveness of state energy policies as they applied to local govern-
ments. The kinds of data retrieved for sub-problem number 3 included
specific information from a variety of communities throughout the state.
This included information regarding the incorporation of the state's en-
abling legislation into local zoning ordinances, sub-division regula-
tions, and land-use plans. This information was collected by using a
random sample survey of city and county governments throughout the state.
Sample size was determined through the use of appropriate statistical
methods. Each local government which was selected for this research was

surveyed by telephone interview.

E. Informational Needs and Survey Development
The first step in the survey research process was to identify infor-

mation needs. Informational parameters were determined according to the

37

particular Opportunities provided by related state legislation to local
units of government. For instance, the zoning component of the Munici-
pal Planning Act allows a municipality to regulate access to direct sun-
light for solar energy systems. Hence, question number 8 of the survey
(Table 3-1) was included. Questions 8 through 14 of the survey direct-
ly relate to Minnesota legislation, of which advantage can be taken by
local governments to improve energy efficiency.

1978 was the year in which the Municipal and County Planning Acts
were amended to allow for energy-efficient opportunities in land-use con-
trols. For this reason, question number 7 was included in the survey to
separate local governments into groups which have updated zoning ordi-
nances since 1978 and those which have not. By doing so, it was possible
to identify which communities have had the formal opportunity to incor-
porate the allowed changes in zoning ordinances and those which have not.
The purpose for doing this, was to determine the proportion of communi-
ties which could have implemented the change but failed to do so.

NO question specifically addresses the land-use plan amendment of
the MetrOpOlitan Government Act which mandated solar access protection,
although information needed to evaluate compliance is requested in ques-
tion 11. Information from question 11 was sought for local governments
statewide. Information specific to this amendment was extrapolated from
surveyed municipalities located within the Metropolitan region.

Information was also needed to assess the effectiveness of the
MEA's Community Energy Planning Grants in stimulating energy planning ac-
tivities at the local level. Questions 12 and 13 addressed this need by
providing information to determine the extent to which local governments

have applied for and received energy planning or implementation grants.

38

Table 3-1

 

 

2.

3.

5.

6.

8.

9.

10.

11.

12.

13.

14.

COMMUNITY ENERGY LEGISLATION SURVEY

 

Name of city (county)?

 

Population (1980 census)?

 

Name of contact?

 

Title or position of contact?

 

Telephone number of contact? ( )

 

Business address?

 

Has the city's (county's) zoning ordinance been updated since
1978? Yes NO

 

Does the existing zoning ordinance provide for the protection and
encouragement of access to direct sunlight for solar energy sys-
tems? Yes NO

 

Does the existing zoning ordinance prohibit the construction of
earth-sheltered structures? Yes No

 

Does the existing zoning ordinance distinguish between earth-
sheltered housing and basement housing? Yes No

 

Does the city's (county's) comprehensive land-use plan contain an
element for the protection and development of access to direct
sunlight for solar energy systems? Yes No

 

Has the city (county) applied for a Community Energy Planning
Grant from the Minnesota Energy Agency? Yes No

 

Has the city (county) received a Community Energy Planning Grant
from the Minnesota Energy Agency? Yes No

 

Does the city's (county's) subdivision regulations include stan-
dards and requirements for solar access? Yes No

 

Date survey taken

 

 

 

39

Questions 7 through 14 were designed to elicit a yes or no response
from the individual being surveyed. It was reasoned by the author that
a nominal response of this nature would be sufficient to determine
action or no action on the given legislative opportunity. The propor-
tioned action or inaction, as the case may be, would serve as a basis

for evaluation of legislative effectiveness.

F. Sample Selection

Research data was required from two separate populations. The first
set included the population comprised Of all counties in the state. The
total population of this set was 83 counties. The second set included
the population of cities within the state with a population greater than
1000. This population set included 313 cities.

Resource limitations prohibited a 100 percent survey of each popula-
tion. Therefore, sampling techniques were employed for each population
set. In each case, a modified random sampling technique was used to in-
sure sampling from a broad range of county and city population sizes. In
each case, a list of all elements (counties and cities) was acquired for
the respective set. The counties and cities were then ranked in an or-
der from least populated to most populated.

The next decision was to determine the appropriate sampling tech-
nique. A factor in determining the technique was the broad spectrum of
populations for individual counties and cities. It was decided that a
sample of counties should include a complete population range. The sam-
ple of cities, however, should be limited to those cities over 1000,
while still including a complete range of cities with populations greater

than 1000. The reason for not including cities with pOpulations less

40

than 1000 was because zoning and planning efforts in these communities is
generally limited or else handled by the county in which the city is lo-
cated.

A systematic sampling technique1 provided a vehicle for ensuring
the desired distribution of county and city populations within the re-
spective sample sets. This was accomplished by taking every Kth element
from the respective ranked lists of counties and cities. The Kth element
was determined by the sample size necessary from each list. The starting
point for selecting the first sample was taken from a table of random
digits.2

The systematic sampling technique was employed as described for the
survey Of cities. This method was used in combination with a stratified
sampling technique3 to ensure that larger cities were included in the
sample. This was necessary since there were relatively few larger
cities (cities with populations greater than or equal to 10,000) compared
to the number of smaller cities (1,000 to 9,999). The selected strata
included cities within the following population limits: a) 1,000 to 9,999,
b) 10,000 to 89,999, and c) 90,000 plus. The sizes of the respective
strata were: a) 247, b) 53, and c) 3.

The selection of limits for the designated strata was based on cer-
tain commonalities of communities within each strata. The smaller
cities with populations between 1,000 and 9,999 tended to be rural ser-
vice communities. The mid-size cities with populations between 10,000
and 89,999 tended to be suburban communities near larger central cities.
The largest cities, with populations of 90,000 or more, were central
cities. There was some overlap in the categories but it was not be-

lieved to be critical to the outcome of the survey. For instance, some

41

cities within the mid-size group were actually freestanding central

cities rather than suburban cities.

G. Sample Size

The sample size of surveyed population was determined so as to en-
sure a reasonable degree of accuracy between the sample results and the
true prOportions if a 100 percent sample was conducted. The confidence
interval and the confidence level of a .10 and 95 percent, respectively,
were selected by the author as acceptable limits for this procedure. The

formula used to determine the sample size has a reduction factor built

into it to account for a small total. The formula 19:4’5

N

“ "ITFTfi(E)2

where:

n - sample size
N - total number of cities or counties in the stratification
e - confidence interval

Based on this formula, the following sample sizes were determined for:

1. County sample size, N-87

87

n ' 1-87 .1)

2 - 47, or 54% of total population

2. Small size cities (population 1,000 - 9,999), N-247

247

n - I:247(:I)2 - 71, or 29% of strata

3. Mid-size cities (population 10,000 - 89,999), N-63

63
n - 1+63 .l)2 - 39, or 611 of strata

4. Large size cities (population 90,000+), N=3

3

n ' 1'+'3(.1)2

- 2.9 or 100% of strata

As should be expected, the percent of samples needed (with respect

to total elements [N] within a strata) increases as strata size decreases.

42

H. Survey Technique

The Options available for conducting the survey included: 1) mail
survey, 2) personal interview, and 3) telephone interview. Mail survey
was rejected because of the typically low response rate associated with
this technique. Personal interview was rejected due to the large geo-
graphic area which the survey was to cover and the high cost associated
with the travel necessary to complete the survey. Telephone interview
was selected as the survey technique because it combined the benefits of
a high response rate, acceptable cost, ease of execution, and rapid re-

sponse.

I. Compilation of Results

The survey results were compiled according to five categories: 1)
county, 2) small size cities, 3) mid-size cities, 4) large size cities,
and 5) cities within the Twin Cities MetrOpOlitan Region. The results

for each compilation are presented in the next chapter.

J. Treatment of Data

Within each of the specified categories, each question was analyzed
by inspection of the number of positive and negative responses and the
proportionate response. This provided indication of the categorical
adaptation of the pertinent legislation associated with the respective
questions. Questions 8, 9, and 10 were then analyzed to discern the re-
lationship of each to question 7. The purpose here was to determine if
the 1978 zoning legislation did, in fact, contribute to the adoption of
available legislative mechanisms at the local level. If the state legis-
lation passed in 1978 was effective, then a zoning update later than 1978

would yield a positive response to questions 8, 9, and 10. The chi-square

43

test was used to determine variable relatedness.

The chi-square test is a very general test which can be used to

evaluate whether or not frequencies which have been empirically obtained

differ significantly from those which would be expected under a certain

set of theoretical assumptions.6 The procedures used for applying the

chi-square test are as follows:

1.

2.

3.

