05-21-97 PCMAY -15-1997 10:52 NAC
612 595 9837 P.02/11
NORTHWEST ASSOCIATED CONSULTANTS
NINC COMMUNITY PLANNING - DESION - MARKET RESEARCH
PLANNING REPORT
TO: Otsego Mayor and City Council
Otsego Planning Commission
FROM: Bob Kirmis
DATE: 15 May 1997
RE: Otsego - Klien Building Relocation CUP
FILE NO: 176.02 - 97.06
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
BACKGROUND
Mr. Charles Mien has requested a conditional use permit to allow a relocated single family
residence to lie upon an existing lot of record within the City. Specifically, Mr. Klien wishes
to replace an existing "single wide" manufactured home with a replacement modular home.
The relocated home would lie upon a f 1.7 acre site located south of 81 st Street and West
of N.E. Ochoa Avenue. The property is zoned R-3, Immediate Urban Service District.
Attached for reference:
Exhibit A - Site Location
Exhibit B - Detailed Site Location
Exhibit C - Site Plan
Exhibit D - Home Photograph
RECOMMENDATION
Based on the following review, our office recommends approval of the requested building
relocation. Approval is, however contingent upon the fulfillment of the following conditions:
1. A site plan, drawn to scale and based upon a certificate of survey is provided which
illustrates various site features including the location of the proposed residence,
septic system, well, driveway and out buildings.
5773 WAYZATA BOULEVARD, SUITE ¢55 ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA 554 145
PHONE 5 1 2-595-9031 FAX 10 1 2-595-91537
MAY -15-1997 10:53 NAC
612 595 9837 P.03i11
2. The relocated residence comply with all applicable requirements of the State
Building Code. This item should be subject to further comment by the City Building
Official.
3. The relocated structure is ready for occupancy within six months from the date of
location on the site.
4. Drainage and utility easements are provided as may be recommended by the City
Engineer.
5. The City Building Official and/or the City Engineer shall provide
comment/recommendation in regard to well and sewage treatment issues.
6. The applicant provide proof to the City that the house move is performed by a
licensed mover in accordance with applicable State requirements.
7. The applicant notify the City of the route and exact timing of the move.
S. The site's existing structure is removed from the subject property prior to occupancy
of the relocated building.
9. A performance security is posted in an amount determined appropriate by the
Zoning Administrator. The security should be reflective of anticipated improvement
costs (foundation work, etc.).
10. The subject site's driveway is surfaced in accordance with the directives of the City
Council, either in compliance with existing ordinance requirements or pending
amendment. Final CUP approval shall coincide and respond to the requirements
of such approved (or denied) amendment.
11. Comments of other City staff.
ISSUES ANALYSIS
CUP Submission Requirements. According to Section 2044, all conditional use permits
applications must includeAhe submission of a site plan which identifies to location of site
structures, driveways, etc. While the applicant has submitted a site plan which identifies
the general location of the relocated home, the submission of a site plan, based upon a
certificate of survey must be submitted prior to building permit issuance.
2
MAY"15-1997 10:53 NAC 612 595 9837 P.04i11
CUP Judgement Criteria. In consideration of conditional use permit requests, Section
20-4-2.F of the Zoning Ordinance directs the Planning Commission and City Council to
consider possible adverse effects of the proposed conditional use. Judgement must be
based upon, but not limited to, the following factors:
1. The proposed action's consistency with the specific policies and provisions of the
official City Comprehensive Plan.
2. The proposed use's compatibility with present and future land uses of the area.
3. The proposed use's conformity with all performance standards contained therein
(i.e., parking, loading, noise, etc.).
4. The proposed use's effect upon the area in which it is proposed.
5. The proposed use's impact upon property values of the area in which it is proposed.
6. Traffic generation by the proposed use in relation to capabilities of streets serving
the property.
7. The proposed use's impact upon existing public services and facilities including
parks, schools, streets, and utilities, and its potential to overburden the City's
service capacity.
