Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout8A - Conprehensive Zoning Ordinance & Map MEETING DATE: AGENDA #: PREPARED BY: REVIEWED BY: AGENDA ITEM: DISCUSSION: ALTERNATIVES: RECOMMENDED MOTION: CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT NOVEMBER 16, 1998 8A JANE KANSIER, PLANNING COORDINATOR DONALD RYE, PLANNING DIRECTOR CONTINUATION OF PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER APPROVAL OF A COMPREHENSIVE ZONING ORDINANCE AND ZONING MAP FOR THE CITY OF PRIOR LAKE History: On October 5, 1998, and on November 2, 1998, the City Council held a public hearing to consider the proposed Zoning Ordinance. At that time, the Council hear testimony on several . different issues and concerns with respect to the proposed ordinance. The Council continued the public hearing to November 16, 1998, and directed staff to review the issues and prepare a response. A copy of this response is attached to this report. Issues: The issues raised during the public hearing on November 2, 1998, are addressed in the attachment to this report. Also attached are copies of the agenda reports, dated October 5, 1998, and November 2, 1998, which raises some of the other significant issues from the Council's previous discussions. Conclusion: The proposed zoning ordinance is intended to implement the desired outcomes specified in the Comprehensive Plan. It reflects changes in land use law and development practices which are common today. The attached response also attempts to satisfy some of the issues and concerns raised at the last meeting. There are three alternatives available to the Council: 1. Close the public hearing and adopt a motion directing the staff to prepare an ordinance with findings of fact adopting the draft zoning ordinance. 2. Continue the public hearing as deemed necessary to allow additional comment. 3. Continue the public hearing and refer specific issues to the Planning Commission for further study and recommendation. The staff recommends Alternative #1. b\ne,wzOJ;le\9.1zonprd\cCIIL698.d~. . L 162 'U t:.agle CreeK Ave. ::>.t.., r'nor Lake, MInnesota b5372-1714 / Ph. (612) 447-4230 / Fax (612) 447-4245 AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER REVIEWED BY: 1:\newzone\97zonord\ccll1698.doc A motion and second to direct the staff to prepare an ordinance with findings of fact adopting the proposed ordinance is required. 2 .:r- RESPONSES TO ISSUES RAISED AT ZONING ORDINANCE PUBLIC HEARING NOVEMBER 2, 1998 1) Define point of measurement for setbacks. The Council discussed this issue at some length during its work sessions, and decided setbacks should be measured from the furthest point of the building, including eaves, overhangs and cantilevers. After hearing testimony at the November 2, 1998 meeting, the Council concluded eaves and overhangs may be permitted as a limited encroachment. To accomplish this, Section 1101.316, which defines how measurements are taken must be changed as follows: MEASUREMENT. The measurement of distances when required by this Ordinance shall be done in a straight line in the plane located at a point 1 foot above the highest point in the surface of the ground along the path of measurement, from the most exterior foundation wall ~ wall of a building containing the use to the property line of the adjacent street, district or lot or other boundary line.... Section 1101.503, which defines permissible yard encroachments must also be changed as follows: YARD ENCROACHMENTS. The following shall not be encroachments on yard requirements: (I) Eaves and gutters. provided they do not extend more than 2 feet into a yard: and provided such encroachment is no closer than 5 feet from all lot lines. 2) Fence Height (Section 1101.504). As noted in the previous staffreport,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 received two letters on this matter from Bryce Huemoeller on this matter. The first, dated October 28, 1998, expresses support for the 48" fence height. Mr. Huemoeller also included a provision from the Palmetto Zoning Ordinance which allows a 6' height with Council approval. The second letter, dated November 3, 1998, reiterates Mr. Huemoeller's support for the 48" fence height. The stafffeels this provision allowing a 6 'fence is unnecessary. The ordinance already includes provisions allowing a taller fence in some areas. This additional provision would also require permits for fences, and Council review in some cases. The current ordinance allows a 42" fence in the front yard with a maximum opacity of 2 5 percent. Opacity is a determination 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 1: \newzone\misc\respons2.doc opacity will also allow decorative fences. The staff recommends the following language: A fence, or wall or hedge shall Hot exeeed 3 1/2 feet in height if may be located in a front yard. ifthe fence or wall does not exceed 4 feet in height and 15 percent opacity. 3) Zoning at CH Carpenter Lumber. The Council received a letter from Fred Meier at CH Carpenter Lumber asking that this property be zoned C-4 on the proposed zoning map. The use is permitted with conditions in this district. This district is consistent with the existing use of the property. The staff recommends the zoning on this site be changed to the C-4 district. 4) Request to include Hotels/Motels as a permitted use in the C-5 (Business Park) District (Section 1102.1401). Mr. Bryce Huemoeller submitted a letter requesting the list of permitted uses in the C-5 district be expanded to include hotels and motels. Hotels and motels can befound in many business parks. The use generates traffic, and is often an asset to the business located within the park. The staff would recommend the following change: PERMITTED USES. The following uses are permitted in the "C-5" Business Park Use District: >- Offices >- Manufacturing/Processing >- Warehouse/Storage >- Business Services >- Blueprint, Photostat and Printing Shops >- Research and Testing Laboratories >- HotelslMotels 5) Effect of retaining walls on Bluff Setback (Section 1104.304). Mr. Joe Passofaro raised the issue of the effect of retaining walls and raised landscaping beds on the determination of a bluff setback. He noted the 1 ' contours would identify an elevation change for a 1 ' high raised landscape area, and affect the bluff setback. It is not the intent of the bluff regulations to include 1 ' high landscape beds in a bluff. However, retaining walls 2-4' or more in height are in place because of the slope of a site. These features should be included in the determination of a bluff setback. The concern raised by Mr. Passofaro about the landscape beds does not occur very often. We can attempt to write some language addressing this issue, or we can make a case by case decision in these matters based on survey information and site visits. The staff recommends the language remain the same, and we will review this issue on a case by case basis. The Council should provide staff with some direction in this matter. 1:\newzone\misc\respons2.doc 2 ;'\ ,.,.....--- 6) Nonconforming Lots and Lot Combinations. The City Attorney has addressed these issues in a separate memorandum (see attached). 7) Bohlen Properly Located South of Titus Addition. This property is zoned R-1 on the existing zoning map. Mr. Bohlen currently owns 18 acres of land, with a single family dwelling. He originally owned 28 acres of land. he then subdivided a 2 acre building site from this parcel, and a 10 acre parcel which he sold to Ramona Whipps. Mr. Bohlen has submitted several documents outlining a variance and an agreement with the City to allow an additional dwelling on the original 26 acres. The agreement identifies the buildable parcel as the 10 acre parcel owned by Ms. Whipps, but, according to the Scott County records, this parcel is currently owned by Harold Bohlen. To date, no building permits have been issued for a dwelling at this site. We have referred the documents to the City Attorney for review. A copy of that memorandum is attached to this report for your information. The City Attorney has not yet commented on the questions raised in this memorandum. However, the staff suggests the proposed agricultural zoning ofthis property will not affect the buildable status of the 10 acre parcel. 1:\newzone\misc\respons2.doc 3 Thomas J. Campbell Roger N. Knutson Thomas M. Scott Elliott B. Knetsch Suesan Lea Pace CAMPBELL KNUTSONr;--- f'-" ~ r::~ 0" n ~ ~0 "'\ c.,. !