Determine r categories using nominal scale for the first
variable being related and c categories for the second
variable. Then collect sample size N and distribute
among the cells of the r by c contingency table. (In
this case, the sample size was predetermined by the method
outlined in Section G of this chapter. The contingency
table in each case was a 2 x 2 matrix.)

Determine the critical value of Xi:

a) State level of significance (-.05)

b) Obtain degrees of freedom
df - (r-l)(c-1) - (2-1)(2-1) - 1

c) Identify the critical value of X3 in a table of X2
distribution

xi - 3.841

Calculate the observed value of X2:

2 ”c nn 2
x-N22(nij-ij)
1-1 j-l N

 

ninj
Assume hypothesis of independence (i.e., no relationship

among variables).
2 2

Then: if X > X* 9 reject hypothesis
if X2‘5.Xi , do not reject7

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

7.

44

References to Chapter III

Donald A. Krueckenberg and Arthur L. Silvers, Urban Planning
Analysis: Method and Models, John Wiley and Sons, New York, 1974,

 

 

p.38.
Ibid., Appendix II.

William G. Cochran, Sampling Techniques, third edition, John
Wiley & Sons, New York, 1977, Chapter 5.

 

Krueckenberg and Silvers, p.115.

This formula makes use of a conservative approach by setting
e - .1 and Z - 2.00. See Krueckenberg, p.115.

Herbert M. Blalock, Social Statistics, McGraw Hill Book Company,
New York, New York, 1960, p.212.

 

Krueckenberg and Silvers, pp.143-144.

CHAPTER IV

SURVEY RESULTS

A. Introduction

The results of data collected by telephone survey were separated
into two primary categories for purposes of analysis and discussion. The
two categories are: 1) county data and 2) municipal data. The municipal
data was further separated into three subcategories according to the
stratifications described in Section F of Chapter III. The purpose of
this chapter is to summarize the survey results according to the respec-

tive categories.

B. County Survey Results

County surveys were conducted by attempting to contact the county
zoning administrator or county planner. Of the 47 counties surveyed, the
respondents were one of these officials in 43 of the counties, while a
county commissioner was the respondent from one county. Officials from
three counties were unavailable, thus resulting in no response from
those counties. The rate of respondents from the survey was 93.4 per-
cent. Figure 4-1 displays the geographic distribution of the responding
counties. The following is a summary of responses for questions 7
through 14.

Question 7: Has the county's zoning ordinance been updated since
1978? 59% of the respondents indicated that the county ordinance had
been updated since 1978, and 20% indicated that it had not. Two counties
(52) had no zoning ordinance and seven counties had shoreline and flood-
plain zoning only.

45

46

Question 8: Does the existing zoning ordinance provide for the pro-
tection and encouragement of access to direct sunlight for solar energy
systems? Of the 44 respondents, 11.4 percent indicated yes, while 68.22
indicated no to this question. The remaining 20.4 percent had no zoning
ordinance or only shoreline and floodplain zoning.

Question 9: Does the existing zoning ordinance prohibit the con-
struction of earth-sheltered structures? Only one county (2.3%) indi-
cated yes to this question, while 77.3 percent indicated no. The remain-
ing 20.4 percent were those with no zoning ordinance or shoreline and
floodplain zoning.

Question 10: Does the existing zoning ordinance distinguish between
earth-sheltered housing and basement housing? 13.62 of the respondents
said their zoning ordinance made the distinction, while 66.0 percent did
not. Again, the remaining 20.4 percent had no zoning ordinance or only
shoreline and floodplain zoning.

Question 11: Does the county's comprehensive land-use plan contain
an element for the protection and develOpment of access to direct sun-
light for solar energy systems? 9.1% responded yes to this question and
70.5 percent responded no. The remaining 20.4% of the counties had no
comprehensive plan.

Question 12: Has the county applied for a Community Energy Plan-
ing Grant from the Minnesota Energy Agency? Only two counties (4.5 per-
cent) applied for a grant, while the remaining 95.5% of the counties had
not .

Question 13: Has the county received a Community Energy Planning
Grant from the Minnesota Energy Agency? Only one county indicated that

it had received a grant and that was in conjunction with one of the muni-

47
Figure 4-1

GEOGRAPHIC DISTRIBUTION OF COUNTIES
WHICH WERE SURVEYED

 

/%
////////7//

/////// //// / / /,

/
’/// //
‘2. /

 

-/
7//

/ 7' all u.
l/W/ /// 777/5

I/ . //-//

Zég Counties which were surveyed

 

48

cipalities in the county. None of the remaining counties (97.7%) had re-
ceived such a grant.

Question 14: Does the county's subdivision regulations include stan-
dards and requirements for solar access? Three counties (6.8 percent)
responded yes to this question and 81.8 percent responded no. Subdivi-

sion regulations were non-existent in 11.41 of the counties.

C. Municipalities with POpulations from 1,000 to 9,999

There were 71 telephone surveys (292 of all cities in this pOpula-
tion range) attempted for this strata. A total of 65 responses (91.5%)
were collected. The following is a summary of responses received for
this strata.

Question 7: 56.9 percent of these cities have updated their zoning
ordinances, while 4.0 percent have not. Only 3.1% indicated that their
city had no zoning ordinance.

Question 8: The existing zoning ordinance in 9.22 of the cities pro-
vided for the protection and encouragement of solar access, while 86.2
percent did not. One city (1.52) indicated that it provided for solar
access indirectly.

Question 9: The zoning ordinance in two cities (3.1 pecent) pro-
hibit the construction of earth-sheltered structures, while 93.82 do not.

Question 10: Four city zoning ordinances (6.2 pecent) distinguish
between earthrsheltered housing and basement housing and 90.7 percent do
not make this distinction.

Question 11: The comprehensive land-use plan in 15.4% of the cities
provides for the protection and develOpment of solar access. 77 percent

of the plans do not provide for this.

49

Question 12: Only five (7.7 percent) of the cities have applied for
Community Energy Planning Grants from the Minnesota Energy Agency. The
remaining 92.3 percent have not applied for a planning grant.

Question 13: Four cities (6.22) received Community Energy Planning
Grants from the MEA, while 93.8 percent had not.

Question 14: Three cities (4.6 percent) had subdivision regulations
which included standards and requirements for solar access, while 93.82

did not. One city did not have a set of subdivision regulations.

D. Municipalities with a POpulation from 10,000 to 89,999

There were 39 telephone surveys (61 percent of all cities in this
population range) attempted for this strata. A total of 38 responses
(97.4!) were collected. The following is a summary of responses re-
ceived for this strata.

Question 7: Of the 38 respondents 24 (63.2 percent) of the cities
have updated their zoning ordinances since 1978 and 14 (36.8 percent)
have not.

Question 8: Five cities (13.2 percent) have zoning ordinances which
provide for the protection and encouragement of solar access, while 33
(86.8 percent) do not.

Question 9: Only one (2.6 percent) city's zoning ordinance prohibits
the construction of earth-sheltered structures, while 37 (97.42) do not.

Question 10: Five (13.2 percent) city zoning ordinances distinguish
between earth-sheltered housing and base housing, while 33 (86.8 percent)
do not.

Question 11: Fiften (39.5 percent) of the cities have comprehensive

land-use plans which contain an element for the protection and develop-

50

ment of solar access, while 23 (60.5 percent) do not.

Question 12: One (2.6%) city has applied for a Community Energy
Planning Grant from the Minnesota Energy Agency. The remaining 37 (97.4
percent) have not.

Question 13: No cities in this strata have received a Community En-
ergy Planning grant from the Minnesota Energy Agency.

Question 14: Two (5.3%) of the cities' subdivision regulations in-
clude standards and requirements for solar access, while 36 (94.7 per-

cent) do not.

E. Municipalities with a Population Greater Than 90,000

There were three telephone surveys (100 percent of all cities in
this population range) attempted for this strata. A total of two re-
sponses (66.7 percent) were collected. The following is a summary of re-
sponses received for this strata:

Question 7: The zoning ordinances of both cities (100 percent) have
been updated since 1978.

Question 8: The zoning ordinances of both (100 percent) cities pro-
vide for the protection and encouragement of solar access.

Question 9: The zoning ordinance of neither (0.0 percent) pro-
hibits the construction of earthrshelter structures.

Question 10: One (50 percent) of the cities' zoning ordinances dis-
tinguish between earth-sheltered housing and basement housing, while one
(501) does not.

Question 11: One (50 percent) of the cities' comprehensive land-use
plans contains an element for the protection and development of solar ac-

cess, while one (50 percent) does not.

51

Question 12: One (50 percent) city has applied for a Community En-
ergy Planning Grant from the Minnesota Energy Agency, while one (50 per-
cent) has not.