Lot Area Requirements. The applicants wish to relocate a residence upon Lot 14, Block
1 of Waleson Estates 2nd Addition. As shown below, the subject lot meets all applicable
R-3 lot area requirements:
Required Existing
Lot Area 1 acre 1 acre
Lot Width 150 feet 150 feet
Lot Depth 100 feet ± 500 feet
Setbacks. As shown below, all R-3 District principal building setbacks have been
satisfactorily met.
Front Yard 35 feet
Side Yard 10 feet
Rear Yard 20 feet
3
50 feet
12 feet
t 390 feet
MAY -15-1997 10:54 NAC 612 595 9837 P.05i11
Structure Compatibility. Section 20-19-2 of the Zoning Ordinance stipulates that a
proposed relocated building must comply with the character of the neighborhood in which
it is being located. The proposed residence to be relocated is a modular home constructed
in 1984. The home measures 28'x 60' (1,680 square feet) in size and meets minimum
single family dimensional requirements of the ordinance (24'x 30'). It is the applicant's
intent to construct a 12 inch roof overhang in conformance with ordinance requirements.
Based upon the submitted photograph, the home to be located appears to be in good
condition. The replacement of an existing 980 square foot (14'x 70') single wide mobile
home constructed in 1974 with the proposed modular home is expected to have a positive
impact on the neighborhood.
Property Values. According to Section 20-19-2 of the Zoning Ordinance, the relocated
structure must not result in a depreciation of adjacent property values. Considering that
the value of the home to be relocated will exceed the value of surrounding residence, area
property values are not expected to depreciate and may in fact appreciate.
In a general perspective, a lowering of area property values is not anticipated if:
1 _ The subject structure is structurally sound and well kept.
2. The building's placement is compatible with area residences_
3. Foundation work is professionally done.
4. Aesthetically pleasing landscaping is provided.
While a firm determination cannot be made in regard to property valuation consistency,
the City can take steps toward providing an assurance against neighborhood depreciation
via its performance standards.
Building Code Requirements. As a condition of CUP approval, the subject structure
must comply with the applicable requirements of the State Uniform Building Code. This
item should be subject to further comment by the City Building Official.
Structure Occupancy. Section 20-19-2.E of the Zoning Ordinance stipulates that a
relocated structure must be ready for occupancy within six months from the date of location
on the site. This item may be of particular relevance to foundation modification work which
may be subject to climatic limitations.
Drainage and Utility E-rsements. According to Section 21-7-15.A of the Subdivision
Ordinance, easements a minimum of 10 feet in width should be provided along rear and
other lot lines for drainage and utilities. If not already provided, and if recommended by
the City Engineer, such easements should be established.
4
MAY -15-1997 10:55 NAC 612 595 9837 P.06/11
Well/Sewage System. It is anticipated that the existing septic system on the site shall be
utilized for the new structure. This should, however, be verified by the applicant. The
existing system shall be inspected by the City Building Official and/or the City Engineer.
Moving Permits. Prior to relocation of the single family residence, the applicants should
provide proof to the City that the move will be performed by a mover licensed by the State
of Minnesota and that all applicable State requirements have been complied with,
including all necessary local permits. The applicants must also notify the City of the Route
and exact timing of the move.
Existing Structure. As a condition of CUP approval, the site's existing structure should
be removed prior to occupancy of the relocated building. To ensure compliance with this
requirement, a posting of a security will be necessary.
Driveway Surfacing. The surfacing material of the subject site's driveway has not been
specified. According to Section 20-22-4.11.12 (b) 2 of the Zoning Ordinance, detached
single family uses within residential developments platted prior to 1 January 1992 must
adhere to the following surfacing requirements:
(b) Any residential use which undertakes an improvement requiring a building
permit and the value of such improvement exceeds $2,500 shall be required
to upgrade the driveway and parking area surfacing to asphalt, concrete,
cobblestone, or paving brick.
