Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutDecember 7, 1998 PRIOR LAKE CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION *** Monday, December 7,1998 5:00 p.m. I. Complete Zoninq Ordinance Discussion A. Front yard fence height and opacity (Public safety opinion - Police and Fire Chief) B. Set back from 904 - 50 feet or 75 feet C. Bluff Ordinance requirements . Indemnification . Side yard setback requirements . Engineer's Certification . 1-foot contour surveys . Distance from top of bluff D. Nonconforming Lot Consolidation E. Sunset Provisions . Impact of new standards on existing . Park lot requirements F. Reconstruction of Nonconforming Structures II. Adiourn - 7:00pm 16200 ~~~~M?:)l&~1~vfEfist5e-ake, Minnesota 55372-1714 / Ph. (612) 447-4230 / Fax (612) 447-4245 AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER ZONING ORDINANCE DISCUSSION ITEMS CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION DECEMBER 7, 1998 A. Fence Height (Section 1101.504). As noted in the previous staff report, fence height is primarily a matter of City policy. The staff suggested a maximum of 4 feet (48") with a maximum opacity of 25 percent. This standard will allow decorative and chain link fences, and will also allow a certain visibility to the front yard. The Council seemed to feel 48" was an appropriate height; however, there was some concern about the maximum opacity, and how this would affect visibility and safety. We have referred this issue to Police Chief Bill O'Rourke and Fire Chief Dave Chromy for their comments. We have not received any written comments at this time; however, the Chief O'Rourke and Chief Chromy will be at the meeting to discuss this matter with the Council. The current ordinance allows a 42" fence in the front yard with a maximum opacity of 25 percent. Opacity is a determination of visibility through the actual fence structure. If the maximum height of the fence is raised, the Council may wish to reduce the maximum opacity. Reducing the maximum opacity to 15 percent will address the concerns about visibility and reduce any potential safety hazards. This opacity will also allow decorative fences. The staff recommends the following language: A fence, or wall BY hedge s,;allnBt exceed 3 1/2 feet in hcig,it if mav be located in a front yard. if the fence or wall does not exceed 4 feet in height and 15 vercent ova city. B. Setback from Ordinary High Water Elevation (Section 1104.302). The current setback from the Ordinary High Water Mark on General Development Lakes is 50 feet. This is also the suggested standard in the DNR model regulations. Prior to May, 1997, the City of Prior Lake required a 75' setback from the Ordinary High Water Mark. The City also allowed setback averaging, which would allow the setback to be reduced to 50' from the Ordinary High Water Mark depending on the setbacks of the structures on the adjacent lots. This issue is primarily a matter of City policy. While the City may not adopt a setback less than that suggested by the model Shoreland Regulations, the City has the option of adopting a higher standard than the DNR regulations. The Council may, as a compromise, want to consider creating a setback somewhere between the 50' and J:\new~ne\mi&.c\resPOI)S3.doc 1 16200 cagle ueek Ave. '::'.t.., Prior Lake, Minnesota 55372-1714 / Ph. (612) 447-4230 / Fax (612) 447-4245 AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER 75' standard, such as 62 feet. If the Council chooses to adopt a setback greater than 50', the staff suggests the setback averaging option should also be included. C. Bluff Ordinance Requirements (Section 1104.304). The attached portion of "Statement of Need and Reasonableness for the Proposed Revisions to Minnesota Rules Parts 6120.2500-6120.3900" was prepared by the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources. This paper identifies the rationale for the bluff requirements of the model Shore land Regulations. As previously noted, the City may not adopt less restrictive standards. However, the City may adopt a stricter standard than that included within the DNR rules. 1) Indemnification Requirements. This requirement is not included in the DNR rules. The provision was required by the City Council when the bluff ordinance was amended in January, 1998. This provision was included as a direct result of discussion with the City Council and the concern about City liability in the event of a bluff failure. The need for this indemnification is a legal issue which should be addressed by the City Attorney. 2) Side Yard Setback. As noted in the attached letter from Pat Lynch, DNR Area Hydrologist, side yard setbacks are not addressed in the model Shoreland Regulations. He also notes side yard setbacks are important on riparian lots to avoid a ''wall effect" when viewing the lots from the lake. In terms of side yard setbacks and bluff requirements, the bluff provisions apply to all portions of a lot. 3) Aggressiveness of Provisions. In November, 1997, the Planning staff polled approximately 15 metropolitan area cities on their bluff regulations. Our survey indicated that most cities had the same or very similar ordinances (see attached memorandum dated November 24, 1997). The City of Prior Lake bluff ordinance, adopted in January, 1998, is more specific than other ordinances in the way it identifies the "visual break" rather than a standard 50' segment with an average slope exceeding 18 percent. The specific language in the City ordinance generally allows for a larger building envelope. The same is true of the requirement for a survey with l' contours. The l' increment provides a more precise determination of the bluff, and generally defines a larger building envelope. In return for a more liberal ordinance, the City requires an engineering study to determine the soil types and building requirements for a structure on a lot with a bluff. The purpose of this study was to ensure the new construction would not compromise the stability and integrity of the slope. This requirement was revised in June, 1998, to remove the engineering requirements on structures less than 480 square feet in area. As regards distance from top of bluff, the State rules establish a setback. The current ordinance follows the setbacks in the State rules. In order to vary from these setbacks, the City would have to pursue a modification under the flexibility provisions in the State rules. Staff has contacted the DNR to determine if they would consider relaxing the setback from top of bluff, but has not heard as of the date of this report. We hope to have a response by the date of the meeting. 1: \newzone\misc\respons3 .doc 2 D. Nonconforming Lots and Lot Combinations (Section 1101.501). The City Attorney has addressed these issues in a separate memorandum (see attached). The attached letter from Pat Lynch also reiterates that this provision, at least as it relates to lots within the Shoreland District, is not discretionary. E. Sunset Provisions {Section 1107.2303, (4,5,6)}. This provision describes the need to bring nonconformity's into compliance within the new ordinance provisions within a certain time frame. 1) Impact of New Standards on Existing Uses. The proposed provisions require compliance in three instances: signs, parking, and lighting. Nonconforming signs must comply with the new ordinance within one year of the effective date of the ordinance. Nonconforming parking lots and paved areas must be brought into compliance within five years of the effective date of the ordinance. This provision applies only to the paving and curbing requirements for parking lots. Lighting on commercial and industrial properties which exceeds the maximum light levels must be removed from the site, or otherwise comply with the ordinance within five years of the effective date ofthe ordinance. 2) Parking Lot Requirements. The purpose of this provision is to bring nonconforming uses, such as unpaved parking lots, into conformance with the current ordinance. The Council discussed this issue at a workshop on June 23, 1998, and determined a 5 year time frame was appropriate. The requirement only applies to paving and surfacing nonconforming parking lots. It does not require the number of parking spaces be increased unless the use is expanded or intensified. This requirement will obviously require some expenditure on the part of businesses and other uses. However, the 5 year timetable is intended to allow planning for these expenses. If an amortization schedule is not adopted, conformance with the ordinance will still be required if the use is altered in any way. F. Reconstruction of Nonconforming Structures. The City Attorney addressed this issue in a memorandum dated November 6, 1998 (see attached). As noted in that memorandum, an earlier draft of the proposed ordinance included the following provision, which the Council may wish to reinstate: Any single family detached dwelling unit which exists on the effective date of this ordinance on any nonconforming lot located within the R-l, R-2 or R-3 Use District which is later destroyed by fire or other natural disaster may be rebuilt if a building permit for reconstruction is issued within 365 days of its destruction and if it otherwise conforms with the provisions of this Ordinance. This provision allows a structure to be rebuilt as long as it meets setback, lot coverage, impervious surface and other applicable provisions. If the structure does not meet these standards, a variance will be required. It is important to remember that a variance is justified if there is no other legal alternative. Nonconforming structures 1: \newzone\misc\respons3 .doc 3 on all other lots may also be rebuilt, provided they meet current standards. Once again, if the structure does not meet current standards, a variance is required. 1: \newzone\misc\respons3 .doc 4 DNR WATERS Fax:612-296-0445 Nov 5 '97 14:55 P.01/07 Post-it"' I=ax Note 7671 Date / _Ij- ~~~~ I] To 17 t!J V R V e- From ~..