-'-~:::. \ \ I ' C.-' . : I..... ) IJ ,.!::::::.~(_:7 -12-_~ L5 \J I'. I,.}I III Professional Association W< i ! II Attorneys at Law II i\ \ i NOV 9 /998 '11 ) 11 (651) 452-5000 !U III Jue!J,ii~ Fax (651) 452-5550 Andrea McDowell Poehle Matthew K. Bro * John F. Kelly Matthew J. Foli Marguerite M. McCarron *** * Also Iict!nseJ in \Visconsin Writer's Direct Dial: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 concerned 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 lot 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 Dederina 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 Suite 317 · Eagandale Office Center · 1380 Corporate Center Curve . Eagan, MN 5 SI2l F. Boyles November 6, 1998 Paae 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. Dederina 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 if 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 RJ.E.P. Associates v. Hellewell, 560 A.2d 353 (RI. 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 66 2/3 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 lot 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 "[a]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 Zonina 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 improved with buildings. Can the City require that she combine the two lots? SHORT ANSWER: Yes. In Tuckner v. Township of Mav, 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? F. Boyles November 6, 1998 Page 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 subsequent to 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. F. Boyles November 6, 1998 Paoe 4 of 4 <C_, In Matter of Johnson, 404 N.W.2d 298 (Minn. App. 1987), overruled by Myron 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. o == =-:::; ~ ~ =- f:j 5-~. a a. 9 ~ :€ Z i:i r,:; c:; - 5. ;:;.v ~ 0... g, 0.... ~.g ::l =l (1) ~ ~ :;. 0 aq ~ F; e: ><~ 0... 0 goo'" "0 I'b@ g- ~ ~ ~ ~ 0' 0' 3 ::;. ~ ~ 0.._. -.--co:> o ....~(1)(1) ~ t"l n~V ~3~::l "Ot"l-::l(1) ~(1)~'" ~~,. .., _ '. ,.., ... ~ 3.... aq :>........ - .~ .... /'.:I ., ~ "0 (1) ;::'::l .... ~ .... ~ ~ ~ 3 ::; c (1),,;::' ~ en, ... ~....~..,..........t"l::r ::rao"'O::~oo... "'0(1) -. ....::rt"l"........3 v"n-, - = =- I'b -< ......0 (1) ~ ri ~ (1) I'b ~ ::r ~ _ ~ ....,;:; ~ o' :;. "51 0 I'b (1) ::l ~ _. 0... 0 ::l C ::r llol ~ ::l' f'iI 0 . ~ 0 ~. g Er.o ~ ::l::l ~ !:i~ 0 0 .., ~ '< ::l f'iI 0 ~ ~....' ~ 0'" - a ~ E':i" ~ I'b ::s t'"' aq"O a -.l ~~. I'b '" /'.:J.... I'b 0.. 00 /'.:J ...., C;; f'iI 0.. t"l"O::l 8 ::l =- ~ '< 0 _. 0 I'b - Q.. 0 "0 ~ ::;. ~ ~ E 0..;. 0 .... t"l ~ 0 ;;l 0'" ~ Ol >. ~ ri 0 f'iI 0 0 I'b I'b .., 0.. I'b ~ - .... .... ::l ....,~. 0.. ~ CIl .... ~ '" ~ f'iI ::l :..:; 0 ....,::r.... ~ t"l ...., =- (1) _ > to"O .... N '" ~ ::l ...., C ;:; 0.....,.... =- O::r ~....::l..... ~ .., _.::; .::l I'b ri .... ii' I'b "0 z"O =- 0 o..:::l '< .., '< I'b =r go.... f'iI ~ ::raq::l _. 't:l n t"l g: r:l t"l 0 ...."0 ....::l =- ::l =-"0 I'b f'iI ::l f'iI l"l 5':;' ~ . 0'" g I'b ~ t: t"l @ @ I'b fD....::l llol ~ ~ I'b I'b 0 :::;; .... 0 =- I'b 0 0 ~ f'iI ~ _. f'iI ~ ~ f'iI::l'" aq r'il '< ~ t"l ~:::;; 0 ~ 0.. =-..0"'''' '" t: ::l ~...., (1) ::1. _ ::l =.0 '" ::l 0: t:I ~ ~ n 0... t"l 0 0 t"l.... ~. C ..... ~ ~ (;;. t: ~ ~ a c .., f'iI .... 0'. t"l ::l'" '" :;::. /'.:J 0 f'iI 0' ~ NO"'" ~:::;;.g a :... ::r ;:; .., a F; ~ '" I'b t; a ~ ~ ;::.'......, ::r 0 ,.., ::r 0 _. 0.. 0 _. 0.."-' t: cy .., < '" ::l ..... f'iI ::l I'b "0 ....... I'b '" 0 ~ .... ., ....... 0- f'iI .., ....... f'iI ... ~ _.....,::l .... ........, .., 0 ",::l I'b 0 I'b en::l .., 0......0 0 0 '" t"l C. "" "'"0 0..... ;::l::l aq - /'.:J - ~ to .... ::l............. .... -..... ~.... .... ~ '" aq::l 0 .... 0'" '::"l t: ~ ... -..... Ol -:l ::l.... :::;; ~.., C..... =- ~ =. ~. ...., I'b .....0 -<:- o !] 0 9.....,: 0- ::l' I'b 0 0 ~ :;. fD ~ 0... to _. /'.:I ... ~'aq 5' 0'" ::l "0 O::l = l:: ~ .....::l ........ ~ .... ~ .., ;::l ::l I'b .... Ol Ol::l I ~ f'iI ::l ::l .... 0 0 1'b"O f'iI @aq I'b ~::l ~.. ;::l ~ ~ ::l:::;; a ~ -..J aq f'iI =-::l ....,- f'iI ~ ::l.., ~ _. .., ::;" I'bo"'no..o.. t"lf'il::l ..,@ ::l....o. ~ ~......t"lt"l0'"~ ..,I'bo....::::~~;::l....~!::.,.::l CIl- ...., f'iI 0..<=' 0'" I'b I'b ~ 5',2 _. g. 0... ~ .~ ~ g ~ @ ~ g f'iI 0 '" 0....... ...., ::r :..:; ::l g =- ~ ii ~.... e:... ~::l;:n> ~ 0'"'< ::l - aq t: a .... '" 0..;'" q '" ....0 e; 0..: ...., 0 .... I'b 0..... 0 .... f'iI a 0 ..... =- 't:l = .... 0 .., 0 f'iI f'iI .... ~ .... ....."0 f'iI f'iI _ /'.:J..-. ~ ~ 2. f'iI::j 0.. f'iI ~.... 1f 0 0.. 0 ::l ~ ~ ~ :::;; 8- f'iI CIl ~ :;' ~ g ::l !] =- ~ =- e:... 0" @ ~ o"? 0 -..J /'.:J ..... ... - t: .... 0.. =-.., t"l .,. ;::l ... ... =. .... ... f'iI ....... f'iI , .... I I ...., ';' .r -..J 0.. ~ < ::.0 t"l Er 0 =- <=. ~ ....... 0.. 0'".... 0 -<: ......... ... =- t"l .. I .... I " ...., f'iI 'l' 0.. 0 _. f'iI =-::l ~ ::l 0 I'b ~ ~ aq ...... I I (b I ('J') 70 ~ 7 c.. t'b tD c:.; .c>o Mi ~ g- g. 5' a 5' 0'" ;:n> ~ :::;; t:I ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ f'iI 0.. _aq f'iI aq E. f'iI ..... =- ..... t"l ",::l"', 0.. .., cy"O C 0 9- t"l ::l COo ;;l ::l ::l _....::l I'b < =-..., .....0.. &<=. ~ I'b .., @ 0'""'" 0 ~ ~ H:>. ~ a e: e; .... ~ e: ~ 5':;' /'.:J ~ =- ~.,. 8. f'iI ~ ~ c.;:;. 9- t: f'iI ~ e =. ~.... f'iI ~ f'iI "51 o...::l :::;; aq f'iI 0..."0 I'b - n; .... ::l ~ .., n aq:" f'iI E =. ~ n 1f ~ ::1. ~ f'iI 5.aq =- ~ .., oo::tl f'iI.., =- 5' ~::l ........ f'iI =- ....... .. ;::l .., ..... f'iI ~ _. ~ ~"O ........ ::"_ 0 5'..0 t: f'iI f'iI aq..c f'iI ::l ~ - 0 ~ .... ~ ~ aq 0 t'"' ......,0... ::l..,::l-t"lo'" t:::l.., t:~oo..o",~=-"" "l:l=S ::r 0 _. t"l 0 =-.... I'b ~..-. f'iI ~. f'iI 0"0 -..., ::l ~ C;; 0.. .... f'iI ......, I'b C. 5' ...., 9- :r. I'b.... e:... .... /'.:I ;:0 ~ . ..0 :::;; .., ri 9- 8 9- ~ 5' 9- t"l ~. ~ .g g. ~ t"l ....... f'iI ~"O 5 ~ ~ ~ ~ Ol o' E. ~..g 0... ~::l t: ~ ~ f'iI 0 t: ~ .... O?'O ::1.0...., @ o."j:>. ::l @.., f'iI f'iI cy '" '" t"l C. t: f'iI .... .., l'b~aoe;~Of'ilf'il~"'z/'.:J o.."'-;:;~~d..c-!ba;:; ~~ o ~ a 0 c. a ..,.., 0 t: 0.. ..... .... ~ -;::l t: ~ I'b 5' a ...., '" 0 0 t"l 5..... 9- ~ ....,8: ~ ::l 0 ~ .... ~ 5' e:... '" 9- 0 cy en =- ~ ::l '" E..... 0 I'b "j:>. ~ ~ t:I O'"~ & =- =-aq :::;.;.... f'iI ...., t: .... f'iI t"l o.g e; a ~....."O "0 .... o....g "r:l f'iI 8. f'iI f'iI f'iI ';S. g- ~ 9- o..::l ~ g, ~..c.,.", c",of'ilO- ....~ ....::l'<o::lt:::l::l..,f'iI o..t:~:::;"'a :::;;"'ooto-'" ..,-. ",aq f'iI o ::j.::l I'b f'iI ~::l a C;; /'.:J /'.:J ~ I'b::l::l:::;;.... I'b .... ~ ~ .... cy 9- "0 f'iI ~ ~. 0'" a (;;'1)'.90 ....... 0... ~ aq ;::l ::l ~ 9- ~ 0 00.. g- :::: I'b ....o..."';:n>o...t:I'bN"'t:t"l ~ f'iI I'bf'il ~f'iI 0 o' e:l'bf'il:::':::loc;.:~o:::;;> o...EJ~"'_"'_~""'~.r:::;;o ::l /'.:1"0 .... ::l 0... o...::l -.., ::l ~ "0 ~ ::l f'iI 0 0.,.... _. ..... .., _ '" ,f'iI(1),,,,"O< "'0...0...0....0........(1)=-0~::l0'" ~ CIl CI'J tu rb ::3 ~oq ,0 l~.~w.J.It'Qli\"'.,.,.~.~-r,;l(~(Jl)~'*i~-~.l~~~.... .". J I.IIl,U en (0) U1 ....(1)00...::;.....>..., =-..,.....,f'iI...=-"Oo f'iI~~s(1)I':I"o:::;;5' '" ....'0 .., _ t"l ::l g. ~ -g 2. ~ g 9. "r:l =. ~::l (1) .., < t:1::l.., ~ ~. t;;"" ~ ~ ,- ~ ~ !]. .... ::l .... -. t"l ;:J 0... =- aq=-Oo< ..-.0 "0 fD~::l t: f'iI oo......;r 0, O..,;;lOltO.., ;:;~~""'''''f'iI~oo o' a 0'".... ~ 0... ~:o < ... .... t: =-... .... ... -..... f'iI ... =- (.lQ '<0: 0...~00(.lQ_ o .....N " 0..' ...., o..::l 0 a.~' z ~ .... :::;; aq 2.::r: 0.. ~ t:l f'iI =-~"O ::l "'aq enf'il I'b -: f'iI aq a ~ /'.:J"O ::;.., f'iI;lo......O "Ooq30'"0...f'iI -f'iI ~ -.0 ::l _ 0 ""1 ""tw,...."" ~""1 @oo......,::-o:i::...aq _::l 0...1".:.....,. -..J f'iI ~::l....rt~""o""::l'" t"l -. =-.., 0... =- ....., =- 0 ~ 8 o. rt ;'''0' rt ~ rt ::l := "r:l .... '0 .......... _. 3 n ~ 0 ~~v'O::lcyN 0"'''' g g: g - Er:::: 0 S'::l 0"0 . '< ::l :::;; aq 0 2. ::;- 0' ....., t: - 0... :::;; ::l ;::l .., ~ .., ::l ~ 2':"0 5.aq t: a '" -g ~ ~ 8- e; aq 0 a 5' t: ~ 0... ....... @ a -aq g' '" 5':::;; - Q 5' ~ t: ~ 0 ::l rt ~ -. '" ~ "'::l"'" o "'::l rt ::l '" rt ,.., ,... _. n NO ...... c.. .....::l o-t"l =-rt rt rt:; rt v 0 - x,..,.... 1'b~t"lS~......,t"l.......rt ::l~ o..=-rtr'il'O:l ~ ~ f'iI a 1':1 ..0 "'g ~ 2. ,.,.. =- 0... 0 .... n 5. I'b ., ::l rt rt ::l =- 0 ., 0... 8 5' ::l .., ~ ~ t: ~ -aq ::;. 3 q 0 .., a ::r ~ ... 0:::;;........ rt 0 '" .... o 7 ~ :;' ~ 5' g a ~ ~ ,......., coo ~ ,;.. - ~ "'d .., ~ '< ri _Ill ... - ::s Cl,. ~ ... < ... Cl,. III Q.. C" '< .... o ~ ::s C" o c: = Cl,. I o n ~ c:: = ::j ~ ~ ~ = =reo -6''< ~; ... - ;. Q.. . ~ 5' a:. n o 0 e;" 3 . . en = en c:r ~ {I> en't:l ~ j't:l ~. a.C::5;~DJt'"' ~ ..... 