The City Council is currently reconsidering its driveway improvement policy and the
aforementioned ordinance requirement. As a condition of CUP approval, the applicant
shall be required to adhere to City's driveway improvement requirements either as they
presently exist or in accordance with a pending amendment. In this regard, approval of
the applicant's request should coincide and comply with formal City action on the cited
driveway surfacing requirements.
Performance Security. The Zoning Ordinance states that a performance security for
relocated residential structures must be provided to ensure compliance with the conditions
of the condition use permit. The security should be in an amount equal to the Zoning
Administrator's estimated costs of labor and materials for the proposed development (may
be handled in stages). rhe security should be approved by the City Attorney prior to
building permit issuance.
5
MAY -'15-19V 10:55 NAC 612 595 9837 P.07i11
CONCLUSION
Based on the preceding review, our office recommends approval of the requested
conditional use permit subject to the conditions listed In the Executive Summary of this
report.
PC: Elaine Beatty
Larry Koshak
Andrew MacArthur
Jerry Olson
Charles Klein
0
MAY=15-1997 10:55 NAC 612 595 9637 P.07i11
CONCLUSION
Based on the preceding review, our office recommends approval of the requested
conditional use permit subject to the conditions listed in the Executive Summary of this
report.
PC: Elaine Beatty
Larry Koshak
Andrew MacArthur
Jerry Olson
Charles Klein
l�
MAY=15-1957 10:56 NAC
612 595 9837 P.08i11
EXHIBIT A - $ITF- LOCATIOP
MAY -15-1997 10:56 NAC 612 595 9837 P.09i11
EXHIBIT B - DETAILED SITE LOCATI<
FA
h1AY-15-1997 10:5?
NAC
612 595 9837 P.10i11
raft �
_ �� ' 312, � �• h . ~-�..
Y
I r��
I ✓ '
WRIGHT COLVIY, 1[I8 MOTA
4Is,}+azaby c�eriifrr that "Ma Is a trae.and • 01 �' s'`s`•
cdtzaat teptwankation of a sup oy of the
'bouodartea of the lYbd describ4d•ibsve. It: n
dols not purport to sh" iQprweaeats or
li
sstesoacmmats. 11 aay. As surveyed by ea
this loth day bt July. 1971.
XLnwrsuta itssistratlon No. 7434
EXHIBIT C -.SITE PLAr
Q
,_
Q
1
EXHIBIT C -.SITE PLAr
o��•�fY�w:li��`��
>w7ii<r 1
Wit_. •.�r.. . •.r s ..5.�: ,�-� n •. !.:.'s-:
' C. �+� r�� ._.11•x. ��~��:[ • il..Y�J' .f.
•`t' I .. ... w���it�s/yy�f`a+J�K•IYJ•.':��!1r1'I•LS�+•.�.���Trq+PM�rl�l..
�y.-r.... .c +.l`i[.:�TXi1.•wu. pis .r F.:'•.r' T.: 'iii..vl+►t-T.r,4�.'W:7:h%•�•,, •:: ..
il'r t 1: a 117.51 l �• �' -r4� 2,/' 5 1� � �i •ul .l } ^� •: �'v �'�;i�•,•. .� .. • ..
-� 1 7. rt• .,Ct, _;+i'xi)'"�♦'�1� �r �� [ �� ,!. Lr � \ � is �,`•i;-Y^T�`1r [I ,. .y: S.
�- l . ` r -Y r 1 t • �. �'F Yll I agJ'I 1y4R ! J i 1+ . •.. .•AY.•.1i r�, • •..•[.' r:^I �'�.
�1t X..Y Y� !r . � Y�: ��l t ir► � -5�� �}�i+t. ,F! !?I r;�f J t -e ��it •`. �.; •..1:...� � r f : •�'••'i� ,:.
