03-18-02 PCITEM 3.1.
"alkTHWIST ASSOCkAut4 Co"3umkHTS" INC.
5775 Wayzata Boulevard, Suite 555, St. Louis Park, MN 55416
Telephone: 952.595.9636 Facsimile: 952.595.9837 planners@nacplanning.com
MEMORANDUM
TO: Otsego Mayor and City Council
Otsego Planning Commission
FROM: Daniel Licht
RE: Otsego - Benson Rezoning/Subdivision/CUP
REPORT DATE: 5 March 2002 APPLICATION DATE: 14 February 2002
NAC FILE: 176.02 - 02.05 CITY FILE: 2002 -
BACKGROUND
Ms. Betty Benson has been working to divide her property along Mason Avenue into two
lots since 2000. The purpose of the division is to allow for construction of one new
dwelling and the sale of the existing home to her daughter and son-in-law. The property
is currently zoned A-1, General Agriculture District and guided for continued agriculture
uses by the Comprehensive Plan.
Part of Ms. Benson's efforts to divide her property involved acquisition of land from the
property to the north such that the area of her land was at least 20 acres. Under the four
dwellings per 40 acres allowed by the Comprehensive Plan for parcels with street frontage,
20 acres is the minimum necessary to allow for two dwelling sites.
With the additional land acquired, the property must be rezoned to A-2 District and divided
by a preliminary and final plat. The applicant is also requesting approval of a CUP to allow
for the keeping of horses within the A-2 District.
Exhibits:
A. Site Location
B. Survey
Page 1 of 6
Zoning. The A-1 District, which the subject site is zoned, allows for development at a one -
per -forty density. To allow for development at four -per -forty densities as allowed by the
Comprehensive Plan, it is necessary to rezone to A-2 District.
Lot Design. Within the A-2 District, the minimum lot size is one acre, minimum width of
150 feet, and minimum depth of 150 feet. The two proposed parcels conform to these
requirements. There is an issue with the common side lot line between the two parcels,
however, which "jogs" at a distance 87 feet back from Mason Avenue.
Section 21-7-4.6 of the Subdivision Ordinance requires that side lot lines be at right angles
to streets. The purpose of the proposed lot design is to accommodate an existing
accessory building which would be bisected by a straight lot line. According to the survey,
there are four existing detached accessory buildings that would be within the north parcel.
Section 20-16-4.13.6 of the Zoning Ordinance limits the number of accessory buildings on
this parcel to two. As such, at two of the existing detached accessory buildings would be
legal non -conforming uses. In this regard, our office recommends that the existing shed
be removed and the side lot line drawn at a right angle to Mason Avenue.
Keeping Horses. Keeping of horses within the A-2 District is allowed as a conditional
use and being considered for each lot. The minimum lot size for keeping horses within the
A-2 District is 2.5 acres, which the two proposed lots exceed. Additional considerations
are as follows, which should be incorporated as part of the CUP approval.
• Buildings for stabling horses may not be closer than 200 feet to any property zoned
R-1 District. There are no properties zoned R-1 within 200 feet of the two lots.
• The maximum number of horses stabled on each lot may not exceed one horse per
acre or ten horses, whichever is least.
• Shelter equal to 100 square feet of area per horse is required
• Manure may not be stockpiled or applied within 300 feet of an adjacent residence,
300 feet from ditches, lakes and creeks or 200 feet from a private well as regulated
by Section 20-27-10 of the Zoning Ordinance.
• Hobby farm uses are subject to the accessory building size and material regulations
for residential uses outlined in Section 20-16-4 of the Zoning Ordinance.
Preliminary/Final Plat. Section 21-2-1.0 of the Subdivision Ordinance allows division of
one parcel into two lots by administrative action only if the original land has not be part of
such a minor subdivision for the last five years. As addition of the 3.3 acre parcel added
to the property bringing the total to 20.0 acres was done as a minor subdivision, this
current request cannot be processed administratively. The subdivision will need to be
submitted in the form of a preliminary and final plat as outlined by Section 6 of the
Subdivision Ordinance. Issues pertinent to the preliminary and final plat are as follows:
Page 2 of 6
• Right -of -Way. The preliminary and final plat should provide right-of-wayfor Mason
Avenue. The width of the right-of-way dedication should be subject to review by the
City Engineer.