<::"/' h'C.t' Co./Dcpt. ~!. . /7 J.. Co. "7 p-,',",! /-t1/i>'d. r , IV." 1./ /-1 I I . v_ - Phone H ;,. f' -1 V'.1 P'none /1.1 ....) _ '? p; / . n r, . j!J :t\ (') I ",or( ~ /P;, ...(.....fI~'f;" F<:x # r. ("2 _..1-( t.{ '7.... J-f.7 t.f f Fax # i..; [' -' - ;.7.. "7 t - cJ t.( '/-9 ---.--." . -_.._- -...- ..", .... ...., . .. . ... '.----' MINNESOTA SHORELAND MANAGEMENT PROGRAM STATEMENT OF NEED AND REASONABLENESS FOR THE PROPOSED REVISIONS TO MINNESOTA RULES PARTS 6120.2500 - 6120.3900 MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES DIVISION OF WATERS AUGUST 1988 DNR WATERS Fax:612-296-0445 Nov 5 '97 14:55 P.02/07 these areas are usually already. highly developed and the preservation of open space for on site sewage treatment systems is not necessary. Further, a 50 foot oHWL setback will reasonably allow for installation or preservation and maintenance of vegetation or other facilities that can intercept precipitation and filter or reduce surface water runoff velocities in theses developed areas, thereby addressing ~ater quality and quantity concerns. The setbacks from bluff tops for structures in all shoreland classes is needed and reasonable to protect bluff tops from adverse environmental impacts of development and construction activities. These impacts can be measured in both physical and aesthetic terms. Physically, development encroachment on bluff tops can lead to accelerated soil erosion and in some cases, slope failure. Aesthetically, development encroachment on bluff tops can compromise or eliminate the natural appearance of this topographical feature in shoreland areas. The 30 foot structure setback from the bluff top provides a minimum distanc b e u n e anned or ro osed foundations, walls or eaves of a s ructure for the m ~n ma erials dur1ng construction. Consequently, the preservation of soils can reduce or avo~d eroS10n prob an preservat10n an ma1ntenance 0 vegeta 10n can protect ~oils, scr en development and ma~ntain the natural appearance of bluff areas. Necessary shoreland alterations such as clearing of vegetation to accommodate structures can be' conducted within the first 10 feet waterward of the bluff top setback area until the bluff impact zone is encountered, vhich is defined as being 20 feet from the top of the bluff and the whole bluff. (i.e., 20 feet plus 10 feet = 30 feet, the width of the bluff setback area). It is noted fo~ clarity that the bluff impact zone is established for reservation and management of shore a d ve etation an soils, and all s ructura develo me t .s xc ed zone, except or sta~rways, lifts and landings. (see Item I of this subpart for stairways & lifts and see Item C of this subpart and Subp. 4 of Part 6120.3300 for additional discussion of bluff impact zones). The statements of need describing the definitions relevant to the above discussion of bluff setbacks and bluff impact zones are discussed below. Subo lb. Bluff: The definition of a bluff is needed because of the new proposal to manage bluff areas in shoreland areas, as described in the statement of Need for bluff top setbacks and bluff impact zones. The topographic 28 DNR WATERS Fax:612-296-0445 Nov 5 '97 14:55 P.03/07 features of a bluff need to be described in detail so shoreland managers, surveyors, property owners and others can have a common understanding of the conditions that constitute a bluff. These descriptions are contained in items A through- D of subp. lb. The provision that a bluff slope:rise a~ ~east 25 feet above the ordinary high water level was developed by the Shoreland Management committee after a presentation by DNR staff and subsequent discussion about what the appropriate height limitation should be for these regulations. A consensUS was reached that 25 feet was appropriate because areas less than__.~.2.._f.~et in height do not have as great a potential for siqni~~~4nt slope erosion and failure problems. This value is supported by research indicating a strong relationship between erosion and bluff height ~hen the bluff height is greater than 18' for historic bluff recession on Lake ontario (1)*. Recognizing that these rules are intended for substantially smaller lake systems than Lake Ontario, the intent is not to extrapolate from that research. Instead, the Lake Ontario research is mentioned to indicate that the 25' height value as derived by shoreland commit~ee members and based on their professional experience is realistic and reflective of documented research. Additionally, committee members agreed that shoreland topographic features of less than 25 feet in elevation are not as visually significant as those areas that are 25 feet or more above the waterbody. n Where soil erosion and stability are not issues, as would be the case if rock outcroppings comprise a bluff, a 30% s~ope *See page 31 for references. 29 ,',,- ........ ~ . DNR WRTERS Fax:612-296-0445 Nov 5 '97 14:56 P.04/07 combined with a 25 foot or more vertical hei~ht does constitute a prominent topographical feature that requires management to preserve the natural scenic values of shoreland areas. It is also reasonable to require that a bluff slope must drain to the waterbody, thereby excluding areas that meet the slope and height requirements of a bluff within shoreland areas, but effectively may have no potential for negative impacts on shoreland values. {- Finally, it is necessary to exclude from the definition of a bluff any areas that ~nclude lands that have average slopes of 18% or less for 50 feet or more between the top of the bluff and the toe of the bluff (as defined later in this document), since these areas could qualify for building sites if the ordinary high water level setback can be met. SUb~ 1c. Bluf~ I~pact Zone: This definition is needed to describe the extent of the bluff impact zone, an area that is proposed to be managed for the protection of vegetation, soil and aesthetic resources within shoreland areas. It is reasonable to manage these areas to ensure that development activities will not involve significant vegetative clearing and soil disturbance or disruption of scenic vistas as viewed from the surface of a ~aterbody. Vegetation is important to bluff stability in four ways: it directly removes vater from the soil layers; the root systems hold soil in place; vegetation softens the impact of raindrops which otherwise can jar loose soil partic1.es; and, vegetation slows runoff and filters out suspended sediments. (4) Therefore, defining the bluff impact zone as the bluff plus 20 feet from the top of the bluff will reasonably achieve the objective of managing' the bluff feature for soil and vegetation protection in shoreland areas. BubD. lab and lac. Toe of the Bluff and ToO of the BlUff: These definitions are needed to aid in the definition and field location by shoreland managers and surveyors of the bluff and bluff impact zone as defined and discussed earlier in this document. The text of" 50-foot segment II and tI an average slope exceeding 18%" were derived after detailed discussion by members of the Shoreland Committee to refine the definition of a bluff as proposed in earlier rule revision drafts. The definitions are reasonable because professional surveyors and planners (Minnesota Land Surveyors Association and Minnesota Planning Association) participating on the committee felt that these definitions in combination with the definitions for bluff and bluff impact zone ~ill enable the accurate location and mapping of bluff features in shore land areas for planning and development activities. 30 DNR WRTERS Fax:612-296-0445 Nov 5 '97 14:56 P.05/07 *References for bluff discussion: 1.. Drexhage, T. and Calkin P.E. (1981), "Historic Bluff Recession Along the Lake ontario Coast, New York," New York Sea Grant Institute. Albany New York. 2. Personal communication with Dr. Tuncer EQil, Department of civil and Environmental Engineering, University of Wisconsin-Madison. spring 1986. 3. Yanggen, D.A. (1981), "Regulations to Reduce Coastal Erosion Losses", pg. 89 IN: Bluff Slumping, Proceedings of the 1982 Workshop, Romulus, Michigan, February, 1982. 4. Tainter, Suzanne P. (1982) ttBluff slumping and Stability: A Consumer's Guide", pg. 6. Michigan Sea Grant Program, Ann Arbor, Michigan. Item B, which addresses requirements for. elevation of structures to prevent flood damage, contains several proposed rewordings of existing requirements, a new provision for lakes with extreme water level fluctuations, and a new provision for water-oriented accessory structures. The introductory language under this item has been rewritten to make it. briefer and clearer. It requires. structures to elevated consistent with local flood plain ordinances where they exist. As with the current rules, where local ordinances do not exist several approaches are presented (Subitems 1-3) for determining the appropriate structure elevation. A new phrase has been added to reference the possibility of floodproofing certain structures rather than elevating them on fill, as an introduction to the specific requirements for water-oriented accessory structures under subitem (3), as explained below. Subite~ (1) has also been also been rewritten. A state~ent has been added to authorize local officials, ~hen they deem it prudent, to require structures to be elevated higher than the standard elevation require~ents on lakes that have a .history of extreme water level fluctuations. In recent years, due to an extended, mUlti-year yet cycle, a number of lakes in the state have experienced extended, extremely high water levels that have damaged and destroyed hundreds of shoreland dwellings. Glacial lakes without outlets are particularly susceptible these extreme fluctuations. A good description of this sort of problem may be found in Chapter S.of "Reducing- Losses in High' Risk Flood Hazard Areas: A Guide~ook for Local Officials" by the Federal Emergency Management Agency, 1987. 