0 >=~~.... a:~Q..O::J:: ~ > 5.~ E: a.B 0 ~ ... c:: ., CIl = ::p :;. e: e: en o ~ = "l:l ... "l:lQ..~~~ ~c:rnCll- ~'<~o~ oc:r....~ ~c::~Q.. = .... ~ ~ ~ ~ :> .., t"" :;a (J1 :r (J1 (J1 ..,. c.tn (.>:l (Q N o z Z C) r o "'i en .... N t'l ~ t'l € .... ~ t'l ~ t'l Z "'i en :::;; ::; 0'" t"l ~ ..... t"l ::l .... ~ - (;;' t: rt 0 t"l a 0 ~ =- i::' ;. ~ ~ 0 0.. ~~~g2]3~~a~l'b~o..a~ Ii '" I'b::j' a rt rt I'b =- t"l rt S' I'b '" .... rt 0.. 0 :::;;.., ~ ~ -< ~ ~ ~ a>< o::l.,.~aq ~ ",::l~ ...._"0 ~"'I'bel:!.~t"lt"l::;; o ::..........., .., o::r ..,... p I'b '. rt e: .r:;:::' .,. ~::l 0.. '" .... :l.. .., "'v"'o..~""O "...."0......... =- rt ... =- _.::l '" ..0..... =. =- c. '-' =- ~ ::l a. c;; ~ ~ ~ 5' ~ ::l 0.. I'b 0 ~ I'b rtO "''''<0.._0...... ::l"01'b ~ 9- I'b .... 2': ~ r:;' s-;.g =-;. 0 ~. 8i "O=-~",..,"O ~t"ll'b~;:l....,rtrt 1001 ,...,. S ro ("') ,..,. C'. ~::s ro ~,..,. ~ o CY..... 0'" t"l 0 =- 0 .....0..9- o::r ..... :s..., .... =-= 0 t: ~ ::l g I'b rt g,!;;' ~ ~ 0.. :::;;"'aqo..-.........~::l .., I'b.... =-::l ::l c.< 0 ,.., 0... =- 0 rt _. ~ '< ..... I'b .,. rt - l'bt:o..No::l....O'" ::::::l~ii'~ 0:' I'b'" '< =- t: ..... ~ ~ ::l .., n o :s. 0.. ~ rt....::l aq ~ I'b I'b :;. :::: :r ....J 0 _ 0 ~ rt a o..'::l 0 rt ~ ~ 'J~ t: ~..,.... ,.,......rt) ",!::!...., .,aq<::r::l_....o...:r .... rt)'" . rt)rt)l'bo...o...~';'.~2..~F"9o~ /'.:J > t'" ~ ~ :;. .IT 111:11,'11.0 I . r 11' 11 - . nil Wl <Jl'I .....J t rTlr fl11~'1 ern IIII' l-4 = aq ~ = ~ .., eo "'d .., o "l:l o~ III ~ . ..,=~ ~ ~ 0 ~ .., .... CIlCll::J:: ~o.s:1ll Q.. .....w _ ... ~ ~ Q.. ::s ... ... ~ ~ ~::S ~;;:rn ~en>o ~a:a Ct ~ a :='l~O ~ ::s = Q...... 5' /'.:I > r ~ ~ .... ::r ~] 0 ;.~. 2" 8 ::l 9- 0 0... (6 ::l 3"0 0 ~ 0 ::l'" rt::l < ::l ~ rt a. ~ t"l g 5' 3 ""':3 a. t"l t"l 0'" aq -..... t"l -. 0... 0 ..... < .... I'b Er ~ ~ f'iI ~ fD ~ ciCi' rt a ~ 0 a. 8 a 0..: =- ~ t"l rt 0 t::::;; rt::l rt)::l t: rt rt 0 ::l 0' 0 ~ :::;; t"l 0 =-~ t"l ::l 0... CY:3 0.. 0 :::;; t"l .., ::l -'::l 0 t: ..... rt ~ ......, .., ::l ~ ~. ~ rt g '" 8-'" - . Er"O a ~, 0' e: ~ "0 0... ..,..... - '" ~......... .., ::l ~ :::;; ~~g.;.g::l(6"51~rt....~;:J~~~~ "0 f'iI .... ii' 0 0..0 ~ t"l :::q 0 ~::l t"l f'iI rt o 0... f'iI t:::l t: ..... rt ~ .., rt .., '" 0 ~ '" t"l ::j' ~."O.... ~ (6 rt' .... ~ ~ e; ....,.... "11 8 rt 0 .... :;::. 0 ..0 ~ -l::r t"l ....~..,~O"'::l~rt::l "'Jrt..c 0~""::l00 '" :t:I'b=-rtt: ...,::l ~ '< ~ 3'" :;- 0"0 0... ^' '" ::j'-g. I'b ..... ~ o~....,..,~-=-rt- ~(6 ;. 5' g cs.aq S' :;. ~ n .., 0 ~ g g ~ 0.. rt e:e:rt rtaq ~ ~ o..:o~ ~::; ....e:~.0'" O :S.::l t: ~ 0 rt ...., 0 0 .... o::l '< o..~~::l ;l 0..'" ~o.. ~t:::l~o..oo~ ....O"'::l'::"l....::l~.... 7-e:...~~~C;;(67-~~2..~~~~n~ c.C ~ ~ i .... PLYMOUTH ZONING ORDINANCE 21025 of this Chapter. The Zoning Administrator shall make a determination tha~ 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 family 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, yar~ and setback or lot areas are exempt from requiring a concI1tional 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 this 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 district 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 21100-4 PLYMOUTH ZONING ORDINANCE 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. 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. 5. and is found to be acceptable per these standards. (b) Developed Lots. An existing conforming use on a lot of substandard size and/or width may be expanded or enlarged if such expansion or enlargement meets all other provisions of this Chapter. 21100-5 ~~$ut.L\~ 10-7 3 (G) Any structure which will, under this Title, 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 Title 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 of land has been placed in a more restrictive nonconforming use, it shall not return to a less restrictive nonconforming use. (I) Normal maintenance of 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 nonconforming 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. ~: LOTPROV~ (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 ofrecord shall not be more 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 permit or planned unit development, not more than one principal structure shall be located on a lot 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 of the principal building or structure. However, in no case shaH such accessory building exceed twenty feet (20') in height in the R District. 10-7 <B-u.-v II -j U L n.e.. 2 10-7-1: PURPOSE: (A) Excessive unifom1ity, dissimilarity, inappropriateness or poor quality of design in the exterior appearance 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 of land 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 services. 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 uses within the City's various zoning districts, shall conform to the following general provisions and performance standards. 10-7-2: NONCONFORMING USES AND STRUCTURES: (A) (B) (C) ~ (E) Except as otherwise provided in this Title, any structure or use lawfully existing upon the effective date 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 structure has been damaged by fire, flood, explosion, earthquake, war, riot or act of God, it may be reconstructed and used as before if it is reconstructed within twelve (12) months after such 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, except 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 permit providing the structure complies with other ordinance requirements. Whenever a lawful nonconforming use of a structure or land is discontinued for a period of six (6) months, any future use of the structure or land shall be in conformity with the provisions of this Title. (F) Any lawful nonconforming use of land not involving a structure, and any lawful nonconforming use involving a structure, excluding 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 nonconforming use shall cease. r Inver Grove Heights Code 515.05, Subd. 2 Subd. 2. Non-Conformine Uses and Structures. a. b. c. (0 e. f. Arty structure or use lawfully existing upon the effective date of this section may be continued at the size and in a manner of operation existing upon 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, earthquake, 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. Arty lawful non-conforming use of land not involving a structure, and any lawful non-conforming 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 structure. 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 owner 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 the 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 structure 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. Q 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 Building. 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. ''''. ~" ,'- l C \-\ r.\ J 1, \'\' " '.t: r.J "r" '. !'" '. ..-,"'- ,.. . 1. ZONING ~ 20-73 (d) Full use of a nonconforming 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 diminished 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 of twelve (12) months, the nonconforming land use may be used only in the manner or to the extent used during the preceding twelve (12) months. For 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 city. (e) Maintenance and repair of nonconforming structures is permitted. Removal or destruc- tion of a nonconforming structure to the extent of more than fifty (50) percent of its estimated value, excluding land value and as detennined by the city, shall terminate the right to con- tinue the nonconforming structure. (0 Notwithstanding the prohibitions contained 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 use of less intensity if it is in the public interest. In all instances the applicant has the burden of proof regarding 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 rights which arise under the provisions of this section shall terminate. (Ord. No. 165, S 2, 2.10-92) \ Sec. 20.73. Nonconforming 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 natural 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 structure. 