• Easements. Section 21-7-15 of the Subdivision Ordinance requires that perimeter
easements be provided for each lot. The easement is to be 10 feet wide, but may
overlay common lot lines (5 feet each side). Easements are also required overall
wetlands, watercourses, or waterbodies. All easements are subject to review and
approval of the City Engineer.
• Park and Trail Dedication. The proposed division will establish one new building
site, triggering park dedication requirements. As no parks or trails are planned that
effect the subject site, satisfaction of park dedication requirements will be a cash
fee in lieu of land. The current cash fee is $1,075, which must be paid prior to
recording the final plat.
• Utilities. The two lots are to be served by on-site septic and well systems. The
septic and well systems to serve the new dwelling will be subject to review and
approval of the Building Official. The well and septic system serving the existing
home will also be subject to review because of the property transfer. As such, the
Building Official should determine that adequate area exists for all on-site systems
as part of the preliminary and final plat.
Criteria. Sections 20-3-21 and 20-4-21 of the Zoning Ordinance outline the criteria on
which the Planning Commission and City Council are to base their decision for the
requested zoning amendment and CUP. These criteria are (but not limited to) the
following:
1. The proposed action's consistency with the specific policies and provisions of the
official City Comprehensive Plan.
Comment: The Comprehensive Plan outlined a limited density allowance intended
to provide opportunities for rural character development in areas not planned for
sanitary sewer service. The proposed development is consistent with a density of
four units per 40 acres as allowed for parcels with street frontage within the
Agriculture Preserve area.
2. The proposed use's compatibility with present and future land uses of the area.
Comment. This area along Mason Avenue has developed with several large rural
lot parcels with single family homes. The proposed lot division and keeping of
horses is consistent with this character.
3. The proposed use's conformity with all performance standards contained in the
Zoning Ordinance (i.e., parking, loading, noise, etc.).
Page 3 of 6
7
Comment: The proposed division and keeping of horses will conform to all
applicable requirements.
4. The proposed use's effect upon the area in which it is proposed.
Comment: The proposed division and keeping horses is not expected to cause any
negative effects as it is consistent with the framework of the Comprehensive Plan
and character of the area.
5. The proposed use's impact upon property values of the area in which it is proposed.
Comment: Although no study has been completed, the proposed use is not
anticipated to negatively impact area property values.
6. Traffic generation by the proposed use in relation to the capabilities of streets
serving the property.
Comment: Mason Avenue has necessary capacity for any additional traffic created
by the property division and construction of another single family home.
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.
Comment: The proposed use is not anticipated to have a negative impact to the
City's service capacity.
CONCLUSION
The proposed division of the applicant's property into two parcels and keeping of horses
on the properties is generally consistent with the provisions of the Comprehensive Plan
and Zoning Ordinance. Our only recommendation contrary to what is proposed is that a
preliminary/final plat be prepared which provides for a straight side lot line. This change
likely will require removal of an existing legal non -conforming accessory building.
Decision 1 - Zoning Map Amendment
A. Motion to approve a Zoning Map amendment rezoning the subject site from A-1
District to A-2 District based upon a finding that the request is consistent with the
policies of the Comprehensive Plan.
B. Motion to deny the application based upon a finding that the request is inconsistent
with the policies of the Comprehensive Plan.
Page 4 of 6
C. Motion to table the request.
Decision 2 - Preliminary and Final Plat
A. Motion to approve a Preliminary and Final Plat for a two -lot subdivision, subject to
the following conditions:
1 A preliminary plat and final plat that includes all of the information required
by Section 6 of the Subdivision Ordinance is submitted and approved by City
Staff.
2. The common side lot line is revised to be a straight line at a right angle to
Mason Avenue over its entire length, which may require removal of an
existing detached accessory building to meet applicable lot width and
setback requirements.
3. Dedication of additional right-of-way for Mason Avenue is subject to review
and approval of the City Engineer.
4. The provision of easements is subject to review and approval of the City
Engineer.
5. The applicant pay a park and trait dedication fee in lieu of land equal to
$1,075.