31 / DNR WRTERS Fax:612-296-0445 Nov 5 '97 14:56 P.06/07 State la~ no~ requires Minnesota communities to maintain eligibility in this program. Since federal regulations for the program require all structures, including accessory structures to be 'protected, it is no~ prudent for local shoreland controls to require elevation or floodproofing of ~ater-oriented accessory structures. A additional benefit is the lower flood insurance premiums property owners will pay if these structures are protected to federal requirements. In view of all the above, it no~ is reasonable to include better standards in the state rules regarding~the management of boathouses and other structures located near the shores of public ~aters. One important improvement is the inclusion of standards to prevent future flooding of these structures. Proposed revisions to this Item and the above- described-sub items will require boathouses and other water- oriented accessory structures to be elevated properly to prevent flood damage. Subitem (3) proposed language would allow such structures to be flOOd-proofed (constructed of water-resistant materials) rather than elevated on fill in appropriate circumstances. This will make such structures much more convenient to use for their intended purposes than if they were elevated several feet on fill. Ho~ever, it also makes them more vulnerable-to damage from ice and wind action than elevated structures, so a caution statement is also presented for situations where long-duration flooding is likely (i.e. lakes without outlets). The statement in item C regarding bluff impact zones is needed to ensure that structures or accessory facilities are not placed within the bluff impact zones. It is reasonable to exclude stairways and landings from this provision 'since stairways and landinqs are facilities needed for achieving access up and down the steeply inclined areas associated with bluff areas. (Provisions for their installation are included' elsewhere in these rules.) Exclusion of all other structures and facilities from bluff impact zones is necessary because of the accelerated amount of erosion that often accompanies development here and because these areas are typically unsuited to development by nature of their steepness, soil type or because the placement~f development can substantially alter the natural appearance of bluff features in shoreland areas. Not allowing development in these areas is reasonable since the natural resource values of shorelands will be protected. 33 DNR WRTERS Fax:612-296-0445 Nov 5 '97 14:57 P.07/07 The statement in item D regarding steep slopes is needed to require local governments to evaluate the potential erosion impacts to shoreland areas and subsequent sedimentation and degradation of wa~er bodies that may result from the development of steep slopes. It is reasonable to require that conditions "be attached to the issuance of shoreland development permits on steep slopes if the proposed development is determined to have potential for creating soil erosion or visual impacts as viewed from the surface of the water. Additional reasons for the proposed treatment of steep slopes as a special management area is justified by review of existing county soil survey documentS. These documents show that generally, steep slopes are prone to soil erosion or stability problems and care should be taken when developing in these areas. .... :"~..:-.' Item E is needed to ensure that development does not encroach upon unplatted cemeteries protected by Minn. stat. Sect. 3.07.08. It is reasonable to require that permission to construct within 50 ft. of such sites be obtained from the State Archaeologist Office since that office is responsible for comprehensive statewide management of such sites. Further, it is reasonable to prohibit the placement of structures on significant historic sites, since the construction activity and placement could adversely affect the values of the site unless and until appropriate information is collected at the site. The state Archaeology Office requested a provision of this order to ensure that future development activity yill be sensitive to preserving and protecting cultural resources o~ this nature. In item F only two minor editorial types of changes are proposed. ~tem G provides provisions for the height of structures. The Shoreland Committee decided that a structure height standard should only apply within residential districts of cities, and that it should not apply to churches. The committee also decided that, since ~any cities use the Minnesota state Building Code (based on the national Uniform Building Code), the method used to determine heights of buildings should be the same as in these codes. They therefore decided to include a definition of "Height of building" as presented in these codes. Since the current rule has a height limit of 35 feet and this definition uses an approach which results in a'measurement vhich only goes part way up pitched or hipped roofs, the Committee decided to change the maximum height limit to 25 feet. 34 Minnesota Department of Natural Resources Metro Waters - 1200 Warner Road, St. Paul, MN 55106-6793 Telephone: (651) 772-7910 Fax: (651) 772-7977 [r- ,. .. n__ --~T~: \.' .-; :~~ P"': ..-- . I \. / ...- 1\ . - ._-) ~-, 1--1 ;"__1 I ' I .---...- II I; ;.~" 2 3 1998 I@\ November 20, 1998 Ms. Jane Kansier City of Prior Lake 16200 Eagle Creek Ave. SE Prior Lake, Minnesota 55372-1714 L RE: SHORELAA'D ZO~"ING Dear Ms. Kansier: Recently, I have had discussion with you, other planning staff, and the city attorney regarding shoreland zoning. Please let me take a moment to clarify a couple of matters, as it has been some time since I have provided written communication to you regarding the city's shoreland ordinance. For a number of years, I have been working with the City of Prior Lake toward adoption of a compliant shoreland zoning ordinance. While the city has adopted and is effectively administering a shoreland ordinance which is nearly compliant with the minimum statewide standards as prescribed by law, the latest draft I reviewed is not yet compliant. We have discussed, and I have agreed to, flexibility from the statewide standards for building height, impervious surface, lot area for sewered lots on RD lakes, and lot area for non-riparian sewered lots on NE lakes. In these instances, the city successfully demonstrated justification for varying from the requirements of the law, and did so through the formal flexibility process outlined in the state shoreland rules. The one facet of your ordinance which the city and DNR have not agreed upon is the issue of combination of substandard lots of record. This issue has resulted in DNR not certifying approval of Prior Lake's ordinance. Minnesota Rules, part 6120.3300, subpart 2.D. (having the effect oflaw), are clear on the combination of lots of record. You have access to the rule, so I will not type it out. The gist of that provision is that contiguous substandard lots of record in common ownership must be combined to meet the current zoning standards as much as possible. Substandard lots of record may be allowed as building sites provided the lot has been in separate ownership from abutting lands at all times since it became substandard. This is the law. It is not discretionary. This requirement has been challenged in the legal arena and has been upheld. The city must adopt language which complies with the law. I suggest the language out of the DNR model ordinance. The city's current ordinance language does not meet the intent of the law, and will not receive DNR approval. DNR Information: 612-296-6157,1-800-766-6000 . TTY: 612-296-5484,1-800-657-3929 An Equal Opportunity Employer Who Values Diversity ft Printed on Recycled Paper Containing a c..I Minimum of 10% Post-Consumer Waste Jane Kansier November 20, 1998 page 2 As I stated earlier, I have been patiently working on this shoreland revision with the city for a long time, and have reviewed more draft ordinances than I care to admit. I was of the understanding that when the city revised its entire zoning code, which is in process now, this component of the shoreland ordinance would be revised to bring it in to compliance with the law. I was disappointed to see the latest proposed zoning amendments do not reflect compliant language with respect to nonconforming lots of record. Another matter that came up recently is that of sideyard setbacks. The state shoreland rules do not address sideyard setback. While sideyard setbacks are especially important on riparian lots (to avoid the wall effect when viewed from the water), they serve other non-shoreland purposes such as privacy, allowing room for equipment to access rear yards, public utility easements, etc. It is not clear to me why sideyard setbacks are not addressed in the shoreland rules. I look forward to bringing closure to the shoreland zoning ordinance amendment process with your community. If compliant language regarding nonconforming lots of record is adopted, I will be prepared to recommend state approval of your shoreland ordinance. If not, I must consider the state's legal obligation in ensuring local shoreland controls meet the requirements ofthe law. There are provisions in the law which allow for the commissioner to adopt and administer local shoreland controls, and assess the costs of such an endeavor to the city. I'm no more interested in that than the city is. I am available to meet with you or the Planning Commission or City Council to further discuss these and other land use matters. If you have any questions, or would like to schedule a time to meet, please call me at 772-7910. Thank you for your diligent administration of shoreland zoning controls. Sincerely, 'f.~yn~ Area Hydrologist Ed Fick, DNR Shoreland Hydrologist Dale Homuth, Regional Hydrologist ..'......... ) _._...:.-..........:.....~~:"-_"-_....;.__.." .....:..L...._~...;~_~._,~._,_.__. ._,.~__..:-.. J ~:.~~......-'-.c....Ao.t..:~.. ._'.~..,.c..:i:...t.....;.,.:'..;.:._.~;",,~~,,_,""'.'..t';<':'-:"',_~..r:"...:...- _,~.....,:-"::"""~:,,,,,-,_,_,__, ...;;.' .''''.k~ _."'-,_- '..~.. ',.'