Question 13: One (50 percent) city has received a Community Energy
Planning Grant, while one (50 pecent) has not.

Question 14: Both (100 pecent) cities' subdivision regulations in-

clude standards and requirements for solar access.

F. Municipalities within the Twin Cities Metropolitan Region

Of all the cities surveyed, 46 were located within the Twin Cities
MetrOpOlitan Region. Figure 4-2 displays the geographic distribution of
sample cities within this region.

Question 11 pertains to a specific charge by the state to cities
within this region. Therefore, the results of this question were separ-
ated into two categories for purposes of studying the effects of said
charge. These categories were: 1) respondents from within the metropol-
itan region and 2) respondents from outside the metropolitan region. A
comparative analysis of the two categories was then performed.

Question 11: A response was received from 45 of the 46 cities sur-
veyed within the Twin Cities Metropolitan Region. Of the respondent
cities, 23 (51.1 percent) had comprehensive land-use plans containing an
element for the protection and development of solar access. Of the re-
sponding nonmetrOpolitan cities, three (5.6 percent) responded positively,

while 49 (88.7 percent) responded negatively.

52
Figure 4-2
GEOGRAPHIC DISTRIBUTION OF SAMPLE

CITIES WITHIN THE TWIN CITIES METROPOLITAN REGION
WHICH WERE SURVEYED

 

 

§§§:§§§§ ‘u-u. ....... u h “I
\\\\\\§\‘\§\\ \ 2.3;.."1— —— L ;r
\\ \\\‘ “""T‘ A

uuuuuuuuuuuu

   

\

l

\
\\ 2.; \Q‘“ “a,

    
 

A.

-« \ h‘NN‘ :“
.3; \\:\\
~\\\ \. \ ‘5 ‘ i

b‘ » \ ‘ __ L
‘ “ \..~\\\\ \\\

\ \ . WE _.\\ ---- .-

SR
\.

      

“t\\\

. \\§‘:‘:\\: “\gw" \
\\\\\\\\\\s\\\\\\\§s§\\s

L~__+ ’ """ \\\\\.§§§\

 

 

 

-';':':-"":"_ :wi': _ _l____\ \\\. ,, - L, _ ~__L_ -_-_ '.__i
- T T l i 1 E; Di”... T
.: | in“... I _ ..... . g I" °' : ”Q.

I : l "(3C2 I I : “as. : who. I
-.__-L. 1 .é§_.'__ .__I_.-__ + — J ‘r '-'afir' ‘—“VIH
.Iw— .. .

§§§Cities which were Surveyed. “’ ‘—‘ L_—‘ _“'l
3352:. ””33: " ""71? "' 33 "' mu—c ooooo sound ry
- :::::':-.'-.-.« " film-r ...... L213): “:3

CHAPTER V

INTERPRETATION OF RESULTS

A. Introduction

The effectiveness of state energy-related land-use legislation iden-
tified in Chapter II is dependent upon the degree of implementation (ac-
ceptability) of the legislation at the local levels of government. The
degree of implementation can be reviewed in terms of the number of indi-
vidual legislative actions and in terms of collective legislative ac-
tions. In this chapter, the county and various city strata will be con-
sidered according to total response and proportional response of legis-
lative actions, individually and collectively.

Prior to the discussion of results interpretation, it is helpful to
restate the central hypothesis of this research. It is hypothesized
that Minnesota legislation related to energy-efficient land-use planning
has not been effectively implemented at the local level on a statewide
basis.

The criteria used for determining effectiveness is based on: 1) the
total number of positive responses to survey questions 8 through 14 per
local unit of government, 2) the percentage of positive responses to sur-
vey questions 8 through 14 for each of the county and city groupings,
and, 3) the chi-square relationship of questions 8 through 10 as com—
pared to question 7 (zoning ordinance update since 1978). Each of the
criteria were assigned values for purposes of evaluating implementation
effectiveness. The standards of effectiveness for the respective cri-

teria were as follows for:

53

54

1. The total number of positive responses to survey questions
8 through 14 per local unit of government;

a. O or 1 positive response - ineffective implementation

b. 2 or 3 positive responses - marginally effective imple-
mentation

c. 4, 5, 6, or 7 positive responses - effective implementa-
tion

2. The percentage of positive responses to survey questions 8
through 14 for each of the county or city groupings;

a. less than 25 percent - ineffective implementation
b. 25 to 50 percent - marginally ineffective implementation
c. greater than 50 percent - effective implementation

3. The chi-square relationship of questions 8 through 10 to ques-
tion 7;

a. if the observed chi-square statistic is greater than the
critical value of chi~square (determined to be 3.841),
reject the hypothesis of variable independence - effec-
tive implementation
b. if the observed chi-square statistic is less than or
equal to the critical value of chi-square (3,841), do not
reject the hypothesis of variable independence - ineffec-
tive implementation
It is noted that the sample size was determined for each strata based
on a confidence interval of 0.10 and a confidence level of 95 percent.
The reader should refer to Chapter III, Section G, for details pertaining
to sample size. Again, the sample size of surveyed population was deter-

mined to ensure a reasonable degree of accuracy between the sample re-

sults and the true prOportion if a 100 percent sample was conducted.

B. County Implementation

The total number of positive responses to questions 8 through 14 per
local unit of government is displayed in the scatter diagram according to
the population of the responding county (Figures 5-1a and b). Of the 44

responding counties, only one county had enough positive responses to be

55

Figure 5-1a

County Data Summary

Number of Positive Responses
to Survey

(Questions 8 to 14)

Number of Positive
Responses

 

 

20 40 60 80 100 (Pop x 1000)

56

Figure 5-1b

County Data Summary

Number of Positive Responses
to Survey

(Questions 8 to 14)

Number of Positive
Responses

 

 

100 200 300 400 500 (Pop x 1000)

 

57

classified as effectively implementing the legislative opportunities.
Twelve counties responded positively to two questions; thus, 13 counties
were marginally effective at implementing the legislative opportunities.
The remaining 29 counties had 0 or 1 positive responses and were deter-
mined ineffective at implementing the legislative opportunities. Of the
44 counties, 65.9 percent were ineffective and 95.5 percent were classi-
fied as ineffective or marginally ineffective.

The percent of positive county response to survey questions 8
through 14 is summarized in Table 5-1. For six of the seven questions,
a positive response was received less than 25 percent of the time. This
interpreted as ineffective implementation of the legislative opportuni-
ties. Only one question (question 9) yielded a positive response
greater than 50 percent. In 77.3 percent of the counties, it was indi-
cated that the existing county zoning ordinances did not prohibit the
construction of earthrsheltered structures. It is noted that a "no” re-
sponse to this question was interpreted as a positive response.

The chi-square test was used to determine if a relationship existed
between the results of the questions pertaining to the county zoning or-
dinance (questions 8, 9, and 10) and zoning updates since 1978. The pur-
pose of this was to see if the county governments had taken advantage of
the respective legislative Opportunities when updating zoning ordinances.
As expected, the results of questions 8 and 10 were found to be indepen-
dent of the responses to question 7. That is, a zoning ordinance up-
date since 1978 was not effective at implementing solar access legisla-
tion or distinguishing between earth-shelter housing and basement hous-
ing. The results of question 9 were also found to be unrelated to the

results of question 7. This suggests that county zoning ordinances did

58

Table 5-1

 

Percent of Positive County Responses to Survey Questions

 

Question

Percent of
Positive
Responses

Effective-
ness of Im-
plementation

 

 

8.

9.

10.

ll.

12.

13.

14.

Does the existing zoning ordinance
provide for the protection and en—

couragement of access to direct sun-

light for solar energy systems?

Does the existing zoning ordinance
prohibit the construction of earth-
sheltered structures. (A ”no" re-
sponse is considered positive.)

Does the existing zoning ordinance
distinguish between earth-sheltered
housing and basement housing?

Does the city's (county's) compre-
hensive land-use plan contain an
element for the protection and de-
velOpment of access to direct sun-
light for solar energy systems?

Has the city (county) applied for a

Community Energy Planning Grant from

the Minnesota Energy Agency?

Has the city (county) received a Com-

munity Energy Planning Grant from
the Minnesota Energy Agency?

Does the city's (county's) subdi-

vision regulations include standards

and requirements for solar access?