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. (h) No variance shall be required to construct a detached single-family dwelling on a nonconforming lot provided that it fronts on a public street or approved private street and provided that the width and area measurements 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, intensification, replacement, or structural changes of a structure on a nonconforming lot. 1\ (d) If two (2) or more contiguous lots are in single ownership and if all or part of the lots / I do not meet the width and area requirements of this chapter for lots in the district, the Supp. No.4 1165 C \.\ (\,i , (' .....;.. r t ' \ t I.. .. \ '., 't 1',,-1 '.~J \,,-.,. \ ,,~...... fi 20.73 CHANHASSEN CITY CODE contiguous lots shall be considered to be an undivided parcel for the purpose of this chapter. Ifpart of the parcel is sold, the sale shall constitute a self. created hardship under the variance provisions of this chapter. (Ord. No. 165, ~ 2, 2.10-92) Sees. 20.74-20-90. Reserved. DIVISION 5. BUILDING PERMITS, CERTIFICATES OF OCCUPANCY, ETC. Sec. 20-91. Building permits. (a) No person shall erect, construct, alter, enlarge, repair, move or remove, any building or structure or part thereof without first securing a building permit. (b) An application for a building permit' 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 structures and the building to be erected, off-street parking and loading facilities and such other information as 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 conflict with the provisions of this chapter. The city shall issue a building permit only after determining that the application and plans comply with the provisions of this chapter, the uniform building code as adopted 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 (1) 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, fi 4(3-1-4), 12-15-86) Cross reference-Technical codes, ~ 7-16 et seq. Sec. 20-92. Certificates of occupancy. (a) In accordance with the Uniform Building Code as adopted and amended by the city, a certificate of occupancy shall be obtained before: (1) Any nonagricultural building, except an accessory building, hereafter erected or structurally altered is occupied or used; and (2) The use of any existing nonagricultural 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 bLoOM I W G;;- \D 0 ZONING 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 to 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 lawful 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 prohibited - Except 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) Moving of use prohibited - 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) Termination 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 specified 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 nonconforming 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 BLOOMINGTON CITY CODE ~ (4) Destruction of use - Any building which does not conform to the use in the district in which it is located 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, 1958 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) SEC. 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 SEC. 19.12. DEFINITIONS. The following words and terms when used in this Article, shall have the following meanings, unless the context clearly indicates otherwise: . Conditional use - A conditional use is a use which is generally not suitable in a particular zoning district but which may, under some circumstances and with the application of certain conditions be suitable. Rezoning - Rezonings are actual changes in zoning or zoning boundaries. The procedures for rezoning 'arid 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; Ord. No. 54,12-18-61, renumbered to S 11.01) SEC. 19.13. INITIATING REZONING AND CONDITIONAL USES. The Planning Commission or City Council 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) Rezonings - Applications which are withdrawn prior to action taken by the City Council. 19-17 TO: FROM: DATE: RE: CC: Suesan Lea Pace, City Attorney Jane Kansier, Planning Coordinator~ November 4, 1998 U Bohlen Property Don Rye, Planning Director Frank Boyles, City Manager On October 5, 1998, Mr. Bohlen addressed the City Council as part of the public hearing on the proposed Zoning Ordinance and Zoning Map. Mr. Bohlen owns property located in the South 1/2 ofthe NE 1/4 of Section 23, directly south of Titus Addition. His property is presently zoned R-l and C-1, although sewer and water services are not available. The staffhas suggested this property be zoned Agriculture on the new Zoning map. Mr. Bohlen requested his property be zoned R-S. Mr. Bohlen currently owns 18 acres of land, with a single family dwelling. He has submitted several documents outlining a variance and an agreement with the City. I have also done some research on these proceedings. The following is a chronological summary of my fmdings. . Mr. Bohlen originally owned 28 acres ofland. In 1976, he received a building permit for a single family home. He subsequently subdivided this 28 acres into a 2 acre building site and a residual 26 acre vacant parcel. . In 1980, Mr. Bohlen received a Conditional Use Permit and a Building Permit to allow a pole building on the 26 acre parcel. . In 1992, Mr. Bohlen applied for a variance to the maximum density of 4 single family homes per quarter-quarter section, and to the minimum lot size of 10 acres. He proposed to subdivide the 26 acre parcel into 4, 2 acre lots, and a residual 18 acre parcel. . The Planning Commission denied this variance request in September, 1992. The Planning Commission did approve a variance to allow one addition dwelling in the quarter-quarter section, if Mr. Bohlen agreed to execute and record an agreement with the City of Prior Lake restricting the issuance of additional building permits on the 26 acres until sewer and water service is available. . Mr. Bohlen appealed this decision to the City Council. . On December 2, 1992, the City Council affirmed the decision of the Planning Commission to deny the variance, and to allow one additional dwelling unit. 1:\newzone\misc\bohlen.doc . On July 1, 1993, Deb Garros, Assistant City Planner, sent Mr. Bohlen a letter reminding him of the necessary agreement. She also noted his variance would expire on November 2, 1993. . In May, 1994, Mr. Bohlen again applied for a variance to allow 5 dwelling units per quarter-quarter section on this 26 acre parcel. This variance was filed since his original variance had expired. . The Planning Commission again denied this variance on May 19, 1998, but did approve the variance to allow one addition dwelling in the quarter-quarter section, if Mr. Bohlen agreed to execute and record an agreement with the City of Prior Lake restricting the issuance of additional building permits on the 26 acres until sewer and water service is available. . On June 6, 1994, the City Council approved an agreement with Mr. Bohlen to allow one additional dwelling unit on a 10 acre parcel. . At some point in this process, Mr. Bohlen apparently sold the 10 acre parcel to Ramona Whipps. Since there were now two parcels in separate fee ownership, Mr. . Bohlen and Ms. Whipps requested separate agreements. On August 1, 1994, the Council approved these agreements. The agreements were executed and recorded with Scott County on August 10, 1994. The agreements signed by Mr. Bohlen and Ms. Whipps identify the buildable parcel as the 10 acre parcel owned by Ms. Whipps. According to the Scott County records, this parcel is currently owned by Harold Bohlen. To date, no building permits have been issued for a dwelling at this site. However, we have received complaints about people living in the bam on the site over the last few years. There are two questions which must be asked in this matter. 1. Is the agreement signed by Bohlen and Whips valid? 