�}�..�LJi•.J+ '); �� F�rS h �r�y � 1 J b%r �'`'LIC r+ �. � .� : • .:ri -�. TSS • • . �� : Jw .1 •t.!•'ti�;•.. ,•T, /::
NORTHWEST ASSOCIATED CONSULTANTS
NINC COMMUNITY PLANNING - DESIGN - MARKET RESEARCH
PLANNING REPORT
zip
FROM:
DATE:
RE:
FILE NO:
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Background
Otsego Mayor and City Council
Otsego Planning Commission
Bob Kirmis
12 May 1997
Otsego - Strommen Curb Cut CUP
176.02 - 97.05
Gregory and Linda Strommen have requested approval of a conditional use permit to allow
the construction of a second curb cut access to their one acre single family residential lot
located south of 85th Street and west of Palmgren Avenue. The proposed second curb
cut would provide access to a future detached garage which is proposed to be sited ± 50
feet from the site's principal building. According to the Zoning Ordinance, single family
uses are limited to one curb cut access per property except by approval of a conditional
use permit.
The subject property is zoned R-3, Residential Immediate Urban Service.
Attached for reference:
Exhibit A: Site Location
Exhibit B: Detailed Site Location
Exhibit C: Site Plan
5775 WAYZATA BOULEVARD, SUITE 555 ST. LOUIS PARK. MINNESOTA 554 1 6
PHONE 6 1 2-595-9636 FAX 6 1 2-595-9837
Recommendation
Based on the following review, our office recommends approval of the requested
conditional use permit to allow a second curb cut for a single family residential use subject
to the following conditions:
1. The applicant recognize that future sanitary sewer service to the property and
implementation of the resubdivision plan could necessitate relocation or removal
of the proposed detached garage (proposed in conjunction with second driveway
construction).
2. A determination is made that the proposed curb cut is not located less than 40 feet
from the driveway of the abutting northerly lot.
3. The proposed driveway is surfaced in asphalt, concrete, cobblestone, or paving
brick.
4. The City Engineer provide comment and recommendation in regard to drainage
issues.
6. Comments of other City staff.
ISSUES ANALYSIS
CUP Evaluation Criteria. According to Section 20-4-2.F of the Zoning Ordinance, the
Planning Commission and City Council must consider possible adverse effects of the
proposed conditional use. Judgement may be based upon, but not limited to, the following
factors:
1. The proposed action's consistency with the specific policies and provisions of the
official City Comprehensive Plan.
2. The proposed use's compatibility with present and future land uses of the area.
3. The proposed use's conformity with all performance standards contained herein
(i.e., parking, loading, noise, etc.).
4. The proposed use's effect upon the area in which it is proposed.
5. The proposed use's impact upon property values of the area in which it is proposed.
2
6. Traffic generation by the proposed use in relation to capabilities of streets serving
the property.
7. The proposed use's impact upon existing public services and facilities including
parks, schools, streets, and utilities, and its potential to overburden the City's
service capacity.
Existing Conditions. As shown on the submitted site plan (Exhibit C), the applicants'
home is located on the southern one-half of their lot (consistent with resubdivision plan).
The home currently includes a two stall attached garage located alongside the property's
southern boundary. Expansion of the existing garage (with access from existing driveway)
is not possible due to the side yard setback limitations and the floor plan of the home
which prohibits northerly expansion. Recognizing these limitations, a detached garage
has been proposed to the northwest of the existing residence. Access to the detached
garage via the property's existing curb cub would present significant difficulties due to the
location of a well and tree within the front yard of the lot (see Exhibit C).
Driveway/Access Policy. The City's Comprehensive Plan includes various policies
related to street access. Specifically, the plan states the following:
• Vehicular access onto all types of arterials shall be minimized and limited ensuring
adequate distance between intersections and utilization of appropriate traffic control
methods and devices.
• Wherever possible, access to property shall be prohibited from major streets.
Detached frontage roads are to provide property access for properties "fronting"
such streets and roads.
Palmgren Avenue, from which the subject property is provided access, is classified as a
"local" street. As such, access limitations addressed by the Comprehensive Plan are not
necessarily applicable. The City's Zoning Ordinance does, however, include various
regulations related to curb cut placement. These standards will be addressed in following
sections of this report.