11.4

77.3

13.6

4.1

4.5

2.3

6.8

Ineffective

Effective

Ineffective

Ineffective

Ineffective

Ineffective

Ineffective

 

 

 

59

Table 5-2

 

SUMMARY OF CHI-SQUARE TEST FOR COUNTY DATA

 

Reoponse to Qpestion

 

Zoning Update

Since 1978

9*

10

 

Yes No

Yes No

Yes No

 

Yes

22 1

 

No

 

11 0

 

 

 

Chi-Square

3.75

.866

1.290

 

Critical Value
of Chi~Square

3.841

3.841

3.841

 

‘Reject Hypothesis
of Variable
Independence

 

No

 

NO

 

No

 

 

*Note: A ”no" response to question number 9 is interpreted as a
positive response.

 

 

60

not prohibit the construction of earth-sheltered construction regardless
of zoning updates since 1978.

The conclusion derived from these results is do not reject the hypo-
thesis with respect to county implementation of the respective state leg-
islative opportunities. Minnesota legislation related to energy-efficient
land-use planning has not been effectively implemented at the county

level on a statewide basis.

C. Implementation by Small Size Cities (POpulation 1,000 - 9,999)

The total number of positive responses to questions 8 through 14
per local unit of government for small cities is displayed in the scat-
ter diagram according to the population of the responding city (Figure
5-2). Of the 65 responding cities, three cities had enough positive re-
sponses to be classified as effectively implementing the legislative op-
portunities. Five cities responded positively to three questions and
ten cities responded positively to two questions. Thus, fifteen cities
are marginally effective at implementing the legislative opportunities.
The remaining 47 cities had 0 or 1 positive responses and are determined
to be ineffective at implementing the legislative opportunities. 0f the
65 cities, 72.3 percent were ineffective and 95.4 percent were classi-
fied as ineffective or marginally effective.

The percent of positive responses to survey questions 8 through
14 is summarized in Table 5-3. As with the counties, a positive re-
sponse was received for six of seven questions less than 25 percent of
the time. This is interpreted as ineffective implementation of the leg-
islative opportunities. One question (question 9) yielded a positive re-

sponse greater than 50 percent. In 93.8 percent of small cities, it was

Number of Positive
Responses

.. M __-_ -
vv 0.

 

61

Figure 5~2

Number of Positive Responses
by City Population (1,000 to 9,999)

(Questions 8 to 14)

4 5 6 7
POpulation (x 1000)

10

62

Table 5-3

 

Percent of Positive Small City Responses to Survey Questions

 

Percent of
Positive
Question Responses

Effective-
ness of Im-
plementation

 

 

8.

9.

10.

11.

12.

13.

14.

Does the existing zoning ordinance

provide for the protection and en- 9.2
couragement of access to direct sun-

light for solar energy systems?

Does the existing zoning ordinance

prohibit the construction of earth- 93.8
sheltered structures. (A ”no” re-

sponse is considered positive.)

Does the existing zoning ordinance
distinguish between earth-sheltered 6.2
housing and basement housing?

Does the city's (county's) compre-

hensive land-use plan contain an

element for the protection and de- 15.4
velOpment of access to direct sun-

light for solar energy systems?

Has the city (county) applied for a
Community Energy Planning Grant from 7.7
the Minnesota Energy Agency?

Has the city (county) received a Com-
munity Energy Planning Grant from 6.2
the Minnesota Energy Agency?

Does the city's (county's) subdi-
vision regulations include standards 4.6
and requirements for solar access?

Ineffective

Effective

Ineffective

Ineffective

Ineffective

Ineffective

Ineffective

 

 

63

indicated that the existing city zoning ordinances did not prohibit the
construction of earth-sheltered structures.

The chi-square test was used to determine if a relationship existed
between the results of the questions pertaining to the small city zoning
ordinances (questions 8, 9, and 10) and zoning updates since 1978. The
purpose of this was to see if the small city governments had take advan-
tage of the respective legislation opportunities when updating zoning
ordinances. The results (Table 5-4) of this test were similar to the
respective county results. The results of questions 8, 9, and 10 were
found to be unrelated to the results of question 7. A zoning ordinance
update was not related to implementation of solar access legislation, not
prohibiting the construction of earth-sheltered construction, and dis-
tinguishing between earth-sheltered housing and basement housing. This
suggests that zoning ordinance updates since 1978 were not effective at
implementing the related legislative Opportunities.

The conclusion derived from these results is to not reject the hypo-
thesis with respect to small city implementation of the respective state
legislative opportunities. Minnesota legislation related to energy-effi-
cient land-use planning has not been effectively implemented at the small

city level on a statewide basis.

D. Implementation by Medium-Sized cities (Population 10,000 - 89,999)
The total number of positive responses to questions 8 through 14 per
local unit of government for medium size cities is displayed in the scat-
ter diagram according to the population of the responding city (Figure
5-3). Of the 38 responding cities, three cities had enough positive re-

sponses to be classified as effectively implementing the legislative op-

64

Table 5-4

 

SUMMARY OF CHI-SQUARE TEST FOR SMALL CITY DATA

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Zoning Update Reoponse to Question
*
Since 1978 8 9 10
Yes No Yes No Yes No
Yes 6 29 35 1 5 30
No 1 24 24 0 1 24
Chi-Square 1.767 .8082 1.717
Critical Value
of Chi-Square 3.841 3.841 3.841
Reject Hypothesis
of Variable
Independence No NO No

 

 

 

 

 

*Note: A “no” response to question number 9 is interpreted as a

posit

ive response.

 

 

65
Figure 5-3
Number of Positive Responses
by City POpulation (10,000 to 89,999)

(Questions 8 to 14)

Number of Positive

Responses
0. O O 0. O... .0. O .
10 20 30 4O 50 6O 70 80 90

 

 

Population (x 1000)

66

portunities. One city responded positively to three questions and 15
cities responded positively to two questions. Thus, 16 cities are mar-
ginally effective at implementing the legislative opportunities. The re-
maining 19 cities had one positive response and are determined to be in-
effective at implementing the legislative opportunities. Of the 38
cities, 50 percent were ineffective and 84.2 were classified as ineffec-
tive or marginally effective.

The percent of positive city responses to survey questions 8 through
14 is summarized in Table 5-5. A positive response was received less than
25 percent of the time for questions 8, 10, 12, 13, and 14. This is inter-
preted as ineffective implementation of the respective legislative oppor-
tunities. One question (question 11) yielded a positive response of 39.5
percent. This is interpreted as marginal effectiveness in implementing an
element for solar access in comprehensive land-use plans. One question
(question 9) yield a positive response greater than fifty percent. In 97.4
percent of the medium-sized cities, it was indicated that the existing city
zoning ordinances did not prohibit the construction of earth-sheltered
structures.

The chi-square test was used to determine if a relationship existed
between the results of the questions pertaining to the medium size city
zoning ordinances (questions 8, 9, and 10) and zoning updates since 1978.
The purpose of this was to see if the medium size city governments had
taken advantage of the respective legislative opportunities when updat-
ing zoning ordinances. The results of this test (Table 5-6) were simi-
lar to the respective county and small city results. The results of
questions 8, 9, and 10 were found to be unrelated to the results of ques-

tion 7. A zoning ordinance update was not related to implementation of

67

Table 5-5

 

Percent of Positive Medium Size City Responses to Survey Questions

 

Percent of Effective-
Positive ness of Im-
Question Responses plementation

 

 

8. Does the existing zoning ordinance
provide for the protection and en- 5.0 Ineffective
couragement of access to direct sun-
light for solar energy systems?

9. Does the existing zoning ordinance
prohibit the construction of earth- 97.4 Effective
sheltered structures. (A ”no” re-
sponse is considered positive.)

10. Does the existing zoning ordinance
distinguish between earth-sheltered 13.2 Ineffective
housing and basement housing?

11. Does the city's (county's) compre-
hensive land-use plan contain an Marginally
element for the protection and de~ . 39.5 effective
velOpment of access to direct sun-
light for solar energy systems?

12. Has the city (county) applied for a
Community Energy Planning Grant from 2.6 Ineffective
the Minnesota Energy Agency?

13. Has the city (county) received a Com-
munity Energy Planning Grant from 0 Ineffective
the Minnesota Energy Agency?

14. Does the city's (county's) subdi-
vision regulations include standards 5.3 Ineffective
and requirements for solar access?

 

 

68

Table 5-6

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

SUMMARY OF CHI-SQUARE TEST FOR MEDIUM SIZE CITY DATA
Zoning Update Response to Question
*
Since 1978 8 9 10
Yes No Yes No Yes No
Yes 3 18 19 l 4 16
No 3 14 16 0 1 15
Chi-Square 1.931 .144 .069
Critical Value
of Chi-Square 3.841 3.841 3.841
Reject Hypothesis
of Variable
Independence No No No

 

 

 

 

 

*Note: A ”no” response to question number 9 is interpreted as a
positive response.