6. On-site septic and well systems shall be subject to review and approval of
the City Building Official.
7. Comments of other City Staff.
B. Motion to deny the request based upon a finding that it is inconsistent with the
Comprehensive Plan, Zoning Ordinance, and Subdivision Ordinance.
Decision 3 - Keeping of Horses CUP
A. Motion to approve a CUP allowing the keeping of horses on two lots within the A-2
District, subject to the following conditions:
1. The maximum number of horses stabled on each lot may not exceed one
horse per acre or ten horses, whichever is least.
2. Shelter equal to 100 square feet of area per horse is required.
Page 5 of 6
3. Manure may not be stockpiled or applied within 300 feet of an adjacent
residence, 300 feet from ditches, lakes and creeks or 200 feet from a private
well as regulated by Section 20-27-10 of the Zoning Ordinance.
4. Buildings for keeping of horses are subject to the accessory building size
and material regulations for residential uses outlined in Section 20-16-4 of
the Zoning Ordinance.
5. Comments of other City Staff.
PC Mike Robertson
Judy Hudson
Andy MacArthur
Ron Wagner
Betty Benson
Page 6 of 6
BASE WAP DATA PROVIDED BY
Haka
hinA$$ac.ArodeIn�.
PREPARED OCTOBER 2001
NOTE:
THIS MAP IS FOR PLANNING
PURPOSES ONLY AND SHOULD
NOT BE USED FOR EXACT
MEASUREMENT.
SCALE:
im e ie
NORTH
CITY OF
OTSEGO
ON THE GREAT RIVER ROAD
SITE PLAN #2
for
BETTY BENSON
i
j
S
wAn¢ x. u w EEEr
0 W }OC Jw
TOTAL AREA - 20.0001 ACRES
DErgortt
Rtar MO~N; FOUND
i Q mm MONI.IVENT SEE B 4APP:0 In •LOR sum
i
REVISE LOT LINE
N 8913'4D' w 444.39
I
� ' s
J
I
1 �
I
'
h 8 ;
Iggl O DB fOUMwfsl BWglfq IK JOYINEASIO M
r xW EovxFR er nq xr r/..p. /20W
♦ a
p __NO
YCN�IF II. IWI I}( q6E ]{ AL SO IgRI er INF FLAIMW(JI OWRlER
3? 0
[. IM MMIHaf (puR2q er 3KIIGv I,, IWq. ISI q4F }J
EAOIAIT OIICI►IMN__I____2
e99.99
Fs.— — _ - },.J.— _--_Z'ti.
------s�===_=_=_�—
rEFa ..YEnn,s
W !/t a nB K rp il.
1..GEJ
IJgtq "' 0
I
.\
WOB.
IN b
- S 8974 5t E 971.90 __
R I b $
z z
y CT ro PLWC Mar Or IVIS AND EASi:ENTS OF RECORD F ANY.
y26 C �
I
n ` • _ .�y
i
fYRE EASEMENTS on RECORD PLAT ARE SNOAN ON Res SURIEY MESS
ADWOOaWNTA RON OF
E v
OIWR EAS WNTS EX RECORD ARE PROMDEO
b.
:p
I n,LY} parufy tear Inr., ..]. pr an o r.pwt wa p. epw ed by m
dir.
Yb
1und.r " aupw ri Gluon o that I oma aur} M.7 of ar e0 Land
1,-.,d.,
under the,1 on
IOW. of the Stote of Minne.ot0
1D nh Y. T.P. W.. DOM
TAYLOR LAND SURY£YA45, INC.
" `- " ' `• '
N0D'J03O'E 91/.10 MEAS -_. _--
...
—D.1A/10R rf701
I t'i t'EE P an"J'oE
61.00 DEED D. KERN
/42 I 1 1 RV 100 FT ..f/)O/A2 ~� tAW"
Hakanson
Anderson 3601 Thurston Avenue, Suite 101, Anoka, MN 55303
ASSOC., Inc. Phone:763/427-5860 Fax:763/427-0520
March 14, 2002
Mike Robertson
City of Otsego
8899 Nashua Avenue NE
Otsego, MN 55330
Re: Betty Benson Lot Split
Section 18 & 18 T121N R23W
Dear Mike:
We have reviewed Betty Benson's application for a lot split, rezoning and a Conditional
Use Permit. We recommend, as a condition of approval, the applicant deed 40 -feet of
right-of-way along the Mason Avenue Street Frontage. Mason Avenue currently has 33'
of prescriptive easement for roadway purposes only. 40' of right-of-way will allow for
the City to one day expand Mason Avenue to a collector type street and allow for City
and private utility installation in the street boulevards.