2. What is the effect of the proposed Agricultural zoning on this property? The original validity and legality of this agreement is a legal question which I cannot attempt to answer. If the agreement was never valid, then the proposed zoning would not appear to affect this property. Mr. Bohlen would not be losing any property rights he legally held prior to the enactment of the agreement or the proposed zoning ordinance. If we assume the agreements are valid, the proposed zoning will have no effect on this property. The dwelling unit is restricted to the 10 acre parcel. Mr. Bohlen is not entitled to any additional dwelling units on the 16 acre parcel ofland. I have attached copies of the agenda reports, minutes, and other correspondence pertaining to these variances for your information. I have also attached a cope ofthe information submitted by Mr. Bohlen. I appreciate your help in this matter. Please let me know if you have any questions. Enclosure l:\newzone\misc\bohlen.doc ..w .) MEETING DATE: AGENDA #: PREPARED BY: REVIEWED BY: AGENDA ITEM: DISCUSSION: ALTERNATIVES: RECOMMENDED MOTION: REVIEWED BY: CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT NOVEMBER 2, 1998 8B JANE KANSIER, PLANNING COORDINATOR DONALD RYE, PLANNING DIRECTOR CONTINUATION OF PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER APPROVAL OF A COMPREHENSIVE ZONING ORDINANCE AND ZONING MAP FOR THE CITY OF PRIOR LAKE Historv: On October 5, 1998, the City Council held a public hearing to consider the proposed Zoning Ordinance. At that time, the Council hear testimony on several different issues and concerns with respect to the proposed ordinance. The Council continued the public hearing to November 2, 1998, and directed staff to review the issues and prepare a response. A copy of this response is attached to this report. Issues: The issues raised during the public hearing on October 5, 1998, are addressed in the attachment to this report. Also attached is a copy of the original agenda report, dated October 5, 1998, which raises some of the other significant issues from the Council's previous discussions. Conclusion: The proposed zoning ordinance is intended to implement the desired outcomes specified in the Comprehensive Plan. It reflects changes in land use law and development practices which are common today. The attached response also attempts to satisfy some of the issues and concerns raised at the last meeting. There are three alternatives available to the Council: 1. Close the public hearing and adopt a motion directing the staff to prepare an ordinance with findings of fact adopting the draft zoning ordinance. 2. Continue the public hearing as deemed necessary to allow additional comment. 3. Continue the public hearing and refer specific issues to the Planning Commission for further study and recommendation. The staff recommend Alternative #2 since Councilmember Wuellner ouncil defer final action on this Zoning Ordinance 8. 1:\newzone\97zonord\cc11298z.doc 1 16200 Eagle Creek Ave. S.E., Prior Lake, Minnesota 55372-1714 / Ph. (612) 447-4230 / Fax (612) 447-4245 AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER RESPONSES TO ISSUES RAISED AT ZONING ORDINANCE PUBLIC HEARING 1) Define point of measurement for setbacks. The Council discussed this issue at some length during its work sessions, and decided setbacks should be measured from the furthest point of the building, including eaves, overhangs and cantilevers. There is a discrepancy in Section 1101.316, which defines how measurements are taken. . This section will be changed to read as follows: MEASUREMENT. The measurement of distances when required by this Ordinance shall be done in a straight line in the plane located at a point 1 foot above the highest point in the surface ofthe ground along the path of measurement, from the most exterior foundatieH ';vall point of a building containing the use to the property line of the adjacent street, district or lot or other boundary line.... 2) Clarify whether or not the Lighting provisions (Section 1107.1800) apply to single family residences. These provisions were not intended to apply to single family dwellings. In order to clarify this intent, Section 1107.1800 will be modified to read as follows: LIGHTING. The purpose of this subsection is to minimize the adverse effects if light and glare on operators of motor vehicles, pedestrians, and on residential and other land uses in the vicinity of a light source in order to promote traffic safety and to prevent the nuisances associated with the intrusion of spillover light and glare. The requirements of this subsection apply to all exterior lighting except lighting for signs, which is covered under subsection 1107.400 through 1107.1700, fI:BEl street lighting within public rights-of-way. and one and two family residential structures. 3) Clarify whether or not the Landscaping and Screening provisions (Section 1107.1900) apply to single family residences. The proposed language is the same as the language in the current ordinance. However, to further clarify that these provisions do not apply to one and two family structures, the language in subsection 1107.1903 can be modified as follows: APPLICATION. This subsection applies to all proposed new commercial, industrial, multi-family residential (projects of3 or more dwelling units per building), public and institutional uses as may be permitted, permitted with conditions, or permitted with conditional use permits within their Use Districts. This applies to all new eonstruetion ',yithin all Use Distriets. Uses within the Downtown Redevelopment District as defined in subsection 1101.400 shall be exempt from this subsection. Existing commercial. industrial. multi-family residential (proiects of3 or more dwelling units per building). public and institutional uses shall also comply with this subsection, except as exempted herein, when a building permit is issued for their expansion. Exceptions include additions in which the ground building footprints in 1:\newzone\misc\response.doc total are under 10% of the existing structures gross floor area or 4,000 square feet, whichever is less. The Dovtntovln Redevelopment District as defined in subsection 1101.100 shall be eXeIHl3t from this subsection. 4) Clarify whether the Architectural Design Standards (Section 1107.2200) apply to single family dwellings. Most of the provisions in this section apply to commercial, industrial and multi-family residential (3-units or more) projects. However, the provisions of subsection 1107.2202 (9) do apply to one and two-family dwellings. In order to clarify the intent of this section, we can add a statement to subsection 1107.2202 asfollows: ST ANDARDS. The provisions in subsection 1107.2202 apply to commercial. industrial. multi-family residential (projects of 3 or more dwelling units per building). public and institutional uses. We can also renumber subsection 1107.2202 (9) asfollows: 1107.2203: Architectural Standards Applying to One and Two Family Residential Uses. 5) Lakeshore setback averaging {Section 1104.308 (2)). The language allowing setback averaging for the lakeshore setback currently refers to "2 adjacent lots". The concern is that this language will not allow setback averaging when the lot is adjacent to a vacant lot. In order to clarify this, the language can be amended in the following manner: SETBACK REQUIREMENTS FOR RESIDENTIAL STRUCTURES. On undeveloped shoreland lots that have 2 adjacent lots with existing principal structures on both such adjacent lots, any new residential structure may be set back the average setback of the adjacent structures from the ordinary high water mark or 50 feet, whichever is greater, provided all other provisions of the Shoreland Overlay District are complied with. In cases where only one of the two lots adjacent to an undeveloped shoreland lot has an existing principal structure. the average setback of the adiacent structure and the next structure within 150 feet may be utilized. Setback averaging may not be utilized when an undeveloped shoreland lot is located adjacent to two other undeveloped shoreland lots. In no instance shall a principal structure be located in a shore impact zone or a bluff impact zone. 6) Legal Ramifications of Lot Combinations. The City Attorney will comment on this issue at the public hearing.. 7) Certificates of Occupancy for Nonconforming Uses (Section 1107.2305). The issue here is that the language appears to require a certificate of occupancy for any nonconforming building. The intent of the language is to require a certificate of 1: \newzone\misc\response.doc 2 occupancy onlyfor nonconforming uses. In order to clarify this, the language will be revised as follows: NONCONFORMING USE. A Certificate of Occupancy shall be issued for all legal non- conforming uses ofland or uses of buildings created by adoption of this Ordinance, or in existence at the effective date of this Ordinance. 