 

 

69

solar access legislation, not prohibiting the construction of earth-shel-
tered construction, and distinguishing between earth-sheltered housing
and basement housing. This suggests that the zoning ordinance updates
since 1978 were not effective at implementing the related legislative
opportunities.

The conclusion derived from these results is to not reject the hypo-
thesis with respect to medium size city implementation of the respective
state legislation opportunities. Minnesota legislation related to en-
ergy-efficient land-use planning has not been effectively implemented at

the medium size city city level on a statewide basis.

E. Implementation by Large Size Cities (Population greater than 90,000)

The total number of positive responses to questions 8 through 14
per local unit of government for large size cities is displayed in the
scatter diagram according to population of the responding cities (Figure
5-4). Both of the responding cities had enough positive responses to be
classified as effectively implementing the legislative opportunities.

One city had five positive responses, the other had four positive re-
sponses.

The percent of positive responses to survey questions 8 through 14
is summarized in Table 5-7. A 100 percent positive response was re-
ceived for questions 8, 9, and 14. This is interpreted as effective im-
plementation of the legislative opportunities. Both cities provide for
solar access in their zoning ordinances and subdivision regulations. Both
cities also do not prohibit the construction of earth-sheltered struc-
tures. The remaining questions received 50 percent positive responses,

which is interpreted as marginal effectiveness of implementation.

70

Figure 5-4

Number of Positive Responses
by City Population (90,000+)

(Questions 8 to 14)

Number of Positive
Responses

 

 

 

90,000 200,000 400,000

71

Table 5-7

 

Percent of Positive Large City Responses to Survey Questions

 

 

 

Percent of Effective-
Positive ness of Im-
Question Responses plementation

8. Does the existing zoning ordinance
provide for the protection and en- 100 Effective
couragement of access to direct sun-
light for solar energy systems?

9. Does the existing zoning ordinance
prohibit the construction of earth- 100 Effective
sheltered structures. (A ”no” re-
sponse is considered positive.)

10. Does the existing zoning ordinance Marginally
distinguish between earth-sheltered 50 effective
housing and basement housing?

11. Does the city's (county's) compre-
hensive land-use plan contain an
element for the protection and de- 50 Marginally
velOpment of access to direct sun- effective
light for solar energy systems?

12. Has the city (county) applied for a
Community Energy Planning Grant from 50 Marginally
the Minnesota Energy Agency? effective

13. Has the city (county) received a Com-
munity Energy Planning Grant from 50 Marginally
the Minnesota Energy Agency? effective

14. Does the city's (county's) subdi-
vision regulations include standards 100 Effective

and requirements for solar access?

 

 

72

A chi-square test was not conducted for this sample because the
number of respondents was small (only two) and the results would be of
no value to this study.

The conclusion derived from these results is to reject the hypothe-
sis with respect to large size city implementation of the respective
state legislative opportunities. There is not substantial evidence to
indicate that Minnesota legislation related to energy-efficient land-use
planning has not been effectively implemented at the large size city

level on a statewide basis.

F. Implementation by Cities within the Twin Cities Metropolitan Region

The Twin Cities Metropolitan Government has been directed by state
legislative amendment to make plans for the protection and development
of access to direct sunlight for solar energy systems (see Chapter 2,
Section E.) In conjunction with this, communities within the metropoli-
tan region include a solar access element in their comprehensive plans.
A comparative analysis of respondent communities within and outside of
the metrOpOlitan region was used to determine effectiveness of implemen-
tation within the region. The relevant survey question is question 11.
The null hypothesis for this evaluation is: there is no difference be-
tween the prOportion of positive responses from sample communities with-
in the metrOpolitan region and sample communities outside the metropoli-
tan region.

Table 5-8 provides a summary of responses to question 11 from metro-
politan communities and nonmetrOpolitan communities. Of the metropoli-
tan communities, 51.1 percent responded positively, compared to 5.6 per-

cent for nonmetrOpolitan communities. It was determined by inspection

73

Table 5-8

 

Comparative Results to Question 11:

Metropolitan to Nonmetropolitan

Cities

 

Question 11:

Does the city's (county's) comprehensive land use plan contain an
element for the protection and develOpment of access to direct
sunlight for solar energy systems?

 

 

 

 

MetrOpOlitan Nonmetropolitan
Responses Cities Cities All Cities
Total Percent Total Percent Total Percent
Yes 23 51.1 3 5.6 26 26
No 22 49.9 49 40.7 71 71
NO Plan 0 0 3 5.6 3 3
Totals 46 100 54 100 100 100

 

 

 

 

 

74

that there is a difference and that implementation is more effective
within the metrOpOlitan region than outside the metropolitan region.
Also, according to criteria established in Section 14 of this chapter, it
was determined that 51.1 percent be interpreted as effective implementa-
tion of the legislative Opportunity. Based on this information, reject
the null hypothesis of no difference.

The conclusion derived from these results is to reject the central
hypothesis with respect to metrOpOlitan implementation of the respec-
tive state legislative opportunity. Minnesota legislation related to
energy-efficient land-use planning has been effectively implemented in

Twin Cities MetrOpOlitan Region.

 

CHAPTER VI

CONCLUSION

A. Summary of Minnesota's Energy-Related Land-Use Legislation

State energy-related land-use legislation pertinent to this research
can be divided into two categories: enabling legislation and mandatory
legislation. The portions of the municipal and county planning acts
which address solar access belong to the former category. The allowance
for earth-sheltered construction in the municipal act is also in a permis-
sive form. The county planning act, unlike the municipal planning act,
takes the form of mandatory legislation with regard to earth-sheltered
construction by not allowing the prohibition of such construction. The
Metropolitan Government Act mandates that communities within the metro-
politan region include a solar access element in their comprehensive
plans. Finally, the state legislative act which allowed communities to
apply for community energy planning and implementation grants is, for

purposes of this research, considered enabling legislation.

B. Summary of Results

This research was an attempt to discover the relationship between
pertinent state legislation and the acceptance through implementation of
the legislation at the local government levels. To do so, the research
focused on five categories of local government, including 1) counties,
2) small size cities, 3) medium size cities, 4) large size cities, and
5) cities within the Twin Cities Metropolitan Region. It was discovered
that the degree of implementation of the various legislative opportuni-

ties was not substantial enough to reject the central hypothesis for

75

76

county governments, small size cities, and medium size cities. The con-
clusion for the respective categories is that the relevant state legisla-
tion has not been effectively implemented on a statewide basis. For
large size cities and metropolitan cities, evidence from this research
called for the rejection of the central hypothesis. In fact, the evi-
dence indicated that the cities within these categories were imple-

menting the related legislative Opportunities.

C. Results in Perspective

The most salient observations emerging from this research suggest
that state enabling legislation does not effectively assure enactment of
energy-related land-use planning strategies in local ordinances and regu-
lations. This is especially true of counties and cities with populations
less than 90,000. State mandatory legislation appears to be more effec-
tive at eliciting an appropriate response. A case in point is the man-
datory language of the metropolitan planning act requiring a solar ac-
cess element in cities' comprehensive plans. Of the cities within the
metrOpOlitan region, 51.1 percent contain such an element, compared to
5.6 percent of the cities outside the metropolitan region. The 51.1
percent is actually misleadingly low since many cities within the region
indicated that their plans were in the process of being rewritten to con-
tain an element for solar access. For purposes of recording results,
these cities were considered as not having the appropriate element in
their plans at the time the survey was conducted.

This research was not designed to determine why (or why not) the
state legislation was implemented locally. However, primary conclusions

lead one to ask why the legislation has been effectively implemented in

 

77

some cities and not Others. The scatter diagrams in the previous chapter
suggest a possible link, although not strong, between a city's population
size and implementation. Other possibilities for such relationships may
exist between a city's average education or income levels, growth rate,
or public expenditures levels. An important next step in associated re-
search is to find an answer to the question, ”why?".

Conversation with planners and zoning administrators during the
course of the survey revealed some insights. One reason suggested for
the lack of implementation of solar access elements in county zoning

ordinances was that the counties were primarily rural and lot sizes were

 

restricted to one-half or one acre or larger. Thus, it was felt by re-
spondents that there was no need for a solar access element.

Another reason for lack of enactment emerged from cities which were
fully develOped. Respondents from some of these communities felt there
was no need for such ordinance amendments since their land was fully de-
velOped. Any future need for any related problems which might arise
could be handled through the use of variances.

A third reason given for lack of local enactment was lack of funds
for plan and zoning ordinance updates. It was felt that decreasing
funds in local budgets did not allow for these changes because of low
priority status.