Also, a 50' drainage easement is recommended centered across Otsego Creek where the
creek crosses the property. The creek crosses in the southwest portion of the property.
This will allow future City projects to maintain or upgrade the existing creek.
We have no other comments and recommend approval contingent upon the above
changes.
If you have any questions, you may contact me at 763-427-5860.
Sincerely,
Hakanson Anderson Associates, Inc.
10
on ..J.
_
RJW:dlc
cc: Judy Hudson, Clerk
Betty Benson
Dan Licht, NAC
Taylor Land Surveyors
Civil 'Municipal ��
G:\Municipal\AOTSEGO\2500\2002\ot2500mr.docEngineering
Land Surveying for
ITEM 3.3.
5775 Wayzata Boulevard, Suite 555, St. Louis Park, MN 55416
Telephone: 952.595.9636 Facsimile: 952.595.9837 planners@nacplanning.com
PLANNING REPORT
TO: Otsego Mayor and City Council
Otsego Planning Commission
FROM: Daniel Licht
RE: Otsego - Dale Beaudry CUP
REPORT DATE: 4 March 2002
NAC FILE: 176.02 - 02.06
BACKGROUND
Mr. Dale Beaudry is proposing to construct a single family home on a five acre parcel of
land located south of 80"' Street and west of Mac Iver Avenue (see Exhibit A). The
property is zoned A-1 District and guided by the Comprehensive Plan for continued
agriculture uses.
The property does not have any frontage to a public street. Access is provided by
easement over a 66 foot wide parcel (owned by the applicant's brother Mr. Lloyd Beaudry)
that extends approximately 1,200 feet back from Mac Iver Avenue.
Without public street frontage, the lot is non -conforming with regards to access and the
minimum 150 -foot lot width required in the A-1 District. Section 20-15-2.A of the Zoning
Ordinance allows construction of a single family dwelling on a vacant non -conforming lot
with less than 75 percent of the minimum required frontage by conditional use permit
(CUP).
ANALYSIS
Access. Section 20-21-4.H.2 of the Zoning Ordinance requires all lots to have access
directly onto an abutting improved public street. As this property does not abut a public
right-of-way or improved street, it is non -conforming. In considering a CUP to allow
construction of a single family dwelling on the property, provision of permanent, adequate
access is of primary concern.
Access to the property is provided b
y a lot fine of the subject site and connects of Ma oot b Iver 'A -foot parcel that abuts the south
Beaudry. The applicant has indicated that the 66 -foot venue, which is o
by an access easement allowing access to the caned by Lloyd
by 1,200 -foot parcel ,encumbered
the other properties abutting it. Based upon the 66 -foot
widsubject site as well as some, but not all, of
established with some forethought as a future street Corr doth, itr� No other practical use for
a
the parcel exists based upon its dimensions. appears this parcel was
City Staff recommends that the 66 -foot by 1,200-footarc
way as a condition of the CUP approval.P el be dedicated as public right-of-
Althoughconstructed at this time, the provision of right-of-way a street would not need to be
provided to the subject properties and other properties in
y will ensure that adequate access is
frontage to a public street. The dedication of the � the area
Opportunities for future street connections to the �, which lack direct
right -of --way would also
single outlet. If dedication of 66 -foot b Provide
the applicant must provide the easementest that would eliminate depth re ,
Y 1,200 foot parcel as right-of-way is not required
documents for review and approval.
Buildable Area. The subject parcel has dimensions
acres. It is our understanding that additional land will be attach
of 400 -feet by arc feet or 5.05
Beaudry's property to the west as ed to this parcel from Lloyd
Part of a sale to Farr Development.
Section 20-51-6. of the Zoning Ordinance requires properties in the A-1 District to have
a minimum width of 150 feet minimum depth of 150 feet a
Based upon the definition of lot width
non -conforming.