_.... ". jM E M 0 RAN 0 U M .I DATE: TO: FROM: RE: November 24, 1997 Planning Commission JenniTovar Bluff Ordinances At the November 10, 1997 Planning Commission meeting, staff was directed to . poll other communities on bluff ordinances. Approximately 15 cities were called. WE have yet to get responses from a few, but here is a summary of what we did get. Lakeville: Same as our current ordinance. However, the issue of Top of Bluff has not come up. They take surveyors word and interpretation. White Bear Lake, Lake Elmo and Shoreview: No bluff ordinance. DNR enforces shoreland ordinances. DNR has adopted language in 1991 which allows for the visual break to be the top of bluff. Minnetonka: The proposed amendment defines steep slopes. Specific criteria are set forth that allow development to occur on steep slopes and bluffs. Allows for additions to existing structures to occur. Prohibits building on area where the slope exceeds 30% where legal alternative exists or drainage and erosion problems are creates. Plymouth: Top of Bluff is a visually observed break in the slope from steeper to gentler. If no break is apparent then the top of bluff is the upper end of a 50' segment, with an average slope exceeding 18%. Mendota Heights, Vandais Heights, Hastings, Orono, Burnsville and Minnetrista: Have same language as existing ordinance. There has been little or no problems enforcing the ordinance. Stillwater, Red Wing, St. Paul and Minneapolis: Awaiting a response. L:\97FILES\97 APPEAL\97-11 O\BLUFFSUR.DOC l1io6/98 FRI.16:09 FAX 612 452 5550 CAMPBELL 141002 CAMPBELL KNUTSON Proft:::>::>ional Assn,,":intiun A rlOrn~y:; at Law TI1\\I11:I-',1. C:1Jnphdl R,.g,,1' N. Kllllt:;\1n "I 'h,Hn,,' Ivl. SenrL Ell illl J 11. Km:rs,'.h SII,'S,\I1 L~;) !';Il:e (65 [) 'l'S2-S000 Fax (6S1) 452-5550 Jut::J J. ,1:1I1111ik Andl'eu MeD..,,,,,.:!l Put::hlcr Mnllh"w K. Rr.,kl" Juhn F. Kt:lly M.ltthew J. Foli Ivhlr~\I"rltt: M. MC".CarrOl1 *. . ~:A.blll,t"l"l.k-J in \~/i.'k:"'\.'iitl Writer's Direct Dia1:234-6226 Writer's Fax: 452-5550 ATTORNEY-CLIENT PRIVILEGED MEMORANDUM November 6, 1998 TO: City Council, City Manager and Planning Director FROM: Suesan Lea Pace RE: Development of Nonconforming lots PURPOSE: This memorandum will deal with two issues that were raised during the public hearings on the proposed zoning ordinance. One issue dealt with a merger requirement for substandard lots in common ownership. The second issue concemed nonconforming uses and structures. Each issue will be addressed separately, ISSUE ONE: MERGER OF SUBSTANDARD LOTS Scenario A: Landowner A owns contiguous undeveloped lots which meet the mInimum lot size requirement or which are presently buildable substandard lots. See generally Section 1101,501 (Proposed Zoning Ordinance). City adopts an amendment to the zoning ordinance which increases the required minimum tot size. This has the effect of making Landowner A's contiguous undeveloped lots substandard, Can City require that landowner A combine her contiguous undeveloped lots in order to meet the minimum lot size requirements of the new zoning ordinance? SHORT ANSWER: Yes, Minnesota courts have consistently approved of zoning ordinances which apply the doctrine of merger. These ordinances require the owner of a nonconforming undeveloped lot who also owns adjacent undeveloped property to combine the two undeveloped lots. FINDINGS I LEGAL OPINION: Merger generally requires the combination of two or more contiguous lots of substandard size that are held in common ownership in order to meet the minimum-square-footage requirements of a particular zoned district. Substandard lots cannot be developed as individual nonconforming lots unless the property falls within an exemption provision or the landowner applies for a variance, In Dederinq v. Johnson, 239 N.W.2d 913 (Minn. 1976), the Minnesota supreme court expressly approved of the use of the merger doctrine in zoning ordinances. Isanti County's zoning ordinance stated that property owners of substandard lots were not entitled to the automatic issuance of building Suir.e .')17 · Eagandale Office Cl~nt(:r · 1380 Corpor~rc:: Ct:nt<<::r. Curve · E~g;ln, MN 55121 11106/98 FRI 16:10 FAX 612 452 5550 CAMPBELL [4J 003 F. Boyles November 6, 1998 Paqe 2 of 4 ~,- > permits if the lots had been held in common ownership when the County adopted its merger ordinance and thus could have been combined to form a standard lot. The supreme court approved of this ordinance and held that where the owner of a nonconforming undeveloped lot also owns adjacent undeveloped property, the owner must combine the two undeveloped lots to meet minimum zoning requirements. DederinCl has been followed in other jurisdictions upholding the use of the merger doctrine to require the combination of substandard lots in common ownership. One common exception provides that a substandard lot will be exempt from the merger doctrine jf it was a lot of record prior to the effective date of the zoning ordinance. Such an exception allows the landowner to develop a substandard lot only if the lot remains isolated and was under single ownership at the time the zoning ordinance was adopted. However, if the landowner owns any adjacent lots that, if combined, would satisfy the square-footage requirements, then the landowner is not entitled to the exception. The landowner therefore must merge the lots to form a single parcel of land that will meet the area requirements. See R.J.E.P, Associates v. Hellewell, 560 A.2d 353 (R.t. 1989) (discussing the merger doctrine). Scenario B: Landowner A owns two contiguous substandard lots which even after combination do not meet the area and width requirements for a buildable lot. SHORT ANSWER: The combined lots are buildable without a variance if they meet the 662/3 requirement in Section 1101.501 (3)a. If the property does not meet the 66 2/3rd rule the landowner must apply for a variance, Scenario C: Landowner A owns an undersized Jot with -a contiguous conforming lot. Can the City require that she combine the two lots? SHORT ANSWER: Yes. The merger doctrine has been applied to compel the merger of an undersized lot with a contiguous conforming lot. One commentator states that "Ia]n owner of several contiguous parcels may not combine them so as to leave a substandard lot, and assert a right to an exception of the latter." R. Anderson, American Law of ZoninQ 99,67, at 310-11 (3d ed. 1986, volume 2), Scenario D: Landowner A owns an undersized lot which is unimproved with a contiguous conforming lot that is jmproved with buildings. Can the City require that she combine the two lots? SHORT ANSWER: Yes, In Tuckner v. Township of Ma\{, 419 N.W.2d 836 (Minn. App. 1988), the court of appeals ruled that the merger doctrine may apply to both improved and unimproved land. Thus, if landowner A owns two contiguous lots, one of which is improved with buildings and conforms to the minimum zoning requirements, and another of which is unimproved and substandard, landowner A can be required to combine the two lots. Scenario E: If landowner A owns a conforming lot at the time of the adoption of the new zoning ordinance, and subsequently acquires an adjacent substandard lot, must she combine the now contiguous properties? 11/~6/98 FRI 16:10 FAX 612 452 5550 CAMPBELL l4J 004 F. Boyles November 6, 1998 PaQe 3 of 4 SHORT ANSWER: Yes. However. the proposed zoning ordinance does not address this issue. If the purpose of the merger provision is to minimize the number of houses constructed on substandard lots the ordinance should expressly prOVide that if two or more contiguous nonconforming lots having continuous frontage are under single ownership at any time after the effective date of the ordinance, the lots shall be considered as an individual parcel for purposes of the ordinance. We are not aware of any reported Minnesota appellate case which addresses this issue. See Gavin L. Phillips, "Construction and Application of Zoning Laws Setting Minimum Lot Size Requirements," Volume 2, American Law Reports, 5th edition, at 634-35 (attached). Scenario F: If the goal of the City's merger ordinance is to minimize the number of houses constructed on substandard lots, is that objective defeated by allowing a six month window during which the owner of two or more contiguous lots, any of which may be substandard, may transfer one or more of the substandard lots into separate ownership? SHORT ANSWER: Probably so. Scenario G: If the ordinance provides a grace period for transferring the property prior to the merger ordinance applying should there be any restrictions regarding to whom the property can be transferred or sold? SHORT ANSWER: Yes. The landowner(s) should be prohibited from transferring the property to a spouse. Although a husband or wife can own property in their own name, their spouse has a spousal interest in the property. Scenario H: Should the City adopt a more specific merger ordinance that addresses the issues discussed above? SHORT ANSWER: I recommend that the City adopt some version of a more specific merger ordinance. LEGAL SUPPORT: Our review of the case law revealed the following ordinance, used in Rhode Island: If two (2) or more lots or combinations of lots and portions of lots with continuous frontage in single ownership are of record at the time of or subsequentto the passage or amendment of this Ordinance, and if all or part of the lots do not meet the requirements established for lot width and areas, the lands involved shall be considered to be an individual parcel for the purpose of this Ordinance, and no portion of said parcel shall be used or sold in a manner which diminishes compliance with lot width or area requirements established by this Ordinance, nor shall any division of any parcel be made which creates a lot with width or area below the requirements stated in this Ordinance. If necessary to assure compliance with other provisions of this Ordinance, the lots shall be combined. 