The indicated lack of planning funds provides a convenient opportun-
ity to discuss the status of state-sponsored energy planning and plan
implementation grants. A very small percentage of cities and counties
surveyed indicated application for or reception of said grants. One of
the reasons for such a low response rate was a lack of knowledge of the

grants' existence. Perhaps more importantly, though, is the fact that a

78

state budget deficit required the discontinuation of the energy planning
grants program in late 1981. Consequently, only those local governments
fortunate to have applied for grants early in the program's existence re-

ceived them.

D. Need for Further Research
The results of this research indicate that the implementation of r

state energy-related land-use planning goals could be enhanced by the

«AI.

use of mandatory language in the various legislative acts. This may not

be feasible or prudent for a variety of reasons. One such reason is an

 

acknowledged resistance to local government interference by the state
government. Also, as indicated in Section I of Chapter II, there may ex-
ist other legal or psychological barriers which should be reviewed prior
to legislative mandate.

Additional research should be conducted to determine the existing
barriers to energy-related land-use legislation. One direction for re-
search is to determine time and cost criteria for revising local ordin-
ances to comply with state guidelines. This would serve as a launching
point for streamlining the process and placing the cost of such re-

visions within the financial reach of most local governments.

APPENDICES

Summary

394.21
394.22
394.23
394.24
394.25
394.26
394.27
394.28
394.29
394.30
394.301
394.302
394.32
394.33
394.34
394.35
394.36
394.361
394.362
394.37

APPENDIX A

County Planning Act Chapter 394

Of Act

Authority to carry on county planning and zoning activities
Definitions

Comprehensive plan

Official controls

Forms of controls

Public hearings

Creation and duties of a board of adjustment
Appropriation for planning activity

May employ director and staff

Planning commissions

Conditional use permits

Relation to other county authority
COOperation with municipalities

Relations with towns

Interim zoning

Filing with the county recorder
Nonconformities

Official map

Variances; adverse effect on environment
Enforcement

There are two amendments concerning solar access in this Act.

The first is in subdivision 2 of 394.25, forms of control.

Subd. 2. Zoning ordinances establishing districts within which

the use of land or the use of water or the surface of water pursuant

to section 378.32 for agriculture, forestry, recreation, residence,
industry, trade, soil conservation, water supply conservation, surface
water drainage and removal, conservation of shorelands, as defined in
section 105.485, and additional uses of land and of the surface of
water pursuant to section 378.32, may be by official controls en-
couraged, regulated, or prohibited and for such purpose the board

may divide the county into districts of such number, shape, and area
as may be deemed best suited to carry out the comprehensive plan.
Official controls may also be applied to wetlands preservation,

open space, parks, sewage disposal, protection of ground water, pro-
tection of flood plains as defined in section 104.02, protection of
wild, scenic or recreational rivers as defined in section 104.33,
protection of lepe, soils, unconsolidated materials or bedrock

from potentially damaging development, preservation of forests,
woodlands and essential wildlife habitat, reclamation of non-
metallic mining lands; protection and encouragement of access to

 

79

80

direct sunlight for solar energy systems as defined in section
116H.021 subdivision 11; and the preservation of agricultural
lands.

 

 

The second amendment concerning solar access is in subdivision 7
of 394.27, creation and duties of a board of adjustment.

Subd. 7. The board of adjustment shall have the exclusive
power to order the issuance of variances from the terms of any
Official control including restrictions placed on nonconformities.
Variances shall only be permitted when they are in harmony with the
general purposes and intent of the official control in cases when
there are practical difficulties or particular hardship in the
way of carrying out the strict letter of any official control,
and when the terms of the variance are consistent with the compre-
hensive plan. "Hardship" as used in connection with the granting
of a variance means the property in question cannot be put to a
reasonable use if used under the conditions allowed by the official
controls; the plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique
to his property not created by the landowner; and the variance, if
granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality.
Economic considerations alone shall not constitute a hardship if a
reasonable use for the property exists under the terms of the or-
dinance. No variance may be granted that would allow any use that
is prohibited in zoning district in which the subject property is
located. The board of adjustment may impose conditions in the
granting of variances to insure compliance and to protect adjacent
properties and the public interest. The board of adjustment may
consider the inability to use solar enetgy systems a "hardship” in
theggranting Of variances.

 

 

 

APPENDIX B

Municipal Planning Act Chapter 462

Summary of Act

462.351
462.352
462.353
462.354
462.355

462.356
462.357
462.358
462.359
462.36

462.361
462.362
462.363
462.364

Municipal planning and development; statement of policy
Definitions

Authority to plan

Organization for planning

Preparation, adoption, and amendment of comprehensive municipal

plan

Procedure
Procedure
Procedure
Procedure
Certified

for plan effectuation; generally

for plan effectuation; zoning

for plan effectuation; subdivision regulations
for plan effectuation; official maps

copies filed with county recorder

Judicial review

Enforcement and penalty
Present ordinances continued
Inconsistent laws

There are four amendments concerning solar access in the Act. The
first is in subdivision 1 of 462.357, procedures for plan effectuation;

zoning.

Subd. 1.

Authority for zoning. For the purpose of promoting the

public health, safety, morals and general welfare, a municipality may
by ordinance regulate the location, height, bulk, number of stories,
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 section 105.485, access to direct sunltggt
for solar energy systems as defined in section 116H.02, flood control

 

 

or other purposes, and may establish standards and procedures regulating

such uses.

The regulations may divide 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

81

82

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.

The second amendment is in subdivision 6 of 462.357

Subd. 6. Variances. Subdivision regulations may provide for a
procedure for varying the regulations as they apply to specific
properties where an unusual hardship on the land exists, but vari-
ances may be granted only upon the specific grounds set forth in the
regulations. Unusual hardshtp_includesl but is not limited to;
inadequate access to direct sunlight for solar energy systems.

 

 

The third amendment made in 1978 was further amended in 1980 when
the subdivision legislation was overhauled. The amendment is in sub-
division 2a of 462.358, procedure for plan effectuation; subdivision
regulations.

Subd. 2a. Terms of regulations. The standards and require-
ments in the regulations may address without limitation: The size,
location, grading, and improvement of lots, structures, public areas,
streets, roads, trails, walkways, curbs and gutters, water supply,
storm drainage, lighting; sewers, electricity, gas, and other
utilities; the planning and design of sites; access to solar enetgz;
and the protection and conservation of flood plains, shorelands, soils,
water, vegetation, energy air quality, and geologic and ecologic
features. The regulations shall require that subdivisions be con-
sistent with the municipality's official map if one exists and its
zoning ordinance, and may require consistency with other official
controls and the comprehensive plan. The regulations may prohibit
certain classes or kinds of subdivisions in areas where prohibition
is consistent with the comprehensive plan and the purposes of this
section, particularly the preservation of agricultural lands. The
regulations may prohibit the issuance of building permits for any
tracts, lots, or parcels for which required subdivision approval has
not been obtained. The regulations may permit the municipality to
condition its approval on the construction and installation of sewers,
streets, electric, gas, drainage, and on the receipt by the muni-
cipality of a cash deposit, certified check, irrevocable letter of
credit, or bond in an amount and with surety and conditions sufficient
to assure the municipality that the utilities and improvements will
be constructed or installed according to the specifications of the
municipality. ,The regulations may permit the municipality to condition
its approval on compliance with other requirements reasonably related
to the provisions of the regulations and to execute development con-
tracts embodying the terms and conditions of approval. The municipality
may enforce such agreements and conditions by appropriate legal and
equitable remedies.

 

83

The fourth amendment is a 1978 change and it is in subdivision 6 of
462.358.

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 literal provisions
of the ordinance in instances where their strict enforcement would
cause undue hardship because of circumstances unique to the
individual property under consideration, and to grant such variances
only when it is demonstrated that such actions will be in keeping
with the spirit and intent of the ordinance. Undue hardship includes,

 

but is not limited toi_inadequate access to direct sunlight for
solar energy systems. 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 permitted under the 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 to insure compliance and to protect
adjacent properties.

 

 

 

APPENDIX C

Regional DevelOpment Act of 1969

Summary of Act

462.381 Title

462.382 Application

462.383 Purpose

462.384 Definitions

462.385 Designation of regions

462.386 Multi-county planning and development; conformance with regions
462.387 Regional develOpment commissions; establishment
462.388 Commission membership

462.389 DevelOpment commission chairman; officers and staff
462.39 Powers and duties

462.391 Specific powers and duties

462.392 Special studies and reports

462.393 Reports

462.394 Citizen participation and advisory committees
462.395 Duties of state agencies, state planning agency
462.396 Financial; state assistance

462.397 Borrowing money; certificates of indebtedness

This act applies to the Regional Development Commissions.

The state

is split into 13 RDC's.