M requires frontage o' a public treet one acre.
the lot is
Approval of a CUP to construct a single family home on th
finding that there an adequate building envelope within required
and dimensions of the properte Parcel must be based upon a
y, the is more than adequate area to accommodate acks. Given the area
family dwelling. It is recommended that the south lot line
the "front", with side and rear lot lines determined accordingly.a single
of the parcel be designated as
CUP Criteria. In considering
Council are to base their decision upon appl(bust not I S' the Planning
20-4-2.F of the Zoning Ordinance: united to) the crite Commission ed in Section
City
tion
1 The proposed action's consistency with the specifies
OffCity Comprehensive Plan. P �c Policies and provisions of the
Comment: The Comprehensive Plan directs thatalllandi
streets. While the present situation may accessed
opportunity to improve on a non -conforming be viewed as a n existing condition, public
parcel is acquired and dedicated as Public right -of -
Parcel provided if the 66 -foot wide
parcel indicate consideration was given to this corridor being he dimensions of this
streets. Dedication Of the right-of-way would ensure adequate provided for future
q ate access to the subject
Page 2 of 4
site, other parcels covered by the existing easement, and those which are not
covered by the easement. Further, dedication of the right-of-way would provide
opportunities for improved circulation in the area at such time as the area to the
west develops.
2. The proposed use's compatibility with present and future land uses of the area.
Comment. The area surrounding the subject site is essentially rural. The rural
character of the area is likely to change significantly if the City proceeds with plans
for a west sanitary sewer service district, which includes the subject parcel. The
land immediately to the west has already been sold to a developer and is within the
first phase of the service area. However, the proposed single family dwelling would
be compatible with the existing rural or potential urban character of the area.
3. The proposed use's conformity with all performance standards contained in the
Zoning Ordinance (i.e., parking, loading, noise, etc.).
Comment: The proposed use will conform with all applicable performance
standards.
4. The proposed use's effect upon the area in which it is proposed.
Comment: Construction of a single family dwelling on the subject parcel creates a
greater need for access to ensure safety. To this end, dedication of public right-of-
way that would serve this and other parcels in the area is abetter long-term solution
than the current easement arrangement.
5. The proposed use's impact upon property values of the area in which it is proposed.
Comment: Although no study has been completed, the proposed use is not
anticipated to negatively impact area property values.
6. Traffic generation by the proposed use in relation to the capabilities of streets
serving the property.
Comment: Area streets have adequate capacity to allow for construction of single
family dwelling on the subject site.
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.
Comment: The proposed use is not anticipated to have a negative impact to the
City's service capacity. Construction of a single family dwelling will require provision
of on-site septic and well systems, subject to approval of the Building Official.
Page 3 of 4
CONCLUSION
The applicant's proposal to construct a single family dwelling on the subject site is
contingent upon providing access. City staff recommends that the applicant acquire and
dedicate the existing 66 -foot by 1,200 -foot as public right-of-way as a better long-term
solution than an access easement. Provision of a public right-of-way where one appears
to have been intended ensures access to the subject site and other area properties while
providing area circulation. Aside from access, there are no other issues created by
developing the subject site with a single family dwelling.
A. Motion to approve a conditional use permit allowing construction of a single family
dwelling on a non -conforming lot, subject to the following provisions:
The applicant acquire and dedicate the 66 -foot by 1,200 -foot parcel as
public right-of-way. Interim use of the right-of-way prior to construction of a
public street will require an agreement with the City.
2 For purposes of defining setbacks, the south lot line shall be designated as
the front lot line if no other lot line abuts a public right-of-way.
3. The site is found to be capable of supporting primary and secondary on-site
septic systems and an on-site well, subject to review and approval of the
Building Official.
4 Comment of other City Staff.
B. Motion to deny the application based upon a finding that the request is inconsistent
with the Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Ordinance.
C. Motion to table the application.
pc. Mike Robertson
Judy Hudson
Andy MacArthur
Ron Wagner
Dale Beaudry
Lloyd Beaudry
Page 4 of 4
BASE MIP DATA PROVIDED BY
Hakanson
I���.