Curb Cut Spacing. Section 20-22-4.H.7 of the Zoning Ordinance states that driveways
for single family dwellings may not be located less than 40 feet from one another. With
a spacing of + 70 feet, the proposed curb cuts upon the applicants' property conform to
this requirement. As a condition of CUP approval, a determination should be made that
the proposed curb cut does not lie less than 40 feet from the driveway of the adjacent
northerly lot.
3
Resubdivision Plan. As noted previously, the applicants' home has been sited on the
southern one-half of the lot, consistent with the Country Ridge resubdivision plan. The
purpose of the resubdivision plan is to provide property owners with a means to lessen
financial burdens (i.e., assessments) associated with possible future sanitary sewer
service. In this regard, the applicant should recognize that future sanitary sewer service
could necessitate relocation or removal of the proposed detached garage. This is of
course a decision to be made by the property owner.
Setbacks. According to the Zoning Ordinance, curb cut openings must be a minimum of
five feet from the side property line in all districts. As shown on the submitted site plan,
the second curb cut is proposed to lie 30 feet from the lot's northern property line and
conforms to the Ordinance requirement.
Driveway Surfacing. In accordance with Ordinance requirements, the proposed driveway
should be surfaced in asphalt, concrete, cobblestone, or paving brick.
Drainage. Construction of the proposed second driveway will require the installation of
a second culvert. As part of the conditional use permit consideration, a finding should be
made that the proposed curb cut will not adversely impact site and area drainage patterns.
This issue should be subject to further comment and recommendation by the City
Engineer.
Curb Cut Width. According to the Ordinance, no curb cut may exceed 24 feet in width
unless approved by the City Engineer. The proposed "second" curb cut measures 15 feet
in width and conforms with the Ordinance requirement.
CONCLUSION
Based on the preceding review, our office recommends approval of the requested
conditional use permit to allow a "second" curb cut upon a single family residential lot
subject to the conditions listed in the Executive Summary of this report.
PC: Elaine Beatty
Larry Koshak
Andy MacArthur
Jerry Olson
Gregory and Linda Strommen
112
h
EXHIBIT A - SITE LOCAT'
I
2
EXHIBIT B - DETAILED SITE LOCATION
BAI+ZTHEt .+.�
ACRE S
1
~° 1 77
y1
2
EXHIBIT B - DETAILED SITE LOCATION
0
� j �v r e-
P AGE AV5- W- 154 -59
- n m (,-)
G-- ra
CC)
CPO
r -J
AVE NF- 1:54
�' "' EXHIBIT C - SITE PLP
N W^rm% NORTHWEST ASSOCIATED CONSULTANTS
INC COMMUNITY PLANNING - DESIGN - MARKET RESEARCH
PLANNING REPORT
FROM:
DATE:
RE:
FILE NO:
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Background
Otsego Mayor and City Council
Otsego Planning Commission
Bob Kirmis
7 May 1997
Otsego - Paumen Accessory Building CUP
176.02 - 97.04
Mr. Greg Paumen has requested approval of a conditional use permit to allow the
construction of more than one detached accessory structure upon his 1.1 acre lot located
south of 78th Street between O'Brian and Odean Avenues (14223 78th Street).
Specifically, the applicant wishes to construct an 832 square foot (26 feet by 24 feet)
detached garage upon the property. Presently, a 1,008 square foot detached accessory
garage and 64 square foot utility shed exist on the property.
The subject site is zoned R-3, Residential Immediate Urban Service.
Attached for reference:
Exhibit A: Site Location
Exhibit B: Detailed Site Location
Exhibit C: Site Plan
5775 WAYZATA BOULEVARD, SUITE 555 ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA 554 1 6
PHONE 6 1 2-595-9636 FAX 6 1 2-595-9837
Recommendation
Based on the following review, our office recommends approval of a conditional use permit
to allow more than one detached accessory building associated with a detached single
family dwelling subject to the following conditions:
The subject site's driveway is surfaced in accordance with the directives of the City
Council, either in compliance with existing ordinance requirements or pending
amendment. If the City Council proceeds with the processing of an amendment,
final CUP approval shall coincide and respond to the requirements of such
approved (or denied) amendment.