There is one solar access amendment in this act and it is found in
subdivision 3 or 462.39.

Subd. 3. Planning. The commission shall prepare and adOpt,

after appropriate study and such public hearings as may be necessary,

a comprehensive develOpment plan for the region.

The plan shall con-

sist of a compilation of policy statements, goals, standards, programs,
and maps prescribing guides for an orderly and economic develOpment,

public and private, or the region. The comprehensive development

plan shall recognize and encompass physical, social, or economic

needs of the entire region including but not limited to such matters

as land use, parks and open space land needs, access to direct sunltgot
for solar energy systems, the necessity for and location of airports,
highways, transit facilities, public hospitals, libraries, schools,
public and private, housing, and other public buildings. In preparing
the develOpment plan the commission shall use to the maximum extent
feasible the resources studies and data available from other planning
agencies within the region, including counties, municipalities, special
districts, and subregional planning agencies, and it shall utilize the
resources of the state planning agency to the same purpose. No
develOpment plan or portion thereof for the region shall be adapted by
the commission until it has been submitted to the state planning

 

 

84

85

agency for review and comment and a period of 60 days has elapsed after
such submission. When a development plan has been adopted, the
commission shall distribute it to all local government units within

the region.

 

APPENDIX D

Metropolitan Government Chapter 473

There are two solar access amendments in this chapter. The first

is in an introductory section on plans, 473.05.

473.05 Plans. Subdivision 1. The commission shall make
plans for the physical, social, and economic development of its
metrOpOlitan area with the general purpose of guiding and accom-
plishing a coordinated and harmonious development of the area
and of public facilities, improvements, and utilities which do
not begin and terminate within the boundaries of any single
governmental unit or which do not relate exclusively to the
develOpment of any single governmental unit. Such plans may include,
among other things, suggestions as to highways and other transporta-
tion facilities, parks and recreational facilities, methods for
protection and assuring access to direct sunlight for solar enetgy
systems, drainage and water supply facilities, public buildings,
utilities and services, as well as suggested standards for the
subdivision of land and for control over the construction, height,
bulk, location and use of buildings and premises. The commission
may adOpt by resolution of a majority of its full membership any
such plan or portion of any plan as its official recommendation

 

 

for the develOpment of the area.

The second amendment is in the MetrOpOlitan Land Use Planning Act
which is summarized below.
473.851 Legislative findings and purpose
473.852 Definitions
473.853 Advisory committee
473.854 Guidelines
473.855 Metropolitan system statement
473.856 MetrOpOlitan system statement; amendments
473.857 System statements; reconciliation procedures
473.858 Comprehensive plans; local governmental units
473.859 Comprehensive plan content
473.86 Cities
473.861 Towns
473.862 Counties
473.863 School districts; capital improvement programs
473.864 Plans and programs; adOption; amendment
473.865 Implementation of plans
473.866 Contested cases; administrative and judicial review
473.867 Planning assistance; grants; loans
473.868 Housing
473.869 Extension
473.87 Exemption from levy limit
473.871 New municipal sewer systems
473.872 Application

86

87

The amendment is in subdivision 2 of 473.859, comprehensive plan
content. Note that this is mandatory language and requires communities
in the metrOpOlitan area of St. Paul and Minneapolis to include a solar
access element in their comprehensive plan.

Subd. 2. Land use plan. A land use plan shall designate the
existing and prOposed location, intensity and extent of use of land
and water for agricultural, residential, commercial, industrial and
other public and private purposes, or any combination of such purposes.
A land use plan shall contain a protection element, as appropriate,
for historic sites and the matters listed in section 473.204, and
an element for protection and development of access to direct sunltg§t_
for solar energy systems. A land use plan shall also include a
housing element containing standards, plans and programs for pro-
viding adequate housing Opportunities to meet existing and projected
local and regional housing needs, including but not limited to the
use of Official controls and land use planning to promote the
availability of land for the develOpment of low and moderate income
housing.

 

BIBLIOGRAPHY

B I B L I O G R A P H Y

 

Ahrens, Donna, Ellison, Tom, and Sterling, Ray, Earth Sheltered Homes:
Plans and Designs, Underground Space Center, University of Minnesota,
Van Nostrand Reinhold Company, New York, New York, 1981.

 

 

Albert, Joseph David, The Effect of Increased Energy Prices on Urban
Spatial Sructures, U.D. Div., Georgia State University, 1978.

 

 

Armstrong, Marilyn Duffey and Joe E., Community Impediments to Implemen-
tation of Solar Energy, prepared for Energy and Environment Division,
Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory, Berkeley, California, November, 1979.

 

 

 

Blalock, Herbert M., Social Statistics, McGraw Hill Book Company, New
York, New York, 1960. ‘

Burby, Ramond J. and Bell, 0. Flemming, Energy and the Community, Cam-
bridge, Mass., 1978.

 

Bureau of Planning, Portland, Oregon, for HUD Energy_Conservation Choices
for the City of Portland, Oregon, Volume 3B, Transportation and Land
Use Conservation Choices, September, 1977.

 

 

Butti, Ken and Perlin, John, A Golden Thread: 2500 Years of Solar Ar- '
chitecture and Technology, Cheshire Books, Palo Alto, California, 1980.

 

 

Carrier, Roger E., Energy Conservation Throsgh Urban Transportation Plane
ning, Ph.D. Thesis, Pennsylvania Sate University, 1974.

City of Minneapolis, Office of the Mayor, Planning Department, Plan for
the 1980's: Energy, Hearing Draft.

 

City of Minneapolis, Planning Department, Minneapolis Metro Center Plan
coo 1990, JUly, 19780

 

Cochran, William G., Sampliongechniques, third edition, John Wiley 8
Sons, Inc., New York, New York, 1977.

Cohen, Lewis Chester, A Compsrative Study of the Energy Alternatives for'
the State of New York, Ph.D. Thesis, Rensselear Polytechnic Institute,
1979.

 

Comprehensive Dissertation's Index: Social Sciences and HumanitiesL Part
2, University Microfilms International, Ann Arbor, Michigan, 1973-1981.

Department of Administration, Building Code Division, ”Performance Stan-
dards for Solar Energy Systems and Sub-Systems Applied to Energy Needs
of Buildings,” Minnesota State Register, October 24, 1977.

Dissertation Abstracts International: ArThe Humanities and Social Sciences,
University Microfilms International, Ann Arbor, Michigan, 1973-1981.

88

89

Eisenhard, Robert M., State Solar Energy Legislation of 1976: A Review of
Statutes Relating to Buildiogs, Prepared for the Energy, Research and
DevelOpment Administration, Washington, D.C., September, 1977.

 

Energy Tax Act, Title I - Residential Energy Credit, def: Renewable energy
source property, (5) the term ”renewable energy source property” means
prOperty (a) which when installed in connection with a dwelling, trans-
mits or uses (1) solar energy, energy derived from geothermal deposits
... for the purposes of heating or cooling such dwellin ... or (ii) wind
energy for non-business residential purposes.

Energy Tax Act, Title I - Residential Energy Credit, Sec. 44C. (a) General
rule - In the case of an individual there shall be allowed as a credit
against the tax ... (b) for purposes of ... (1) Energy Conservation - in
the case of a dwelling unit ... (2) Renewable energy source - .

Environmental Law Institute, Department of Housing and Urban Development,
Prototype Solar Access Legislation, preliminary draft, September, 1978.

Erley, Duncan, and Jaffe, Martin, Site Planning for Solar Access: A Guide-
book for Residential Developers and Site Planners, American Planning
Association, Chicago, Illinois, no date.

Freeman, Patricia Kaye, Ph.D., The State's Response to the Energy Crisis:
An Analysis of Innovation, University of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, Ph.D.
Thesis, 1978.

 

Hall, Timothy Allen, Ph.D., Energy Conservation: An Analysis of Public
Polioy Formulation, Implementation, and Alternatives, Ph.D. Thesis,
University of Oklahoma, 1978.

Hanna, Allan Alexander, Settlement and Energy Poliey in Perspective: A
Theoretical Framework for the Evaluation of Public Polley,

 

Hayes, Gail Boyer, Solar Access Law: Protectiog Access to Sunlight for
Solar Energy Systems, Ballinger Publishing Company, Cambridge, Massa-
chusetts, 1979.

 

Helland, John, Minnesota Major Environmental Laws in the 1970's: A Sum-
marnyrom 1969 to 1979, State of Minnesota, House of Representatives,
Research Department, St. Paul, Minnesota, January, 1981.

 

Hirst, Eric, and Armstrong, John R., “Managing State Energy Conservation
Programs: The Minnesota Experience,” Science, Vol. 210, November 14,
1980, pp.740-744.