PREPARED OCTOBER 2001
NOTE:
THIS MAP IS FOR PLANNING
PURPOSES ONLY AND SHOULD
NOT BE USED FOR EXACT
MEASUREMENT.
SCALE:
NORTH
CITY OF
OTSEGO
ON THE GREAT RIVER ROAD
EXHIBIT A-2
Hakanson
Anderson 3601 Thurston Avenue, Suite 101, Anoka, MN 55303
Assoc., Inc. Phone: 763/427-5860 Fax: 763/427-0520
March 14, 2002
Mike Robertson
City of Otsego
8899 Nashua Avenue NE
Otsego, MN 55330
Re: Mr. Dale Beaudry's CUP Application Parcel #251406
Dear Mike:
We have reviewed the Conditional Use Permit applied for by Mr. Dale Beaudry to allow
a home to be built without the required minimum street frontage or a direct access to a
public street.
We have reviewed the City Planner's report and agree with the recommendation that the
applicant acquire and dedicate the 66 -foot by 1200 -foot parcel (25 12 10) as public right-
of-way. The property is within Phase 1 of the proposed West Sanitary Sewer District and
dedication of parcel #251210 would help facilitate an efficient road and utility system.
If you have any questions, you may contact me at 763-427-5860.
Sincerely,
Hakanson Anderson Associates, Inc.
,V �
Ronald J.a ner, P
RJW:dlc
cc: Judy Hudson, Clerk
Andy MacArthur, City Attorney
Dan Licht, City Planner
Dale Beaudry
Lloyd Beaudry
Civil 6- Municipal
Engineering
G:\Municipal\AOTSEGO\2500\2002\oQ500mr1 doc
Land Surveying far
ITEM 3.4.
HORTIAWItST A$SOCM*-tit4 CONSULItANTS,, M"C.
5775 Wayzata Boulevard, Suite 555, St. Louis Park, MN 55416
Telephone: 952.595.9636 Facsimile: 952.595.9837 planners@nacplanning.com
MEMORANDUM
TO: Otsego Mayor and City Council
Otsego Planning Commission
FROM: Daniel Licht
DATE: 5 March 2002
RE: Otsego - Zoning Ordinance; Business/Industrial Wall Signs
FILE NO.: 176.08 - 02.05
BACKGROUND
The City of Otsego received a request from Godfathers Pizza to install a second wail sign
on the facade of their building facing Parrish Avenue. The sign is to identify a second
restaurant franchise that the operator has included within the building in addition to the
existing pizza franchise. The introduction of this second restaurant chain has not changed
the way the building functions internally or resulted in any expansion.
Section 20-37-5.C.4.b of the Zoning Ordinance limits the number of wall signs to one per
building, except for corner lots which may have two signs (one on each frontage). Under
these provisions, Godfathers would not be allowed any additional signs beyond the
existing sign above the doorway.
The City Administrator directed our office to prepare a draft amendment of the Zoning
Ordinance that would allowfor additional wall signs. This item is for Planning Commission
review and discussion and recommendation to the City Council.
Exhibits:
A. Section 20-37-5.C.4
B. Ordinance Amendment
Page 1 of 3
ANALYSIS
Existing Ordinance. For single occupancy buildings, wall mounted business identification
signs are regulated in a number of ways under the existing Ordinance. First, the total area
of all signs, including freestanding and wall signs, may not exceed 15 percent of the wall
area of the front facade (or front and side facades on a corner lot). Second, the area of
any individual wall sign may not exceed 100 square feet. Third, only one wall sign is
allowed per building (except for a corner lot where two signs are allowed, one per street
frontage).
For Godfathers, the limit on the number of wall signs does not allow the owner to identify
all of the franchises within the building with wall signs. It would be possible to identify one
franchise on a freestanding sign and the other will a wall sign, or to use a common name
for the business making the franchise names incidental.
For information purposes, multiple tenant commercial buildinc . "iere ear,-. - ,,ant has a
separate exterior entrance are allowed one wall sign per ter:. ,.