8) Fence Height (Section 1101.504). The question of appropriate fence height in the front yard is a result of a recent variance request. The current ordinance, as well as the proposed ordinance limits the height of a fence in the front yard to 3 112 feet (42 ''). The proposed ordinance does allow us to measure the height of a fence as an, average height, when the fence section has variable heights. The 42" height is afairly standard provision in most zoning ordinances. Limiting the height of fences in the front yard is primarily a safety issue. The 42" height allows the drivers of emergency and public safety vehicles to see the front of a house and the house numbers. This provision, however, is a matter of City policy. The Council has the discretion to set any height limit it feels appropriate. If the Council chooses to increase the allowable height of a fence in a front yard, the staff would suggest a maximum of 4 feet (48 ''). We would also suggest these fences have a maximum opacity of 25 percent. This will allow decorative and chain link fences, and will also allow a certain visibility to the front yard. The Council should provide the staff with some direction on this issue. 9) Zoning Map Changes. . LAKERS RESTAURANT. The Zoning Map has been revised to include this property within the C-1 (Neighborhood Commercial) Use District. This district is consistent with the current zoning of the property. The Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map will be revised to identify this property as C-NR (Neighborhood Retail Shopping) as part of the future update. . RESIDENTIAL AREA LOCATED SOUTH OF TH 13 AND WEST OF THE DAIRY QUEEN. The Zoning Map has been revised to identify this area as R-l (Low Density Residential) which is consistent with the current use ofthe area. . COMMERCIAL AREA LOCATED ON MAIN AVENUE NORTH OF DOWNTOWN. This area includes businesses such as Pearson's Auto Body, Dan's Auto Body, and other automotive uses. The area is located within the Downtown Redevelopment District; however, it is physically removed from the remainder of downtown due to its topography. It is the staffs recommendation that this area be zoned C-4 (General Business) which is consistent with the current uses. . BOHLEN PROPERTY LOCATED SOUTH OF TITUS ADDITION. This property is zoned R-l on the existing Zoning Map. According to Mr. Bohlen, his property is approximately 18 acres in size, with one single family dwelling. He has requested his property be zoned R-S (Rural Subdivision). The purpose ofthe R-S district is 1:\newzone\misc\response.doc 3 to recognize existing large lot subdivisions, such as the Titus Addition. This property does not meet that requirement. The site can eventually be developed when sewer and water services are extended to the area. The staff recommends the site be zoned A (Agricultural). 1:\newzone\misc\response.doc 4 MEETING DATE: AGENDA #: PREPARED BY: OCTOBER 5, 1998 8A DONALD RYE, PLANNING DIRECTOR AGENDA ITEM: CONSIDER APPROVAL OF A COMPREHENSIVE ZONING ORDINANCE AND ZONING MAP FOR THE CITY OF PRIOR LAKE DISCUSSION: History On December 18, 1995, the City Council adopted Resolution 95-126 which adopted a new Comprehensive Plan subject to review and acceptance by the Metropolitan Council. On June 13, 1996, the Metropolitan Council approved the City of Prior Lake's Comprehensive Plan as being consistent with the Regional Blueprint and without impact on Metropolitan systems. Since October of 1996, the staff and Planning Commission have been working to develop a new zoning ordinance which would be the primary means of implementing the Comprehensive Plan. The Planning Commission held 11 study sessions on the new ordinance between January and December of 1997 and conducted public hearings on the draft ordinance on September 22, 1997 and November 24, 1997. Numerous Prior Lake residents participated in these meetings and hearings and their comments are reflected in the hearing record. The draft ordinance differs from the current in several significant respects. The ordinance has been reorganized and there are new or greatly expanded sections covering definitions, district requirements, performance standards and administrative procedures. Staff will go over these changes in detail at the public hearing. In 1998, the City Council held 7 workshop sessions on the draft ordinance and produced the hearing draft of the ordinance which is being considered on October 5, 1998. Issues During the course of the Council review, several issues were discussed which constituted a significant change from current ordinance provisions. These issues were discussed by the Council and the results of these discussions are reflected in the public hearing draft ofthe zoning ordinance. 162(jl~NlM~lp~1)bl!ke, Minnesota 1)5372-1714 1 Ph. (612) 447-4230 1 Fax (612) 447-4245 AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER ----.7.-. ALTERNATIVES: The most significant issues include the following: . Combination of substandard riparian lots- The draft ordinance now states that substandard riparian lots of record in cc-mmon ownership can be developed separately provided the lots have at least 75 feet of frontage at the front building line and has at least 12,000 square feet of area. This provision expires 6 months after the effective date of the new zoning ordinance. Upon expiration, any substandard lots in common ownership can only be divided and recombined if all resulting lots meet the lot width and area requirements in the ordinance. . Setback from Ordinary High Water mark- The draft- ordinance specifies a setback from the Ordinary High Water mark for General Development lakes (which includes both Prior and Spring lak~s) of 75 feet compared to the current requirement of 50 feet. . Recreational equipment storage- This is a new provision which allows storage of seasonal recreational equipment adjacent to driveways during the season the equipment is being used and in a side or rear yard during the remainder of the year. It also allows for year around storage adjacent to the driveway under certain conditions. . Landscape irrigation- The requirement that landscaping be irrigated has been modified to allow the developer the option of posting a 2 year letter of credit for the landscaping in lieu of the installation of irrigation systems. . R-1 districts without sanitary sewer- A new zoning district called the Rural Subdivision Use district has been added to the ordinance to allow for existing developments which have been platted in lots smaller than 10 acres in area but do not have city sewer or water. . Landscaped parking islands- The current ordinance requires landscaped islands in new parking lots. This provision has been deleted in the draft ordinance. The zoning map is being changed to reflect the new zoning districts and to reflect the Comprehensive Plan land use designations which have been adopted. Properties outside the current MUSA boundary will retain the Agricultural zoning designation until sewer service is available. Conclusion- The draft zoning ordinance which is being considered is intended to implement the desired outcomes specified in the Comprehensive Plan. It reflects changes in land use law and development practices which are common today. There are three alternatives available to the Council: 1. Close the public hearing and adopt a motion directing the staff to prepare an ordinance with fmdings of fact adopting the draft zoning ordinance. L:\NEWZONE\97Z0NORD\CCI0598Z.DOC 2 RECOMMENDED MOTION: REVIEWED BY: 2. Continue the public hearing as deemed necessary to allow additional comment. 3. Continue the public hearing and refer specific issues to the Planning Commission for further st.ldy and recommendation. Alternative 1 Prank Boyles City Manager L:\NEWZONE\97Z0NORD\CCI0598Z.DOC 3 HUEMOELLER & BATES ATIORNEYS AT LAW 16670 FRANKLIN TRAIL POST OFFICE BOX 67 PRIOR LAKE. MINNESOTA 55372 ,.-----~--...~_.