11/06/98 FRI 16:10 FAX 612 452 5550 CAMPBELL I4J 005 F. Boyles November 6, 1998 Paqe 4 of 4 -" In Matter of Johnson, 404 N,W.2d 298 (Minn, App. 1987), overruled bv Mvron v. City of Plymouth, 562 N.W.2d 21 (Minn. App. 1997), the court of appeals approved of the following Forest lake Township merger ordinance: If in a group of two or more contiguous lots or parcels of land owned or controlled by the same person, any individual lot or parcel does not meet the full width or area requirements of this Ordinance, such individual lot or parcel cannot be considered as a separate parcel of land for purposes of sale or development, but must be combined with adjacent lots or parcels under the same ownership so that the combination of lots or parcels will equal one or more parcels of land each meeting the full lot width and area requirements of this Ordinance. ISSUE TWO: NONCONFORMING STRUCTURES The question has been raised concerning whether a structure on a substandard lot can be rebuilt without a variance if the structure is destroyed by fire or natural disaster. The follOWing provision which addressed this question, was removed from the May 5, 1998 version of the proposed ordinance. LEGAL SUPPORT: Section 1101.501 (3)b provided that: ANY SINGLE FAMILY DETACHED DWELLING WHICH EXISTS ON THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF THIS ORDINANCE ON ANY NONCONFORMING LOT LOCATED WITHIN THE r-1, r-2 OR r-3 USE DISTRICT which is later destroyed by fire or other natural disaster may be rebuilt if a building permit for reconstruction is issued within 365 days of its destruction and if it otherwise conforms with the provisions of this Ordinance, Based on the discussion at the November 4, 1998 council meeting this language may be reinserted, The cited language does not address the issue of whether the dwelling can be rebuilt as it existed before its destruction or whether it must meet setback and impervious surface requirements to the extent possible, Planning Director Rye will provide the Council with a recommendation. One additional concern that individuals have raised is that they will not be able to sell or refinance if their dwelling becomes nonconforming with the adoption of the proposed zoning ordinance. When Don Rye and I worked on the comprehensive revision to the St. Louis Park Zoning Ordinance this same concern was raised. Don Rye and I asked representatives from several banks and mortgage companies to attend a meeting to discuss the concerns that had been expressed. The bankers and lenders who attended the meeting indicated they would finance or refinance property that was legally nonconforming. Attached hereto are copies of the merger ordinances from Plymouth, Burnsville, Inver Grove Heights, Chanhassen, and Bloomington. 11/06/98 FRI 16:11 FAX 612 452 5550 CAMPBELL ~.....~~P-;:l~ - - ~ ::J~n- _,.e3p-., Ft3:;l;~--~p-:'''''onc;;:;......'t:l''''P''';,):;I1l;''>''''::l -~.. tQ 0' l'll_.liI.J006_ S'1'll 0 ~ Q"" 0 5, g __.:l ~ ~:s ll> N:j- 0 0 '" ....,;:!. ;;;- 0 ::r ""l 0 l'll .""l S' c:L ~ I'l _,l;i ~ ~ . en CoO '"'" .., -<..,,,,-::S"C1ll ......,., ~ ...., """,,,<: ::In o~ ~_ ClqQ""-c..!.,='" ::s~ :;;"'l:l"CJ~ _~ '0 P-.., <.. l'l> '" r;.c.... l'll - a> I'o:l !; l'll P- ~"C::l 2 5. ~ ~ ""<! 0 -, 0 l'll - P- 0 .,Q III e: . o _, _ II> ::l ....0 _ n l>> 0 ;;l Q"" t>:l ...... 01 > - ~., 0 l'l> 0 0 l'l> l'll" l'll ~ - - .... ::l ....,~, c..,..0 Ill'" g, C D. III r-< ] ~ ~ rD ::l ~ g ....,;r... I'l q ....,:r" :- -0 to'O ,.. N ~ ~ -3 ...., c: ;:1 0.. iil & ;;;I'" 0 P'" ~....::l"'" I'll l'Il g; - 0 ., 0:::1 _ .... ,... l'll ::;.-t5' g '0 ~'O ~ 0 Ei:::l . ~ ~""<! ::l l'll ~ g .... l'll e: n P"'a<:! ::l =:;' 11 a ~ a l'll l'll - ::;l ~ n f'"l 0 _ 0 p-"C 0;:1.... ::r n rJl ::l rJl l'll ::l ~ nO-"" III aQ .. n l'll n l'll ~ So ...... ~..!::" Q. 0 ~ .... n n 0 ~ ~ -. n n 0 3 fll '" ..... fll llJ I'll::l" CI1:l I'll -< Cl ~ ~ ": 0 Cl (l. .0"'" Ill"'" S" ~ l'P '" 3 c..:; ~ n,.. 5' ~;:; S' ~ '" :: 0: s:! ~ ;;;- 8 0.. ~ Ci' r.> N a, "" g.2 s - s: 5; s' ~ ~ 1;:' c ~ g n > t:l ~ l>> I'll ;::::. _ ., ~::r 0 c..;;;I'" 0 ..... c.. 0.' ..: c..~ c: 0"'" ., 0 '" ::l ~ 5. n S' -;;J"C fll c.. ~ ~ l'll.... S/')O l'll 0- _ .., _ 0 I'll'" I'll::l S _.....,::l .... .... ;4 "'1 0 ~ "1 n '"' 'II ...::1 ..,,..,.c 0 ,. 0 ~ _..tl ., S' "'" ..."0 ,.. c.. _ _::l a<:!"" I'o:l _.. to ::l.....~, ,.. ...., -.- .... '"' 0 ... .- 0 en &. 0::' ~ ..... c .. III ",W'"'''' 0 _'" '::"1....111 ......... ::r:!,::l='~" P. ::r~ =:.:::,....,l'l>~ .......e:a:r.n o ~ ~ @.-,~o~'~ ~:; S::I &rr~ o.~g;S'~lll fllllla<:!::l = C!.O 0""t:J O".,::l I'll] g;:l I'll g- ~ ~ !:j."C.... S 0 "'1 ..... ~ ~ - ::l :!; ;; 9 ~", ~ ~.. -- ql>l.... ~,...,- DQ "';;;I"'::S""''''C''' ~ ~ aQ ::l "1' _. '" - "C ... ~ :I ", n 0.. _ C"' n n _, "'1 ... ;. 0 ~ t,11 en ,n",... III "'1 ", 0 ~ I'll ~ Ill;;> ~ ~ ~::l '" a.. III ::I el D,S. ...., ~ 0..=' ..... I'll I'll ~ ::l n ..... g. Q. t,11 ;;;;;l 0 0 l'll III 0 0 t.I s.. 0- """l ~ :!. ::s 9 ~ g III ::T ~ 1:. =. :!. ~ ~ 0 III i:i::l ~ ~ 0'"' P - CIq -g 3 - ... ", - ~ "1 Q ~ 0 !!l 0.: ., ~.... 0 ~o 0 .... .. ;;> 0 ::;:. P'" ." .. '< ~ ~ ..... 0 0", 'II ~ III .... _.'t:I l'll /'ll ~ 0 3 I'll'" 0.. /'ll .. :r 0'" .. - ~ a ~ :..:. rll .- 0 s::C'" ..... .. "'::llll~::lnp-::l~""-...a "'O-~................, "1 - ,. ........ ....::... - -.",.. ""1 I r-? ,..,. = " 0. t1l .... ~ ~ LI7 0 ~ ~ ....,.J' ~ ;;;. ~,,~ 5" 0 s- .9-: fJ - a. Q""""; 8 ~ -, ~ ::l ;:r"" S. ~ - A> 0.. f ..,. . ~ c.. n < ";" _ r;> ", ...., n III 0. 0 ....." ::r'::l ii ;:l 0 I'll '" III DQ I=l - I rP I . rD . CI'l ~. ""11 7 Q. ~ ;; ~ to ~. &. ~'.9: ~ ~ ~-g ~ g,:T Q fa u;>> ~ .... 0" n III -. n ::s ::s P'" 0 ri ~ ~ s:.... S1 ~ ::s c:: ~o~. 2 t'1I 0 n S 0 I>l 5- I>l Z':r f>> III 0 c. DE..~ :;. . Illn"'1",::r':;.lI'n::s s. . I'll~C~O"O~::s'" "'1n;;!::l'"1ll.l ~", ~.... n ", w..", ::I . -... '"1 .: llJ ., n '"1 ~ - .... 0.. 0.. .... ", ;;;I'" =:;" p.l::l _' _::r' c..;;> ",......., S t'lI ", ;:l ::r' n rll -. ", c: ~ I'll a<:!,.en <" ::s ?r _ 0 - l"'!. I'l !:; DQ =0 ~ ~~, l'll ft ., 0 ~ ~ Q 0":;: 0..; p.l 2 Oo.O.,Ill;;;l"',... "'Cl ~ 3>< ::l"~lr.i C ~::S~ ,.,' ~ 0 E. ~ ::s. c;;' 0.."" I1l ... ..... '0 "'0 0 ~ '" I'll llJ "1 ~ n n rll . ,.e .. "'0 ., ..... n .... ~ .... So 0 0 t'l 0 - ill::! ., 0 p- "'1;:3 - - ;:J n '"1 = ~ a a. ~ e ::r- ~ ~ ~ on ~ /'ll 'T:l :=:: c n ""'cr.<' ~ ~::s 0.. '" "'C'. _. ", "0 .......... = III ::I ~ Ill::l::j :T n ~ ::r e: ~ "'0 0 ~ _.::. s:- =. tJ ;. iil ., l'll ", 0'''' '" n ::' ~ n ... ~ I'll ~ ~ ;:l 0. F:: :;; l-1 /'ll 5' ~ ::l c.. t'lI 0 ~ I'll 0.. ...-;:; Q"" 1:: "1,.e ~.n s;:; 3 ~ :;! ., r'Il 0 ;.: ... ..: c. t:.. c.. .... ::s "'0 l'll _ ':" '<. S I: a ....", S'tl e: =- ~ So I'D .... 2:" ;::;' s-;-2 :T::::' 0 ;:. g, o III -:;.::s' !:..... ~ 0 0' '" "Cl.'< "0 ~ III '" ..,"0 "'1 III g ", ~ :3 ...., n ", c::r..9-: s:- ;:r:;TtItl ::;.; _ n .., C S- ::r"1.... iU " n .... ::. c;::s I'D -.... !l : ~,~ g c: S' ~ ~ 5- ~", a. ~.!l ~. ~:' g; 8 g ~ g g' ~ ~ a, ~ ~~. "1"'" 0 '" CIQ ... ", I'll - =- c.. "" '" CIQ - _. - ::s .., 11::13:=;;....", ....I>>I>>-o,:r;:r n5-o::r'::Sc..::s :::..:sI'llOfll.... ~CIQ ::I:r S-:r o..::"'....n S' c..nE..a.N'o~....O'"'-<d::l~rD'~ " I'll I'll ", I'l ", rJl 0 0 III 0"" p.l ....' 1'll"1.....::r c ..... lU III ::s .., 'II 0.. C;'" "'1 ... ~""'''C r .. 0 .e- n 0 ::=..... c..... - I'll .... ;:l a<:! !l n n III ::I ~ 5" 0'..,....::::. ;S, ., 0"0 & :::: ::r' ;3 ...... 0 ci'" 3 c.. ~ 0 '" P- C. a, ~ 8' ~ ~ ~ g fi!-Jil 9-: s' =:I Q ~ ~ ;2 ~ s... ~ a. 5- lo<" ::r I'D ;::;: n. :; I .. . I"'D n f'b c. a.. ~ -- QJ ~ ~ =' -r;j - :r 1 _~~.r-. On ~ ~ g- 5' s' S S' Q"" ::t' iU ~ t:l en III E: ~ ~lr.i C":).".., c: I'D .....:r -. n :::: ,. ..... ::s-.... ::.: _::l <:~.....] ::s ~ 0.. I>> ..... 0 0.. - -' ~ 0 ~ III ;;l _..., ., -. ;:l P'" t>:l n ::r' ~ ~ r"I '" I'll "'0 Q..;:l .. oq l'll P-"O I'll ;;ro'tl5".l>>ri-.a<:!~~'"1 ::0 ., ~. (',) f'"l ....,::q ~ "C -'.... - ~ S',J:j :r ., c.."" ::I ;:i.::I 0" 9- ::? ~ ';""" C n ,.. ..... 0 .... 0'"' t"l... e:.. -- ~ =::l ""';r S.", t::... 2 I'o:l to ::::. g.fll f'"l - Clq"'C::l'" ll.l ,t).O'lo .... 0 ~'"'O ::1. c.. ~ ri 0 0 _~ ::s 1'll..::lol>lf>>Ol'llI'DII>~ o ~ :; o::l 3 ..,., 0 c Z ~ ....' """"l ~ 0 0 r=to -. _ - ~ ..-r;rE: -< ::l ~ =::so::r fllCnO ~ III ;:l '" _ -. l'll ~ n r~ r:> n 0.0 ~ 3 :=,...."0 '0 .... P-~ '-r:l ""~...c 'C:"'or'DO- .....lll 0.. c: <. l>> "'1::1 ..::! 0 0 ~-"1 o -.;:3 ~ r'D ~ l>> <. ~ ... ~~~ 't:I ~ G ~. 0-:3 ::l Ui'1; !:" .0:; _ ::s ~p-",""'c..~nN"'t:: g. o' ::r I'll n ::':;:l 0.... n.. ~ :;3 ~-o' ~ ::l Q.. c..::: s:: ~ g ~ "C _ I 4 I . n ~ I "" "'0 -== ~.'~' . .. ,. ~_,..LL,_ 11 ~"' ....~~rl ,J-:.... 0- ... UI """"00..-->.-1 ::r., -.n ::l"'::r"C o. n~",r;/'l)/")"C:::;' '" ... '"'d "1 ...... n ::s c: '"'d3oo0 s: ~ ~ S' ~ :; <' l:li ~ ~ ~o r;;- ~ -1 ~ I':) p. ~. ,-, ::1 - -0. ~ Q. ::r cr.;:;:r' f'"l -<: 0 "C n~::l g l'll CXl-:::;r o. O...,;;lOHC>-c ;:;~I:J-.""fllo-CXl o' 3 C"'.... l:.l P- - ;.0... t:::r ~ . ::s ::.:~. I'll ::I ';- c.>= '< 0: P-", CXl""'t"" o _.:-l 0- ..... 9-:l 0 !:..~. Z ~ ~ .. oq ~.::-: 0- >< 0 fll ;:;~'"'d::l"'CI1:lUlI'll . ::-: I'll CIQ !3 3 ~"C CJ '"'d~~Q""a.nO-'::::'1'll ~ ....0 :::l _ 0 ""'tJ....,- -~ ~ 0 ... ..., ::;- 0 :; ~CICI ......;:3 0 0-1'; -,. .....:rn ~ ::!. 5- ~ ~ &- a, ;- 5 ~ 8 a. I'll ;.~. I'll III (',) ::s ~ 'Xl .. "0 .......... ~ n ... 0 ....1ll"'''O:lO'~;lO''''"1 g :: g.. S' =:: g Ei';, 0 "C . .g ;:l .. CIQ 0 ...' S' 0 ...., c: :::l fr 2:"'0 ~.~ ~ S ~-g ~..:;1&~a<:!g3Erc:~ Q.. ...... I'll c.. -CJq ~... Er ~ ...... Q 3':a t:: ~ 0 g l'll ~ S':; l:.l '" ::; ;:l -, .- _. ::l -, 0- P- _:l-on::r~~I'De:fll '" o. :Co..- r:> ~ n ~ I1l '" n " ::s ~;J O:S:-l'll r"I"O::! g; ~ ~ 3 I"l -9 ~ III e. "-;::T-o- ...".,::! l'll t'll :::l:r 8 =r Q.. n ..... ::s "'1 I>l ~ t:: 11 ~~ _' ~ ::l 0 "'1;3::r t.l ;::l::lO~&--"o"'S- o ~ ~ ~ 11 S'~ 3 ll.l n ';'10> ~ .::. ~ D>"d ~ ~ =:::l. ::5 n e: :i. r:l,. n r:l,. C'" '< 0' ~ ;:l Cl'" o ~ = l=!- I '..~IIl"''''.-',', ...'[.'.':tr.-r.'" >-04 =' aq " = l'll ... Eo "'d ... ..gO~ l'll ~ . "'=,~ ..:< " ~ ~ ... ... Olllr.~ ... Q e: l'll 0......."'Cl .... ~c~~ ; III j:l. S' ;~S-n n c:n>o ~.e:S Q.~ ; =,"0 III = ::s 0..... S' 'f' ..." ......" , . 1'l1 ~"O_~"'::rn:::l~oQ..~:::l~~O~O o :T:::;' III 0.... .,;;l III ~ e; n'" < ::s III l'1l a. ~ n 9 ...., -t .., ~ a. n f'\ C'" tItl......... ~ ..... 0. 0 ~ :l g :>- n ", n I'D ::;-':::,.:;;;' I'D ~::l "1 n ;'';:. S- l'1l ::I' . _ ::q ,. CJI:l w'"' ;;l I>> 0 c::.. 