Jaffe, Martin, and Erley, Duncan, Protecting Solar Access for Residential
Development: A Guidebook for Planning Officials, American Planning As-
sociation, Chicago, Illinois, no date.

Reyes, Dale, ”Energy and Land Use, Energy Poliey, September, 1976.

 

9O

Koenig, Herman E. and Edems, Thomas C., "Evolutionary Adaptations in
Western Food Systems,” Testimony to the Presidential Commission on
World Hunger, Chicago, Illinois, April 25, 1979.

Koenig, Herman E., Ph.D., ”Energy Conservation: Imperative and Opportun-
ity,” prepared for Energy Seminar for Michigan Legislators and Staff,
September 11, 1978.

Krueckenberg, Donald A., and Silvers, Arthur L., Urban PlanniogyAnalysis:
Methods and Models, John Wiley and Sons, New York, 1974.

Mackie, Marsha, and Mackie, Bill, Community Energy Planning, Oregon De-
partment of Energy, November, 1979.

Miller, Allan S., Hayes, Gail Boyer, and Thompson, Grant P., Solar Access
and Land Use Law, 1977, Environmental Law Institute, Washington, D.C.,

1977.

 

Minnesota Department of Economic Development and the Minnesota Energy
Agency, Energy Guide Book, St. Paul, Minnesota, 1981.

 

Minnesota Department of Economic Development and the Minnesota Energy
Agency, Energerlanninngools Library, St. Paul, Minnesota, 1981.

Minnesota Energy Agency, Energy Accounting Procedures Manual for Local
Governments and School Districts, St. Paul, Minnesota, November, 1980,
revised January, 1981.

Minnesota Energy Agency, 1980 Energy Policy and Conservation Biennial Re-
port, St. Paul, Minnesota, 1980.

Minnesota Energy Agency, Draft Executive Summary and Recommendations:
Solar I - Active, Solar II - Passive, The Minnesota Alternative Energy
Research and DevelOpment Policy Formulation Project, March, 1977.

Minnesota Energy Agency, Energy PlanniogyTools Library, St. Paul, Minne-
sota, no date.

Minnesota Energy Agency, Energy Poliey and Conservation Report, St. Paul,
Minnesota, 1976.

Minnesota Energy Agency, ”Land Use Section,” 1980 Energy Policy and Conser-

vation Biennial Report.

Minnesota Energy Agency, Policy Analysis Activity, Legislation Options for

Encouraging Solar Energy Use in Minnesota, Executive Summary, December
31, 1977.

Minnesota Energy Agency, ”Results of the Minnesota Community Energy Survey,”

April 13, 1981.

“”1

I? "If!

91

Minnesota Energy Agency, Solar I - Active, A Subcommittee Report to the
Minesota Energy Agency, Prepared as part of the Minnesota Alternative
Energy Research and DevelOpment Policy Formulation Project, March, 1977.

 

Minnesota Energy Policy Task Force, Final Report and Recommendations of
the Minnesota Environmental Quality Council, Minneapolis, Minnesota, 1973.

 

 

Minnesota Environmental Quality Council, Energy Use in Minnesota, St. Paul,
Minnesota, 1973.

 

Minnesota State Planning Agency, County Plannisg Legislation in Minnesota,
Office of Local and Urban Affairs, St. Paul, Minnesota, August, 1977.

 

Minnesota Statutes, 1980.

 

Murray, Francis X., Energy: A National Issue, The Center for International
Studies, Georgetown University, Washington, D.C., 1976.

 

National Solar Heating and Cooling Information Center, State Solar Legis-
lation, Rockville, Maryland, July, 1978.

 

Ninety-Fourth Congress, Second Session, The Energy Conservation Act of
1976, Heariogs Before the Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs,
United States Senate, Pursuant to 8. Res. 45L_National Fuels and Energy
Poliey Study, April 26 and May_6, 1976, U.S. Government Printing Office,
1976.

 

 

Ninety-Fifth Congress, First Session, Energy and the City: Heariogs Before
the Subcommitttee on the City of the Committee on Banking, Finance, and
Urban Affairs, House of Representatiyes, September 14, 15, and 16, 1977,
U. S. Government Printing Office, 1977.

 

 

 

Northeastern Illinois Planning Commission, Energy Code Administration: A
Handbook for Buildiog Officials, Illinois Energy Conservation Program,
April, 1981.

 

 

Northeastern Illinois Planning Commission, Guidelines for Energy Effici-
ent Community Development (Site Planning and Subdivision Destgo), Illi-
nois Energy Conservation Program, April, 1981.

 

 

Northeastern Illinois Planning Commission, Guidelines for Energy Effici-
ent New Construction, Illinois Energy Conservation Program, April, 1981.

 

 

Northeastern Illinois Planning Commission, Guidelines for Energy Effici-
ent Rehabilitation and Retrofit, Illinois Energy Conservation Program,
April, 1981. III

 

 

Northeastern Illinois Planning Commission, Guidelines for Protection of
Solar Access, Illinois Energy Conservation Program, April, 1981.

 

 

Nudler, Arnold 0., "Planning Aspects of Direct Solar Energy Generation,”
American Institute of Planners Journal, pp.339-351, October, 1977.

 

92

Peskin, Robert L, The Impacts of Urban Transportation and Land Use Policies

 

on Transportation Energy Consumption, unpublished Ph.D. dissertation,
Department of Civil Engineering, Northwestern University, Evanston, Il-
linois, June, 1977.

 

Pollock, Peter, The Implementation of State Solar Incentives: Land-Use
Planning to Insure Solar Access, Solar Energy Research Institute, Golden,
Colorado, March, 1979.

 

Public Law 95-618, November, 1978, Energy Tax Act of 1978, 92 Statute
3175.

Public Law 95-619, November 9, 1978, National Energy Conservation Policy
Act, 92 Statute 3207.

 

Ryan, Richard William, Solar Energy Polieerakiog:in California, Ph.D.
Thesis, Unversity of Southern California, 1978.

 

Shapiro, Ragina, Conflict Between Energy and Urban Environment: Consoli-
dated Edison verus the City of New York, Ph.D. Thesis, City University
of New York, 1976.

 

 

Solar Energy Research Institute, Solar Energeregal Bibliography: Final
Report, Golden, Colorado, March, 1979.

 

 

Spivak, Paul, Land-Use Barriers and Incentives to the Use of Solar Energy,
Solar Eergy Research Institute, Golden, Colorado, August, 1979.

 

Taft, Graham 8., Land Use Guidance Strategies as a Means of Achieviog
National Energy Goals, A Poliey Analysis, Ph.D. Thesis, Purdue Univer-
sity, 1978.

 

Thompson, Janice, Community Center Planner for the Minnesota Energy Agency,
interviewed Jan. 20, 1982.

U. S. Department of Energy, Assistant Secretary for Conservation and Solar
Energy, Solar Energy: Program Summary Document FY 1981, Washington, D.C.,
August, 1980.

U. S. Department of Energy, Community Impediments to Implementation of
Solar Energy, DOE/EV-0059, Office of Technology Impacts, Technology As-
sessments Division, Washington, D.C., November, 1979.

 

 

U. S. Department of Energy, Domestic Poliey Review of Solar Energy, A re-
sponse memorandum to the President of the United States, TID-22834, Feb-
ruary, 1979.

U. S. Department of Energy, Local Government Energy Activities: Volume 1:
Summary Analysis of Twelve Cities and Counties, DOE/PE-0015/1, UC-95d,
Division of Environmental and Institutional Impacts Evaluation, Washing-
ton, D.C., July, 1979.

 

 

93

U. S. Department of Energy, Local Government Energy Activities: Volume 2:
Detailed Analysis of Twelve Cities and Counties, DOEfPE-0015/2, UC-95d,
Division of Environmental and Institutional Impacts Evaluation, Washing-
ton, D.C., July, 1979.

 

 

U. S. Department of Energy, Local Government Energy Activities: Volume 3:
Case Studies of Twelve Cities and Counties, DOE7PE-0015/3, UC-95d, Divi-
sion of Environmental and Institutional Impacts Evaluation, Washington,
D.C., July, 1979.

 

 

University of Minnesota/Experimental City Project, The Minnesota Erperimen-
tal City Progress Report, May, 1969, 3rd edition.

 

 

University of Minnesota School of Architecture, Faribault, Patterns, En-
ergy, Issues, Directions, Minneapolis, Minnesota, 1980.

 

 

University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, Colloquium on Energy and Pat-
terns of Human Settlement, 1977.

 

 

Villecco, Marguerite N., ”Energy, Human Ecology and Urban Design,”
American Institute of Architecture Journal, January, 1981.