2. The proposed accessory building is not used for home occupation/commercial
related activities or the keeping of animals.
3. A building elevation (or elevations) is submitted which demonstrates compliance
with City building height requirements.
4. The proposed accessory building match the site's principal building in color.
5. Ten foot wide drainage and utility easements are provided along side and rear lot
lines.
6. Comments from other City staff.
ISSUES ANALYSIS
CUP Review Criteria. As noted previously, the applicant has requested a conditional use
permit to allow more than one detached (or second) accessory building upon his property.
According to Section 20-16-4.1 of the City Zoning Ordinance, a conditional use permit for
an accessory storage structure may only be granted provided that:
There is a demonstrated need and potential for continued use of the structure and
the purpose stated.
2. In the case of residential uses, no commercial or home occupation activities are
conducted on the property. This prohibition shall include the storage of materials
and equipment which are unrelated to the on-site residential use and facility.
3. The building has an evident re -use or function related to the principal use.
2
4. The accessory building shall be maintained in a manner that is compatible with the
adjacent uses and does not present a hazard to public health, safety, and general
welfare.
5. The provisions of Section 20-4-2.F of the Ordinance shall be considered and a
determination made that the proposed activity is in compliance with such criteria
(listed below).
a. The proposed action's consistency with the specific policies and provisions
of the official City Comprehensive Plan.
b. The proposed use's compatibility with present and future land uses of the
area.
C. The proposed use conforms with all performance standards contained herein
(i.e., parking, loading, noise, etc.).
d. The proposed use's effect upon the area in which it is proposed.
e. The proposed use's impact upon property values of the area in which it is
proposed.
f. Traffic generation by the proposed use in relation to capabilities of streets
serving the property.
g. The proposed use's impact upon existing public services and facilities
including parks, schools, streets, and utilities, and its potential to overburden
the City's service capacity.
Existing Accessory Storage Space. Currently, a total of approximately 1,072 square feet
of accessory storage space exists upon the subject property as summarized below:
Square Footage
Two Stall Garage (28' x 36') 1,008 square feet
Utility Shed (8'x 8') 64 square feet
1,072 square feet
Including the proposed 832 square foot accessory building, approximately 1,904 square
feet of accessory storage space would exist upon the subject property.
3
Building Use. The CUP review criteria states that there should be a demonstrated need
for the continued use of the structure and the stated purpose. The proposed garage is to
be used for the storage of the applicant's personal recreational vehicles and equipment.
As such, there appears to be a demonstrated need for the continued use of the structure.
In accordance with Ordinance requirements, the structure may not be used for home
occupation/commercial related activities or the keeping of animals.
Building Type. According to Section 20-16-4.G of the Zoning Ordinance, the same or
suitable quality exterior building materials (as determined by the Building Inspector) shall
be used in all accessory buildings over 150 square feet as the principal building. The
proposed detached garage is to be finished in 12 inch lap siding similar to that used upon
the single family residence and existing detached garage.
To ensure structure compatibility, it is recommended that the proposed accessory building
be of a color which matches the site's principal structure.
Setbacks. According to Section 20-16-4.B.5 of the Ordinance, accessory buildings may
encroach into the required side and rear yard of a lot, except however no such
encroachment may occur upon a required easement or within 10 feet of any lot line. As
shown on the submitted site plan (Exhibit C), the proposed accessory building would lie
32 feet from the site's southern property line and 34 feet from the lot's western boundary.
Thus, the proposed garage meets applicable setback requirements.
Access. The subject property is currently provided access via a single driveway ± 24 feet
from 78th Street. No change to the access is proposed as a result of the accessory
building construction.