8 .. c::.. n 0 III n n 0 e,"';:l l'll'" C I'll ~::s ...., 0 n .. n 0 ~;:: ,.. :l 0- 0' E3 0.. 0 <'. n g ::l =. ~ 0 c: _. I'D .!!.. .....::! ., ;:l ~ '" -= ... :::.... en t"l "1' ::r''':;l t:l 0' c::.. I'D '"'d 0.: n ~::l ~ "'0 : n ~..... ~ "1 S."1 '.: eGP-~c::::liil"'1n~....~~lll~~~ "'1 I'll ~ ....0 o,J:j 0 ~ _. ... .... ~ "8 0.. I'll ~ t:: ::I e ::. I'D ::;' g ::l ~ ~ n 5 r.> s., ~ :, 9 ~. 5'~ ~'o g] ~ ~ ~ ~ ..._~8~O"::s~t'lI::l :t::~;2 c: o ~ ::r E ~ ~ ~ 0"0 Q.. ... -'"0 n n ... ....., fll. _ 3 -<: """l ""l III ~ p-;;1 c. ~ Ii .- ..... 0 ~.~ .....0 .... 0.... 0 3 0 0 n P- ;:r::l "'1 S-::l o::r<n '"1:5;:;::l'"1.... (\l c.. c.. '.oq ..... 11) "':..: 0. -. ~. S' n t:: ., I1l 0.."0 8 .....- 5' ~ .~ o :;::' tl ll.l::l S 0 a. -" "'1 0 0 I>> '"' ..,.....:::l~c.~0"'1 o.::l ::l.... ~f.n~l'll~"'1o..C"'&n ~~n~s:- ,=-", .., -1 ... I'll 7'.< " C. ll.l g I'll I'll l'll I'll N o z s:: C'l t"'" ~. ~ :;;. t:: .... ~ .... p; ...€ ... := I': ... ~ z ...,) ... Jo,;) > r"" ;;g ~ S- .T~ ![I ..., e 0- - :r N o :z i Cl L' o --l Ul t::l t'l ~ I'l ..g ; t'l .... r:; ~ ... u: 01 .. ,.... :. ..... 11i06/98 FRI 16:11 FAX 612 452 5550 CAMPBELL [4]007 PLYMOUTH ZONING ORDINANCE -, 21025 of this Chapter. The Zoning Administrator shall make a determination that the building expansion will have not external negative impacts upon adjacent properties or public rights-of-way. a. Expansion of buildings found to be non-conforming only by reason of height, yard setback, or lot area may be permitted provided the structural non-conformity is not increased and' the expansion complies with the performance standards of this Chapter. b. Lawful non-conforming single family and two fanuly units may be expanded to improve the livability provided the non-conformity of the structure is not increased, (2) Conditional Use Permit. Lawful non-conforming commercial, industrial, public, semi-public, and multiple family structures may be expanded - ~ on the same lot by conditional use permit provided: a. Expansion of buildings found to be non-conforming only by reason of height, ,yard and setback or lot areas are exempt from requiring a conciitional use permit. b. Except for the above, the expansion will not increase the non- conformity of the building or site. c. The new building expansion will conform with all the applicable performance standards of this Chapter. A conditional use permit shall not be issued under !his section for a deviation from other requirements of this Chapter. unless variances are also approved. d. The request for conditional use permit shall be evaluated based on standards and criteria set forth in Section 21015.02, Subd. 5 and Section 21015,04 of this Chapter. Subd.7. Non-Conforming Lots. (a) Vacant or Redeveloped Lots. (1) Lot Combination. If an owner has an interest in more than one (1) lot of record contiguous to other lots of record, all such lots shall be combined to meet the requirements of this section or the applicable zoning disnict standards. If sufficient contiguous property is held in one ownership to comply with the standard of the applicable zoning district, then those more restrictive provisions will apply. In no circumstances will there be approval of any proposal for 211 00-4 11/06/98 FRI 16:12 FAX 612 452 5550 PLYMOUTH ZONING ORDINANCE CAMPBELL [4]008 multiple lot developments based upon lots of record, and not conforming with the provisions of the existing zoning district. (2) Single Family Detached Dwellings. Legal non-conforming, vacant, substandard sized lots of record may be developed for single family detached dwellings upon approval of an administrative permit by the Zoning Administrator. provided that: a. The lot in question was legally established in accordance with Chapter requirements existing at the time of its creation and is a separate, distinct tax parcel. b. The lot is properly zoned for single family land uses. c. Minimum Lot: Size. 1. Sewered ~~ record having direct access .to municipal sewer nd water shall be'& nsidered buildable provided measurements for area and/or wi are within seventy (70)' percent of the requiremen hl:.Jyise z ning district. 2. Unsewered Lots. A lot of record not having access to municipal sewer and water shall be considered buildable provided it complies with Section 21115.08 of this Chapter. d. The lot in question has frontage on a public street. e. Public health concerns (potable water and sanitary sewer) can be adequately provided. f. The setback and yard requirements of the applicable zoning district or Section 21115.04 of this Chapter can be achieved while simultaneously resulting in development which complies with the . character and quality of the immediate area and the objectives of the' City's Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Ordinance. g. The lot in question and related potential development is evaluated based upon criteria outlined in Section 21015.02., Subd. S. and is found to be acceptable per these standards. (b) Developed Lots. An existing conforming use on a lot of substandard size andlor width may be expanded or enlarged if such expansion or enlargement meets all . other provisions of this Chapter. 211 00-5 ..'........ 11106/98 FRI 16:12 FAX 612 452 5550 CAMPBELL ~"~l)1. (\ e... 10-7 (G) Any structure which will. 'under this fille, become nonconforming but for which a building permit has been lawfully granted prior to the effective date.: of this Title or of amendments thereto. may be completed in accordance with the approved plans provided construction is started within six (6) months of the effective date of this Titk or amendment thereof and continues to completion within one year. Such structure shall thereafter be a legally existing nonconforming structure. (H) . A lawful nonconforming use of a structure or land may be changed to a more restrictive nonconforming use. Once a structure or parcel ofland has been placed in a more restrictive nonconforming use, it shall not return to a less restrictive nonconforming use. (1) Normal maintenance or a structure containing or related to a lawful nonconforming use is permitted, including necessary nonstructural repairs and incidental alterations which do not extend or intensify the nonconforming use. (1) Alterations may be made to a.building containing lawful nonconforming residential units when they will improve the livability thereof, provided they will not increase the number of dwelling units. (K) Improvements may be made to existing lawful nonconforming structures, provided that such .improvements shall not enlarge the structure by fifty percent (50%) or more. (L) A nonconfom1ing use of a structure or land shall not be moved to any other part of the parcel upon which it was conducted or located at the time of adoption or amendment to this Title unless the movement will reduce the nonconformity. ~: LOT PROVIsrONV (A) A lot of record lawfully existing upon the effective date of this Title in an R Residential District which does not meet the requirements of this Title as to area or width may be used for a single family detached dwelling purpose provided the measurements of both the area and width are each within seventy percent (70%) of the requirements of this Title. The lot of record shall not be ~ore intensively developed unless combined with one or more abutting lots or portions thereof so as to create a lot meeting the requirements of this Title. . (B) Except by the use of a conditional use pennit or planned unit development. not more than one principal structure shall be located on a Jot of record. 10-7~4: ACCESSORY BUILDINGS AND STRUCTURES; (A) No accessory building or structure shall be constructed on any lot prior to the time of construction of the principal building to which it is accessory. (B) No accessory building or structure shall exceed the height ofthe principal building or structure. However. in no case shall such a'ccessory building exceed twenty feet (20') in height in the R District. f4J 009 3 .:., 11i06/98 FRI 16:12 FAX 612 452 5550 CAMPBELL 10-7 ~n:s UL fl.e.. 2 10-7-1: PURPOSE: (A) Excessive unifomlity, dissimilarity, inappropriateness or poor quality of design in the exterior appeat'ance of structures and the lack of proper attention to site development and landscaping in the City hinder the harmonious development of the City, impair the desirability of residences, investment or occupation in the City, limit the opportunity to attain the optimum use and value ofland and improvements, adversely affect the stability and value of property, produce degeneration of conditions affecting the peace, health and welfare of the City, and destroy a proper relationship between the taxable value of property and the cost of Municipal servjces. A primary purpose of this Title is to eliminate such problems. (B) The maintenance of certain standards is essential to insure compatible relationships between land uses within a community. All uses allowed, as either permitted Or conditional uscs within the City's various zoning districts, shaH conform to the following general provisions and performance standards. lO-7~2: NONCONFORMING USES AND STRUCTURES: (A) (B) (C) ~ E~cept as othelwise provided in this Title, any structure or use lawfully existing upon the effective datc of this Title may be continued at the size and in a manner of operation existing upon such date. . Nothing in this Title shall prevent a property owner from putting a structure in safe condition after the structure has been declared unsafe: by the Building Inspector. When any lawful nonconforming use in any district has been changed to a conforming use, it shall not thereafter be changed to any nonconforming use. Whenever a lawful nonconforming strLlcture has been damaged by fire, flood, ex.plosion, earthquake, war, riot or .a.ct of God, it may be reconstructed and used as before if it is reconstructed within twelve (12) months after sLlch calamity, unless the damage to the building or structure is fifty percent (50%) or more of its fair market value as estimated by the Director of CommunitY Development