~ ilD ~:~~:G@ ; JAMES O. BATES BRYCE O. HUEMOELLER October 28, 1998 Telephone (612) 447-2131 Telecopier (612) 447-5628 Prior Lake City Council 16200 Eagle Creek Avenue Prior Lake, MN 55372 Re: Proposed Zoning Ordinance Dear Council Members: I am writing on behalf of John and J eri Trulson to request that the Council modify the fence provisions in the proposed zoning ordinance. After the City Council denied the Trulson's variance appeal, I contacted the Urban.Land In~titute and the American Planning Association (the APA) for advice on dealing with the Trulson's dilemma. The APA performed some research for us and provided us with two suggestions. One option is to increase the maximum height of front yard fences to 4 feet. Of the many examples furnished us by the AP A, most used 4 feet as the maximum height for front yard fences. Section 7-185(a) of the Palmetto, Florida Fence Ordinance is an . example of one of the ordinances setting 4 feet as the maximum front yard height. .The Palmetto Fence Ordinance contains an additional flexibility provision that I think should also be considered for Prior Lake. Section 7-185(d) allows the erection of a fence up to 6 feet in height, so long as the City Council determines that the fence meets certain standards. The provision from the Palmetto Fence Ordinance allowing for issuance of a "special fence permit" to permit the construction of a fence up to 6 feet in height is also attached to this letter for your information. This provision would allow the City Council to deal on an equitable basis with requests for special ornamental fences of the type proposed by the Trulsons, and would be a valuable addition to the proposed zoning ordinances. Accordingly, on behalf of the Trulsons, I would request that the maximum height for front yard fences be increased to 4 feet. In addition, I would request that the Council include an additional provision, similar to Section 7-185(d) of the Palmetto Fence Ordinance, to allow the City Council to issue a "special fence permit" to permit '~ Prior Lake City Council Page 2 October 28, 1998 the construction of a front yard fence up to 6 feet in height that meets the special conditions set forth in the ordinance. . Please contact me with any questions about this request. Sincerely yours, ~- Bryc . Huemoeller BDH:jd Enclosures cc: John and Jeri Trulson Frank F. Boyles .~ " OCT. 27 .1998 3: 52PM 545454 NO. 284 P.l/49 ill ~ American Planning Association 122 South Michigan Avenue. Suite 1600 '. ,. Chicago, IL 60603-6107 fax 312.431.9985 Phone 312.43.1.~'OO FAX TRANS:MrITAL COVER SHEET Date: I d I ~ ~ I '1 ~ To: ( { \ /l.. d~ 1- '"" t7 ~oe I ~ I' Co.lDept.: Prom: Americ:an Planning Association Phone #: S 1 ~ ( ~ G; Fax#: Phone #: Fa.": #: I (p c;;, '14/- r'- ~~ Subject c:- ~ , Ie I'\~ t ", Number of Pages: to.{ \3r,(.'t'r ~ -t-'~ ""'" ~. <J~7'~' {..J. ~ M-.> J1.. j ~. \.....e ~ O\'~ d2- ~ cU ~ ~ 1~---t 14;1. :.....J..-.,. . ~ 1C e. b -+ J .to!....-l, 'C2. es -..-....J ~ YOU DO NOT RECEIVE THE W)ICATED NUMBER OF PAGES OR HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, PLEASE CALL 312-431-9100. . 0Cr:27.1998 3:59PM DOCl.'11ltlm. I"CIIC ,mCgase .- . I- ;t 545454 NO. 284 P.13/49 http:/NN.W,muDlcode.eomlfcna.pgIl1' ~~.nfo/query::"/C\0CI{1324IO,0,0}?, . ~ ... " .' , II p~~7h-; -Ie..- .. , CODE OF ORDINANCES OF THE CITY OF PALMETTO, FLORIDA CODE OF ORDINANCES Chapter 7 BUILDINGS AND BUILDING REGULATIONS * ....Drewous - MTIC~.nml-:",~ ] See. 7-181. Short title. Thi$ article shall be kno'Wn and may be cited as the Palmetto Fence Ordinance, (Ord. No. 39!r ~ 1(1), 1-15-90) See. 7-182, Definitions. (a) Barbedwire,. One (1) or more strands of wire or other material having intermittent sharp points of " wire or metal that may puncture, cut., tear or snag person~ c1ot.hing or animals. The ferm "barbed 'Wire" as used herein excludes razorrlbbon. . . (b) Chain-linkfence: An open mesh fence made entirely of wire woven in squares of approximately one and one-half (11/2) inches with vertical supports not less than one and one-~ (1112) inches in diameter spaced not less than ,six (6) feet. and not more ~ eight (8) feet, apart. (c) V'zsibility triangle,' As defined in the zoninS code, appendixB, anicle v, section 5.4(a) and (b), Pa1m~o Code of Ordinances. 1:1 . . Cd) Fence: A ~standing stnlcture made' of metal, masonry, composition, wood, or a hedge, a free-standing wall, or any combination thereof; resting en or partially buried in the' ground and rlsiIlg above ground level and used for confinement, scre;ning, partition, or omamental purposes. Such stIllctures are generally erected to divide a lot or parcel ofland into distinct portions, or to separate two (2) contiguous lots or parcels. (e) Height:. :fer purposes of a fence that does not incOIporate barbed wire, l'lleightll means the distance from any.point ofnatur~ ground level perpendicularly to the highest edge of the fence, However, from the purpose of a fence that does incorporate barbeq wire, "hcightll means the distance from any point of natural ground level perpenQicularly to the highest edge of the fence or barbed wire, whichever is higher. (f) Livestock;:for purpose of this article, "live:;tock" means horses or cattle. (g) Unsafe fence: An unsafe fence means: (1) A dilapidated, deteriorated or decayed fence which by reason of inadequate maintenance, obsolescence or abandcnme~ poses a risk to human safety or property, or is no longer adequate to serve the purpose for which it was originally intended; or (2) A fence which, due to the ma.oner of its construction or the materials used in its constnlction, poses a. . 1 cf2 11/1919718:34:17 OCT.27.1998 3:59PM :;:>ccUmell~ - r \lU\l l\lr\l~a:se 545454 NO. 284 P.14/49 httP;/IWMV.mun~de.CQm/fclio.pg1l1 , ~t:i5.nfo/query=./dOcJ{@1344}? " ... . '. - CODE OF ORDINANCES Chapter 7 BUILDINGS AND BUILDING REGULATIONS'" ARTICLE ym. FEN'CES. . Sec. 7..184. Prolubited locations, ... 'D7evious No fence or wall of any type shall be erecteq and no permit ahall be iSSl,Jed for the erection of ~uch fence or wall on a street or road right-of-way within the city. No fence or wall of any type shall be erected and no permit shall be issued for the erection of sucli. fence or wall on any utility easement unless permanent access the width of the easement is provided by the landowner, at the sole expense of such landowner, to such utilities for purposes of testing, repairs and eq\lipmem replacement In the event a city utility must utilize the easement for testing, repairs or equipment replacement. requiring the fence to be moved or removed, or otherwi~ resulting in damage to such fence or waJ.l, aU costs associated with moving or r~ving such fence or wall to provide access to the ci:t:y utility as well as all costs ofrepair to or replacement~" such fence or wall shall be borne exclusively by the landowner. (Ord. No. 391, g 1(4), 1-1S-90) See. '..185. Maximum height. (a) No fence shall be built, erected or rn~;~lned at a height greater than four (4) feet at locations that would be closer to the road or street right..of....vay than the btl;Tding se~back line as provided in the zoning ordinance of the city,' except as provided in subsection Cd). (b) No fence other than a. chain-link fence may be "built, erected or maintained in the clear sight triangle. Such chain-link ~nce and the area adjacent to such fence shall be maintained in a manner providing a clear and unobstructed view through the visibility triangle at aU times. . . (c) No fence shall be constructed, erected or maiI$ined haYing a height greater than six (6) feet that is located within or adjacent to areas zoned ~ ER, RS.l~ RS-2, RS-3, RS..4. EM-5, RM-6, :M:8P..l, MHP-2. GO, under the Palme~o Zoning Ordinance. No fence shall be constructed, erected or maintained within an area zoned CHI under the P ahnetto Zoning Orainance in violation of subsections (a) or (b), . above. (d) Notwithstanding the provisions con1Ained in s~b$ection (a) above, if the applicant desires to erect within such setback a.re8, a fence greater than four (4) feet in height, the fence penni.t. applicant may apply to the city council for a special fence permit to erect a fence not m excess of six (6) feet in height The term "special fence permit" means a fence permit granted as a special exception to tbis article, which, if allowed but controlled as to the location, height, design and construction materials, would promote the general health, welfare, safety or morals of the public. In connection with the approval of any such special fence permit under this section, the city council shall apply to all such applications certain standards and conditions consistent with the following: (1) Compatibility. The proposed fence shall be compatible with existing surrounding land uses and the general character of the area. 1 cf2 0112619815:55:0; OCT. 27. 1998 4:00PM :locume...-. VJl.... .'IIWWQOS 545454 NO. 284 P.15/49 http://wMV.mLlnlccQe.ccmlfcfio.pgVl 1 l:f~5.n1Q/qLlery=.