Driveway Surfacing. The submitted site plan does not indicate whether a driveway is to
be constructed to access the proposed detached garage. According to Section 20-22-
4.H.12.(b).2 of the Zoning Ordinance, detached single family uses within residential
developments platted prior to 1 January 1992 must adhere to the following surfacing
requirement:
(b) Any residential use which undertakes an improvement requiring a
building permit and the value of such improvement exceeds $2,500
shall be required to upgrade the driveway and parking area surfacing
to asphalt, concrete, cobblestone, or paving brick.
The City Council is currently reconsidering its driveway improvement policy and the
aforementioned ordinance requirement. As a condition of CUP approval, the applicant
shall be required to adhere to City's driveway improvement requirements either as they
presently exist or in accordance with a pending amendment. In this regard, approval of
12
the applicant's request should coincide and comply with formal City action on the cited
driveway surfacing requirements.
Building Height. According to Section 20-16-4.F of the Zoning Ordinance, an accessory
building within an R-3 Zoning District may not exceed 16 feet in height except via
conditional use permit. As a condition of CUP approval, a building elevation should be
submitted which demonstrates compliance with the maximum height standard.
Easements. According to Section 21-7-15.A of the Subdivision Ordinance, 10 foot wide
easements should be provided along lot lines to accommodate drainage and public/private
utilities. It has not been indicated whether such easements have been established upon
the site in question.
As a condition of CUP approval, 10 foot wide drainage and utility easements should be
provided along side and rear lot lines.
Compatibility/Screening. According to CUP evaluation criteria, the proposed use must
be judged to be compatible with surrounding uses. As shown on the submitted site plan,
the proposed accessory building is to lie more than 30 feet from the subject site's southern
and western lot lines. Considering that these setbacks are triple that required by
ordinance and that a row of trees (species not identified) exists to the west (of the
structure), the proposed use is considered compatible with the area in which it is proposed.
CONCLUSION
Based on the preceding review, our office recommends approval of the requested
conditional use permit subject to the conditions listed in the Executive Summary of this
report.
PC: Elaine Beatty
Andy MacArthur
Larry Koshak
Jerry Olson
Greg Paumen
5
EXHIBIT A - SITE LOCATIO
vy a*" -,1j �ze 1 y
9
2 JTRF
%J0nUn, .�,,N
,,,,, I ,0 son -.30
Got" 13 3 3 4 �' p,x 1on�10
pow12
,,,a 16 1 po.a 5 /„m 13g 14
%10.10 - ,,,a
-ESCH ESTATES 3120406
,,,1a 1 4
:,a �,a �� EJ0'0 � 7
21 #� 19 ' 6 NF OI #mm2
5 3 �21
7 a Oq}• 6 po, sJ po,mo lao,c,o
4 � 03 7 ° � � ��` � ,=Q,° °° 1 ��� � 6
� T'. � � ' 7 �op
3 3
+� 'd 2 pass 2nd ADD ON Poo 10 �� pm ,00,aea 7
180 p+ 8
Q,z,o p16 15 p,w #3130 p,1a 11 po,a7
w-sa #3170910-z
Z p m 7937-m
18 17 — 14 13 t 2f"120 "° 9 1 p°'°4°8
< — 78th 5 4
N.E.STREET
s s 44 z R
W 1 2 3 — —4 —5 '''`` 7 —8 —9 —10 -11 12 13 14 15
01-30 z
µmo µow Nom µos, µDeo ?jip?d:r µmo µ� µ,Do
µno µ1m µ,z ,H,a µiso
SITE
(282,00
/282100
EXHIBIT B - DETAILED SITE LOCATION
FROM : CITY OF,OTSEGO
w
rl
i11� g
T �
uTrt;�r
S7oa448
Wrt. 17, e IU; -5,�H`I r Z
PHONE NO. 612 441 4414
w-
�0 �"� iRuctvtt iJ ��
w�,a
s, aAr;E
I I f i Jop
r�ny
'Ew'snNJ�
.G �rdl1_
STOR+6E
-CAR
A, TAcHCD
.. c1t
bNVE _x_
a
X_
EXHIBIT C - SITE PL
AN
INC
MEMORANDUM
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
RE:
FILE NO:
NORTHWEST ASSOCIATED CONSULTANTS
COMMUNITY PLANNING - DESIGN - MARKET RESEARCH
Otsego Planning Commission
Bob Kirmis / David Licht
5 May1997
Otsego - Zoning Ordinance: Building Relocations
176.08 - 97.05
Attached please find a draft amendment to the Zoning Ordinance which would allow
building relocations via administrative rather than conditional use permit.