and approved by the Council, in which case the reconstructed use must conform with the provisions of this Title, ex.cept that the owner may within six (6) months apply for a special permit for approval to reconstruct a nonconforming structure for its use prior to the damage. The Council may grant such pem1it providing the structure complies with other ordinance r~quirements. (E) Whenever a lawful nonconforming use ofa structure or land is discontinued for a period of six. (6) months, any future use of the structure or limd shall be in confomlity with the provisions of this Title. (F) Any lawful nonconforming use of land not involving a structurc:, and any lawful nonconforming use involving a structure, ex.cluding signs. with an assessor's valuation upon the effective date of this Title of three thousand dollars ($3,000) or less may be continued for a period of thirty six: (36) months unless it creates a safety hazard whereupon such nonconfomling use shall cease, 11i06/98 FRI 16:13 FAX 612 452 5550 CAMPBELL tal 011 Inver Grove Heights Code 515.05, Subd. 2 Subd. 2. Non-Conforming Uses and Structures. a. b. c. (0 e. f. Any stnlcture or use lawfully'existing upon the effective date of this se~tion may be continued at the size and in a manner of operation existing up'on such date except as hereinafter specified. Nothing in this section shall prevent the placing of a structure in safe condition when said strUcture is declared unsafe by the Building Inspector. When any lawful non-conforming use of any structure or land in any district is discontinued for a period of six months or is changed to a conforming use, any future use of said structure or land shall be in conformity with the provisions of this section. Whenever a lawful non-conforming structure shall have been damaged by fire, '. flood, explosion, eart~quake, war, riot, act of God or similar occasion, it may be reconstructed and used as before if it is reconstructed within 12 months after such calamity, unless the damage to the building or structure is 50% or more of its fair market value as estimated by the Building Inspector and approved by the Council, in which case the reconstruction shall be for a use in' accordance with the provisions of this section, except that where a structure is damaged more than 50% of its fair market value, the owner may within six months apply for a special permit for approval to reconstruct a non-conforming structure for its use prior to the damage. Any lawful non-conforming use of land not involving a structure, and any lawful non-confonning use involving a structure with an assessor's full and true valuation upon the effective date of this section of $1,000 or less may be continued for a period of 36 months and billboards as defined in this section regardless of their valuation may be continued for a period of 36 months after the effective date of this section, whereupon such non-conforming use shall cease. Any structure which will, under this section, become non-conforming but for which a building permit has been lawfully granted prior to the effective date of this section or of amendments thereto, may be completed in accordance with the approved plans; provided construction is started within 60 days of the effective date of this section or of amendments thereof and continues to completion within one year. Such structure shall thereafter be a legally existing non-conforming strocture. 11106/98 FRI 16:13 FAX 612 452 5550 CAMPBELL [4J 012 Inver Grove Heights Code 515.05, Subd. 2 (g) g. A lawful non-conforming use of a structure or parcel of land may be changed to a similar or more restrictive non-conforming use. Once a structure or parcel of land has been placed In a more restrictive non-conforming use, it shall not return to a less restrictive non-conforming use. h. Normal maintenance of a building or other structure containing or related to a lawful non-conforming use is permitted, including necessary non-structural repairs and incidental alterations which do not extend or intensify the non- conforming use. 1. Alterations may be made to a building containing lawful non-conforming residential units when they will improve the liveability thereof, provided they will not increase the number of dwelling units or bulk of the building except that a garage may be added if none previously existed. J. Pursuant to Inver Grove Heights Code, Section 515.59, Subd. 11, upon., application by a property owncr or upon application initiated or required by the City, the City Council sitting as a Board of Adjustment and Appeals by majority vote may determine that the non-conforming use of a lot or structure is lawful and issue a non-conforming use certificate to ti?-e owner.. The Board of Adjustment and Appeals may include in the non-conforming use certificate reasonable conditions governing the continued use of the lot or structur.e and may authorize accessory uses not currently on the property to be placed thereon in the future. A non-conforming use certificate shall not allow a principal use which did not legally exist on the property prior to the property becoming non-conforming. ~ Lot Provision. (Ord. 230; 8/25/75) A lot, being of record upon the effective date of this section and being presently in an "R" Residential District, which does not meet the requirements of this section as to area or width and does not have a structure thereon may be utilized for a single-family dwelling detached purpose provided the measurements of such area and width are within 70% of the requirements of this section, but said lot of record shall not be utilized for any purpose other than a single-family dwelling detached purpose unless combined with one or more abutting lots or portions thereof so as to create a lot meeting the requirements of this section; however, said lot of record shall be utilized as herein stated only where connection to the city utility system is possible. Subd. 4. Accessorv Buildin~. a. No accessory building or structure shall be constructed on any lot prior to the time construction of the principal building to which it is accessory. 11/06/98 FRI 16:13 FAX 612 452 5550 C. \-\- f-l f-J tt , \ ~l":'>~ f'-J CAMPBELL ~013 ZONING ~ 20-73 Cd) Full use of e. nonc:onfonning land use shall not be resumed if the amount of land or floor area dedicated to the use is lessened or if the intensity of the use is in any manner di:minished for a period of twelve (12) or more months. Time shall be calculated as beginning on the day following the last day in which the nonconforming land use was in full operation and shall run continuously thereafter: Following the expiration or twelve (12) mont.hs, the nonconforming land use may be used only in the manner or to the extent used during the . preceding twelve (12) months. FOl" the purposes of this section, intensity of use shall be mea- sured by hours of operation, traffic, noise, exterior storage, signs, odors, number of employees, and other factors deemed relevant by the c:ity. (e) Maintenance and repail' ofnone.onforming structures is permitted. Removal or destruc- tion of a nonconfonning Structure to tbe extent of more than f'1fty (50) percent of its estimated value, ex.cluding land value and as determined by the city, shall t.enninate the right to con. tinue the nonconforming structure, en N otvrithst.anding the prohibitions e.ontained in the forgoing paragraphs of this section, if approved by the city council a nonconforming land use may be changed to another noncon. forming land llBe of less intensity if it is in the public interest. In all instances the applicant has the burden of proof rega:n:ling the relative intensities of uses. (g) If a nonconforming land use is superseded or replaced by a permitted use, the non. conforming status of the premises and any rigbts whicb arise under the provisions of this section shall tenninate. (Ord. No. 165, S 2, 2-10-92) \ Sec. 20.73. Noneonionning lots of record. (a) No variance shall be required to reconstruct a detached single.family dwelling located on a nonconforming lot of record or which is a nonconforming use if it is destroyed by na.tural disaster so long as the replacement dwelling has a footprint which is no larger than that of the destroyed structure and is substantially the same size in building height and floor area as the destroyed struc:tlll"e. Reconstruction shall commence within two (2) years of the date of the destruction of the original building and reasonable progress shall be made in completing the project. A building permit shall be obtained prior to construction of the new dwelling and the new structure shall be constructed in compliance with all other city codes and regulations. (b) No variance shall be required U:l construct a detached single-family dwelling on a nonconforming lot provided that it fronts on a public ~treet or approved private street and provided that the width and area measurexnents are at lest seventy-five (75) percent of the' minimum requirements of this chapter. (c) Except as otherwise specifically provided for detached single-family dwellings, there shall be no expansion, i.nteusification, replacement, or structural changes of a structure on a noneonfo:rmi.ng lot. A (d) If two (2) or more alnt.iguous lots are in single ownership and if all Dr part of the lots J I do not meet the width and area requirements of this chapter for lots in the district, the Supp. No.4 1165 11/06/98 FRI 16:14 FAX 612 452 5550 C -\-, r \ r.