Alternative Regulation. While many communities regulate tr,- number of v, all signs for
single occupancy buildings, the City of Plymouth does not. Rather. Plymouth limits wall
sic = only to one wall (or two walls on a corner !ct) and the area as a percentage of the
fac e wall. In response to the Godfathe,'s request, it was suggested that similar
allcwance could be considered as an ammo idment of the Zoning Ordinance.
Canopy, or Marque,,
td ittg ,
Wall, canopy, or
marquee signs shall be permitted only on one facade fronting a public
street, except in the case of a corner lot or through lot where wall
signs may be installed on two facades fronting public streets
Individual wall sign area shall not exceed one hundred (100) square
feet.
The language above would allowfor more than one wall sign to be mounted on a building
facade facing a public street. The number and area wall signs would be limited by the 15
percent limitation for total site signage (freestanding and wall signs) and limit that no
individual wall sign exceed 100 square feet.
In the case of Godfathers, the front facade measures 1,648 square feet. The total sign
area for freestanding and wall signs is 15 percent of the facade area or 247 square feet.
There is an existing freestanding sign that has an area of 100 square feet. As such, the
area available for wall signs would be 147 square feet.
Page 2 of 3
Under the existing Ordinance, only one wall sign is allowed and it may not exceed 100
square feet. Under the draft language above, Godfathers would be allowed their existing
Godfathers Pizza" sign, which measures 44 square feet and an additional 103 square feet
of signs.
CONCLUSION
An amendment to the sign regulations within the Zoning Ordinance is being considered
as an accommodation to single occupancy businesses within the City that would allow
more than one wall sign to identify their operation or services. Determining an appropriate
limit or control over the number of wall signs is an aesthetic issue impacting community
character. Therefore, it is a policy issue to be rest . � by the Planning Commission and
City Council. Our office does not make any recommendation as to the proposed
amendment.
pc. Mike Robertson
Judy Hud ---;
Ant MacArthur
Rudy Thibodeau
Page 3 of 3
b. The sign area shall not exceed thirty-two (32) square feet of space on
each side.
C. The sign shall not be illuminated.
14 d. The sign shall not exceed fifteen (15) feet in height.
14 3. Real Estate Development Project Signs. Signs involving temporary
identification of a new subdivision of development located upon the project
site.
a. Each subdivision or development shall be allowed the following signs
by permit:
(1) One (1) sign not to exceed sixty-four (64) square feet in
surface area and a maximum height of fifteen (15) feet, except
signs abutting principal arterial streets which may not exceed
one hundred (100) square feet in surface area and twenty (20)
feet in height.
(2) Directional signs as authorized by Section 20-37-5.B.4 of this
section.
b. The permit shall be renewable annually and conditioned upon
documentation allowing such sign or structure by the property owner
upon which it is to be located, and a vacancy rate of the subdivision
greater than ten (10) percent.
Vim— 4. Business Identification Signs. Total sign area shall not exceed fifteen (15)
percent of the total front building facade except that both front and side
facades shall be counted on a corner lot. Signs chosen to comprise the total
gross sign area shall be consistent with the following provisions:
19/39 a. Freestanding. Not more than one (1) double sided freestanding sign.
Sign area may not exceed one hundred (100) square feet each side
with a maximum height of twenty (20) feet, except that for signs within
the Interstate 94 Corridor Sign District, the maximum height shall be
forty-five (45) feet.
�– b. Wall, Canopy or Marquee. Not more than one (1) wall, canopy or
marquee sign per building. However, on corner lots, two (2) such
signs shall be allowed, one (1) per street frontage. Individual sign
area shall not exceed one hundred (100) square feet.
C. Advertising messages shall not comprise more than twenty-five (25)
percent of any freestanding or wall sign.
37-10 EXHIBIT A
ORDINANCE NO.:
CITY OF OTSEGO
COUNTY OF WRIGHT, MINNESOTA
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 37 OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE (SIGNS) FOR
THE NUMBER OF WALL, CANOPY OR MARQUEE SIGNS ALLOWED WITHIN
BUSINESS AND INDUSTRIAL ZONING DISTRICTS.
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF OTSEGO DOES HEREBY ORDAIN:
Section 1. Section 20-37-5.C.4.b of the Zoning Ordinance is hereby amended to
read as follows:
b. Wall, Canopy, or Marquee. Wall, canopy, or marquee signs shall be
permitted only on one facade fronting a public street, except in the
case of a corner lot or through lot where wall signs may be installed
on two facades fronting a public street. Individual wall sign area shall
not exceed one hundred (100) square feet.