{C2oc/{@ 1344}?' #4 "j _ . . ~ . -(2) Orderly development The proposed fence ~a1l be consistent wiUl efficient and orderly development and growth patterns and shall not in~.e,rfere with the provisions of p1+blic facilities and services. (3) Traffic. The proposed fence shan not C1'e'l,te any hazardous vehicle or pedestrian traffic conditions and shall be compatible Vlith and promote the intent of the city to eliminate obstructions to motorists' view 'Within the visibility triangle. . (4) Screening and buffering. The proposed fence may provide such screening and buffering as nece'ssary . to m;nimize ad~verse impacts on surrounding ~ uses. .., (5) P~rmit duration. The duration of time the proposed fence shall r~ standing may be limited as necessary to minimize adverse impacts on surrounding land uses. . (Ord. No. 391, ~ 1(5), 1-15-90; Ord. No. 401, ~ 1,4--16-90; Ord. No. 453, 92, 6-17-91; Ord. No. 455, 9 1, 7-15-91) I . See. 7-186. Barbed wire. (a) It shall be unlawful for any person or entity to COIlStrq.c~ erect or rn~in1'ain barbed wire fences or . fences incorporating barbed wire if any such barbed wire is installed 'Viithin the area extending vertically . from the ground to a level six (6) feet in height; and: . . .1 (1) That is located on any land zoned RS-l, RS-2, RS-3, 'RS-4, RM-5,ID4-6, lv!PH..I or MPH-2 under the city zoning ordinance; or (2.) Is located on any.land zoned CN, ee, CG or CHI un4er the city zoning ordinance that is adjacent to any land zoned RS-l, RS-2, RS-3, RS-4, :&M-5, RM-6, WH-l, MPH..;2 under such ordinance. (b) Notwithstanding the foregoing, barbed wire fenceli, or fences incorporating barbed wire below the six-foot prohibition may be constIucted or JTll:1;TrtR;ned on land zoned ER under the city zoning ordinance, provided livestock are kept within such barbe4 wire fence, (Ord, No. 391, ~ 1(6), 1..15-90) S~ 7-187. Unsafe fences. " next... 2of2 01/26/98 15:55:09 HUEMOELLER & BATES ATTORNEYS AT LAW 16670 FRANKLIN TRAil POST OFFICE BOX 67 PRIOR LAKE, MINNESOTA S5372 " ~ i l ; i IJ I j 1; ,'; ! j}' D1 JAMES D. BATES BRYCE D. HUEMOEllER November 3, 1998 Telephone (612) 447.2131 Telecopier (612) 447.5628 Ms. Jane A. Kansier City of Prior Lake 16200 Eagle Creek Ave. SE Prior Lake, MN 55372-1714 Re: Proposed Zoning Ordinance Dear Ms. Kansier: In response to the mayor's concerns about increasing fence height to 48 inches, I would ask city staff to consider the following as it prepares its follow up report for the city council. First, my research indicates that there is no "standard" height for front yard fences. The range is substantial, and I have seen at least one ordinance that would allow front yard fences up to 72 inches in height. The American Planning Association furnished me with many ordinances allowing 48 inch front yard fences. Second, the Trulsons' found that pre-manufactured ornamental fences come in standard heights of 48 inches, 60 inches and 72 inches. While I presume that other manufacturers may make 42 inch high ornamental fences, or that 42 inch high ornamental fences can be custom ordered, I think that the experience of the Trulsons' with. the fence manufacturer that they selected should be considered in this process. Specifically, it appears that increasing the maximum fence height to 48 inches will permit the use of pre-manufactured, high quality, maintenance-free fences available at a much lower cost than would be the case for custom made fences. The opportunity for people to buy higher quality fencing at a reasonable price should be a factor in this process. Third, I am not sure that I agree with the analysis that 48 inch fences are inherently less safe than 42 inch fences. The issue is principally one of driver attentiveness. Beyond that, homeowners have so many other landscaping choices (such as large rocks, Evergreen trees, bushes, berms and the like) that can and often do exceed 42 inches in height that the issue of fence height becomes only one of many factors that effect visibility and safety. Ms. Jane A. Kansier Page 2 November 3, 1998 <- , All things considered, we simply do not see substantial and compelling reasons for not increasing front yard fence heights to 48 inches and would ask for the staff s favorable recommendation in that regard. Call me if you would like to discuss this further. Sincerely yours, ~~~ Bryce D. Huemoeller BDH:dmw cc: John and Jerilyn Trulson ." ',- OCT 29 '98 02:21PM HUEMOELLER & BATES P.2/2 HUEMOELLER & BATES ArrORNEYS AT lAW I MiD floA"'I(LI'" TltAll POST OFFICI BOX 61 1'R10lt ~~. M''''Nl5OTA 55371 I-"'l€S O. BATES !IIlYCS C. HUEMOELLER October 28, 1998 Teleph_ (1121447.2131 Teleeallit!l' (6121 447-5'21 Prior Lake City Council 16200 Eagle Creek Avenue Prior Lake, MN 55372 Re: Proposed Zoning Ordinance Dear Council Members: This letter is being sent to you on behalf of Deerfield Development LLC to request that the list of "permitted uses" for the Busmess Park Use District be expanded to include hotels and motels. The areas in the city with a business park classification are typically located on a major thoroughfare at one of the entry poinLS to the city. In addition to being a prime location for an office or business, it is also a prime location for lodging. An example of another city that includes hotels and motels within a general business area is found in Eagan. The business district located at the intersection of Pilot Knob Road and Corporate Circle Curve contains both a Holiday Inn Hotel, ,. several major multi-story office buildings and. several other buildings housing various businesses. The hotel is complimentary to the adjacent business uses. ,,~.\ Please contact me with any questions about this request. cc: Deerfield Development LLC Frank F. Boyles ID ~~@OW[g~;: I III ) i i OCT 29 i998 I@ BDH:jd C.H. CARPENTER LBR. ~ ... J.... TEL:612-447-4042 9aa; 9ax ' , I :1 , i ! I I i , PATE 1c-J.- 9 --:- TO d-e.~~ FROM @ C.H.CARPHITER LBR - PRIOR LAKe YARD PAGES :?-- i 14:12 No.012 P.02 MESSAGE I :1 !I ~~.D . ~ : I II : TEL:612-447-4042 Oct 28'98 14:12 No.012 P.Ol C.H. (8RPENTER LBR. I I I I I 1 I I I I I I j I . . .-- -) "I J OQtabe~ 28, ~"8 ,: e~~y of Pd."" t..lk, , ,:A~tl J~1 ~~v'.E'". . . n."ne, ' '16200 :]la;l" 'ar..~ Ave'!" '~r1or ~k8,~~ii312~11 :.0.'.1' J"nn1. f . We are ~equ..U.1\9 thaC 1n 0 propoa8d zoning or'dhncc that C.Ii. Cllrpl:ll~ r~r L~r. b. .~meQ C-4 r.t~..r ~h.n the pcopo8ed \~-~. Th, c"",. ....pIIt..........wlbQr.....L.at . ' . I ; ..... A" : !'nct "'181' . , ii~_ f 5' f~ @O"i'.17 ,rs ~I. !! I) LS '-::::7 L.=: \:J 15 ,: iiU!' I Ii j~\ I OOT 28 gs ,J I :1 . . ,l I .,' " I ~ .---' . ..-- --- -." .1' :~; . _.......-'-~!.I. ,. , f ,. J First I would like to clarify two assumptions. I hare been told by planning that in determining any bluff setback that -if any slope- beyond the top of bluff- - exceeds 18%, then the 251 setback would begin at that point. Is this correct? It-is also my understanding that we have to show I' increments of grading elevations in determining the setback points and bluff line. Is this correct. As written then, a raised bed garden of less that one foot in height would change the setback point or any other landscaping method which raises the grade. I do not think that this is the intent of the bluff line setback regulations. The old regulations us-ed to take- _ an_average slope over a 501 length. Given that the setback length is 25' wouldn't it be reasonable to use a25'average for determining the 18% or less slope. This would eliminate numerous_ issues including landscaping and save the taxpayers money. Currentlywe are required to have a-survey showing II increments of eJ~vation. Fpr determining the 18% slope we would only have to show this over a 251 length and this woulcf- -- -- Hresult in less survey charges; Another approach you could take would be to exclude landscaping and retaining walls of less that 4' in height. It is my understanding that a retaining wall of less than 4' does not have to have an engineering report and if this exclusion were added in addition to the 25' average then the structural integrity of the slope should not be compromised. In summary I would request that you use an average slope of 18% over the 25' of set back and you exclude landscape walls of less than 4' from the regulations in determining the 251 setback point. /TT 11//..1. -/1'f();;.r.IJ It.t():P p~,dw,!/f/~p jb 5[1 Will? l' 4# IIi .f~p/E r )o-1.7UJ/;: Lp"~f i-1A"Er /'h,.r ,hv'{ ,jEi.V!J .zr- rill) A4/f/U5 5'/pc,t.;. 9/;/ f jf 1/6- t{) ,Iff/I-[ ,1/ () C- 1./ J<1 E /'J T f ..l d/ C L t{ /1/ /J {,.. . ~JlJf/J~L ~ ~t1~LI( 'z/VfJ~fT all c/!'/J/ZItfi-$$', '} a -:" J..b~ ~ 11 v.Jt:JJ -~t:V, t:rlk'f,fJ-r. !IIi II