--.l \"\'"' , "-- CAMPBELL !4J014 ~ 20.73 CHANHASSEN CITY CODE contiguous lot.s shall be' c:onaidered to be an undivided parcel for the purpose of this chapter. Ifparl of the parcel is sold, tbe sale sball constitute a s;lr.c:reated hardship under the variance provisions of this chaptero (Ord. No. 165, ~ 2, 2-10-92) Sees_ 20.'14-20-90: :Reser-ved. DIVISION 5. BUILDING PERMITS, CERTIFICATES OF OCCUPANCY, ETC. Sec. 2G-91. Building permits. (a) No person sha.ll erect, construct, alter, enlarge, repair, move or remove, a.ny building or structure or part thereof without first securing a building permit. (b) An a.pplication fOT a building permitO shall be made to the city on a form furnished "by the city. All building permit applications shall be accompanied by a site plan drawn to scale showing the dimensions of the lot to be built upon and the size and location of any existing struct\l.res and the building to be erected, off-street parking and loading facilities and such other information a.s may be deemed necessary by the city to determine compliance with this chapter and other land use ordinances. No building permit shall be issued for activity in confliet with the provisions of this chapter. The city shall issue a building permit only after determining that the application and plans comply v.'ith the provisions of this chapter, the uniform building code as a.dopted and amended by the city and other applicable laws and ordinances. (c) If the work described in any building permit is not begun within ninety (90) days or substantially completed within one el) year following the date of the issuance thereof, said permit may become void at the discretion of the zoning administrator upon submission of documented evidence. Written notice thereof shall be transmitted by the city to permit holder, stating that activity authorized by the expired permit shall cease unless and until a new building permit has been obtained. (Ord. No. 80, Art. III, ~ 4(3-14), 12.15.86) Cross reference-Technical codes, ~ 7-16 et seq. Sec. 20-92. Certificates or occupancy. (a) In accordance with the Uniform Buildin.g Code as adopted and amended by the city, a c~rtificate of occupa.ncy shall be obtained before: (1) Any nonagricultural building, except an aecessory building, hereafter erected or structurally alt.e1"ed is occupied or used; and (2) The use of any existing nonagric:ulturs.l building, except an accessory building, is changed. (b) Application for a certificate of occupancy shall be made to the city as part of the :application for a building permit. A certificate of occupancy shall be issued by the city supp. No.4 1166 11/06/98 FRI 16:14 FAX 612 452 5550 CAMPBELL 'BLbon I W G;-\D 0 ZONING ~015 accordance with the requirements of Section 19.52(d). The side setback for such equipment over five feet in height above grade shall be not less than the required side setback of the principal building in the zoning district or ten feet, whichever is greater. The rear setback for all such equipment shall be not less than ten feet Such equipment shall not encroach into public easements of record. (6) Trash and recyclable material storage rooms, when fully enclosed with walls and roof and integrated with the principal building, are not permitted within a front yard and shall be located only in side and rear yards. Such storage rooms, when added onto existing principal buildings, may encroach eight feet into a required side setback and 12 feet into a required rear. setback, provided that a side setback of not less than five feet and a rear setbacK of not less than 15 feet shall be maintained. Such features shall not encroach into public easements of record. (Code, 1958 S 5.06; Village Ord. No. 185, 4-10-59; Ord. No. 54, 12-18--61; Ord. No, 65-44. 7-12-65; Ord. No, 71-69,8-16-71; Ord. No. 72-38, 7-17-72, renumbered te S 5.05; Ord. No. 78-73, 12-18-78; Deleted and added by Ord. No. 97-13, 4-21-97) Division D. Exceptions and Nonconforming Uses _.:? SEC. 19.09. NONCONFORMING LOTS. When two or more lots located in the same use district, one or more of which lack adequate area or dimensions to qualify for a permitted or conditional use under the requirements of the use district in which they are located and are contiguous and held in one ownership, they shall be combined for use in order to meet the lot requirements by subdividing the property in accordance with the subdivision regulations of this Code. (Code, 1958 S 6.01; Added by Ord. No. 54,12-18-61; Ord. No. 63-13, 6-24-63; Ord. No. 72-38,7-17-72) SEC. 19.10. NONCONFORMING USES. Except where otherwise specificallY indicated, the la'Nful use of any land or building existing at the time of adoption of this Code or amendments thereto may be continued, even if such use does not conform to the use regulations for the particular district where located, subject, however, to the following provisions: (1) Enlargement or alteration orohibited - Ex:cept for single-family residences in Industrial Zoning Districts and in Institutional Zoning Districts, no nonconforming use shall be enlarged, altered or increased. or occupy a greater area than that occupied by such use at the time of the adoption of this Code or amendment thereto. Any enlargement or alteration shall conform to the applicable regulations and standards of this Chapter. No enlargement or alteration shall be allowed or permitted if the cost thereof exceeds by more than ten percent the market value of the residential building being enlarged or altered or by the addition of a garage. The issuing authority shall determine the cost of the alteration and the value of the building which decision shall be final. (2) Movina of use orohibited - Such nonconforming use shall not be moved to any other part of the parcel of land upon which the same was conducted at the time of the adoption of this Code or amendment thereto. (3) I~rmination of use - (A) If such nonconforming use ceases for a continuous period of one year or if a nonconforming use is replaced by a conforming use, any subsequent use of the premises shall be in conformity with the use regulations spa.cified for the district in which such use is located. . (8) Where no enclosed building is involved and a nonconforming use has ceased for a period of six months, any subsequent use of the premises shall be in conformity with the use regulations of the district where located. (C) The following nonconforming uses of buildings, structures or land may continue for a period no longer than two years from the effective date of this Code or any amendment thereto which causes the use to be nonconforming. Every such nonconforming use shall be completely removed from the premises at the expiration of the two-year period: . (i) Any nonconformin!] use with a building or structure having an assessed valuation of $500.00 or less on the effective date of this Code or amendment. (ii) Reserved. (iii) Any nonconforming use of land where no enclosed building is involved or where the only buildings employed are accessory or incidental to such use or where such use is maintained in connection with a conforming building. 19-16 11i06/98 FRI 16:14 FAX 612 452 5550 CAMPBELL l4J 016 BLOOMINGTON CllY CODE ~ (4) Destruction of use _ Any building which does not conform to the use in the district in which it is lotated shall not be rebuilt or reconstructed to its former use and physical dimensions if destroyed in value 50 percent or more according to the estimate of the issuing authority unless exception is made by the City Council. (Code, 1956 SS 6.01 _ 6.05; Ord. No. 54,12-18-61, renumbered to S 6.02: Ord, No. 70, 4-30-62: Ord. No. 101, 1-8-63; Ord. No. 64-51,6-22-64; Ord. No. 66-61,10-3-66; Ord. No. 72-38, 7-17-72; Ord. No. 97-36.8-18-97) ;;EC.19.11 EXEMPTIONS FROM BULK. SPACE PERFORMANCE. PARKING AND LOADING REGULATIONS. . (a) Lawfully existing uses and .buildings otherwise conforming to the requirements of this Code shall be exempt from the following requirements only to the extent that they presently fail to conform to these requirements: (1) Building setback. (2) Minimum floor area. (3) Minimum lot area and width, (4) Number of principle buildings on a lot (5) Distance between buildings. (6) Pump island setback. (b) Such useS and buildings shall be exempt from the following requirements only to the extent that it is physically impossible to comply because of existing improvements or property dimensions, or where a significant hardship is involved. (1) Number and location of parking and loading spaces. (2) Landscaping. (3) Minimum requirements of Section 19,61 (e) of this Chapter. (c) A building. permit may be issued with the approval of the City Council to expand, alter, or repair an existing use that was a permitted or conditional use under the Zoning Code when originally built and is a permitted or conditional use at the time the application is made, except where amendments to the Zoning Code have changed the performance standards or conditions for the use, Prior to approval by the City Council, the application shall be reviewed by the Planning Commission for recommendation to the City Council. (Code, 1958 S 6.03; Added by Ord. No. 63-45,10-21-63; Ord. No. 69-33, 4-21-69) ARTICLE II. ADMINISTRATION AND PROCEDURE Added by Code, 1958, 11-21-58 ~EC. 19.12 DEFINITIONS. The following words and terms when used in this Article, shall have the following meanings, unless the c;:onte:d clearly indicates otherwise: .' ~onditional use _ A conditional use is a use which is generally not suilalJle in a particular zoning district but which may, under some circumstances and with the application of certain conditions be suitable. Bezonino _ Rezonings are actual changes in zoning or zoning boundaries. The procedures for rezoning 'and conditional use permits shall in all cases be in accordance with the provisions of this Article. (Code, 1958 S 9.01; Village Ord. No. 232,6-10-60; Qrd. No. 54,12-18-61, renumbered to S 11,01) SEC. 19.13. INITIATING REZONING AND CONDITIONAL USES. The Planning Commission or City Councll may initiate a proposed rezoning or conditional use permit. A property owner or representative of the property owner may request such rezoning or conditional use permit If it applies to his property. In such case the property owner or his representative shall fill out a Zoning Application Form, copies of which are available 'in the Department of Community Development. No. application for a conditional use permit or a rezoning of a particular piece of property shall be accepted more than once in any 12- month period except as follows: (1) Rezonin9s _ Applications which are withdrawn prior to action taken by the City Council. 19-17