At the 28 April meeting of the City Council, staff raised question as to the intended
applicability of the City's building relocation requirements. As you are aware, the
relocation of a building or structure within the City currently requires the processing of a
conditional use permit. Specific question was raised by staff as to whether the current
conditional use permit is desired to apply to newly constructed homes assembled off site
(i.e., replacement manufactured homes).
Considering that the City of Otsego is characterized by "mobile home" subdivisions,
replacement manufactured homes are commonly processed by the Building Inspector
(approximately five per year). As a matter of standard practice, such manufactured home
replacements have not been processed by a conditional use permit but rather simple
building permit issuance.
Technically speaking, this practice does not meet the strict letter of the Ordinance.
According to the City Building Inspector, the past practice of exempting replacement
manufactured homes from building relocation CUP requirements has been based on the
following rationale:
5775 WAYZATA BOULEVARD, SUITE 555 ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA 554 1 6
PHONE 6 1 2-595-9636 FAX 6 1 2-595-9837
1. The replacement homes are "nevi' and meet all applicable Building Code
requirements.
2. New, on-site construction does not require the processing of a conditional use
permit. In terms of actual final home product, little difference exists between off-site
and on-site construction.
3. The costs associated with the processing of a conditional use permit may
discourage property owners from replacing dilapidated manufactured homes.
In informal consideration of this matter, the City Council has initiated a Zoning Ordinance
amendment which would make building relocations an administrative approval.
It was generally concluded that potential adverse impacts of such relocations may be
satisfactorily addressed through the existing performance standards and security
requirements (to be retained).
For reference purposes, proposed ordinance text modifications have been highlighted.
This item is scheduled for public hearing on 21 May.
PC: Elaine Beatty
Andy MacArthur
Larry Koshak
DRAFT - DRAFT - DRAFT
CITY OF OTSEGO
WRIGHT COUNTY, MINNESOTA
ORDINANCE NO. 97 -
AN ORDINANCE ADDRESSING PROCESSING REQUIREMENTS FOR BUILDING
RELOCATIONS.
THE CITY OF OTSEGO ORDAINS:
Section 1. Section 20-19 of the Otsego Zoning Ordinance (Building Relocations)
is hereby amended to read as follows:
20-19-1: REVIEW PROCESS: The relocation of any building or structure on a lot or
onto another lot within the City shall be subject to the rii
requirements, regulations and conditions oSeetion 4,
f
SO
Qr>9''dr'€sa Permit of
: ..:::....:..........::::::::::::::::: this Chapter as well as Section 20-19-2
below, of this Section.
20-19-2: PERFORMANCE STANDARDS: The following performance standards
shall apply:
A. Upon relocation, the building shall comply with the applicable requirements
of the State Uniform Building Code.
B. - The proposed relocated building shall comply with the character of the
neighborhood in which it is being relocated as determined by the City
Council.
C. The relocated use will not result in a depreciation of neighborhood or
adjacent property values.
D. The relocated structure shall be similar to the market valuation of adjacent
principal structures as determined by the City or County Assessor.
E. The relocated structure shall be ready for occupancy within six (6) months
from the date of location on the site.
20-19-3: PERFORMANCE SECURITY: A performance security shall be provided to
the City as specified in Section 20-4-7 of this Chapter.
Section 2. This ordinance shall become effective immediately upon its passage
and publication.
ADOPTED by the Otsego City Council this day of
ATTEST:
in
CITY OF OTSEGO
Larry Fournier, Mayor
Elaine Beatty, City Clerk/Zoning Administrator
2
1997.