Section 2. This Ordinance shall become effective immediately upon its passage
and publication.
PASSED by the Otsego City Council this day of 2002.
CITY OF OTSEGO
BY:
Larry Fournier, Mayor
ATTEST:
Judy Hudson, Zoning Administrator/City Clerk
Page 1 of 1
EXHIBIT B
ITEM 3-�
"OST"WItST A430CIAxI110 CONSUILTAN7tS,, INC,
5775 Wayzata Boulevard, Suite 555, St. Louis Park, MN 55416
Telephone: 952.595.9636 Facsimile: 952.595.9837 planners@nacplanning.com
MEMORANDUM
TO: Otsego Planning Commission
FROM: Daniel Licht
DATE: 5 March 2002
RE: Otsego - Planning Commission By -Laws
FILE NO.: 176.08 - 02.09
This memorandum forwards a revised version of the Planning Commission's By -Laws. The
revisions include the items discussed at the Planning Commission meetings on February
18, 2002 and March 4, 2002. We have also taken some liberty in re -organizing the By -
Laws such that related provisions are grouped together in a more clear order.
This information is to be discussed at the Planning Commission meeting on March 18,
2002. If the Planning Commission approves of the changes, they must be adopted by a
motion with five positive votes. Upon adoption by the Planning Commission, the updated
By -Laws require approval of the City Council before taking effect.
PC. Mike Robertson
Judy Hudson
Andy MacArthur
CITY OF OTSEGO
PLANNING COMMISSION
BY-LAWS
A. Organization.
1. Membership of the Commission shall consist of seven (7) members
appointed by the City Council, one (1) alternate member appointed by the
City Council, and one (1) non-voting City Council representative.
2. The Commission shall elect officers from its membership at its first meeting
in February.
3. The officers of the Planning Commission shall be:
a. Chair.
b. Vice -Chair.
4. Duties of the officers.-
a.
fficers:
a. Chair.
1. The Chair shall preside at all meetings of the Commission.
2. The Chair shall preserve order and decorum and shall decide
all questions of order.
3. The Chair shall appoint any necessary committees and shall
appoint any committees requested by a majority of the
members.
b. Vice -Chair.
1. The Vice -Chair shall preside at all meetings in the absence of
the Chair and perform such duties as requested by the Chair.
B. Work Rules.
1. There shall be two (2) regularly scheduled meetings the first and third
Monday of each month, unless an alternative is scheduled due to an
unforseen conflict or canceled by the Chair due to a lack of business items.
Notice of the change must be given communicated to members at least four
(4) days prior to the meeting date.
Page 1 of 4
3. A quorum of the Commission shall consist of four (4) members.
4. All meetings shall be open to the public.
5. A special meeting of the Planning Commission may be called by a motion of
the majority of the members stating the purpose of such meeting with written
notice posted at least twenty-four (24) hours in advance of the meeting.
6. Any site inspecting involving four (4) or more members as a group must be
scheduled and noticed as a special Planning Commission Meeting.
7. The alternate member shall sit at the Planning Commission table during any
scheduled meeting, but the alternate shall only vote if a member of the
Commission is absent.
8. A member may be excused from an individual meeting for reasons of illness,
work, or out of town trips. Notice of the member's absence must be
communicated to the City staff before 4:00 PM on the date of the meeting.
9. The order of business shall be as listed in the meeting agenda to be
prepared by the Zoning Administrator before each meeting.
10. The Zoning Administrator shall take minutes of all Commission meetings or
special meetings, which are to be distributed to the members prior to the
next Commission meeting. Approval of the minutes is by a majority of the
members present at the meeting at which the minutes are on the agenda.
Upon approval, the minutes shall be signed by the Chair and attested to by
the Zoning Administrator.
11. Motions shall be made only by persons recognized by the Chair.
12. Any resolution or motion may be withdrawn at any time before action is taken
on it.
13. When a question is under debate, no other motion shall be entertained
except to table or call for the questions, act on the question, postpone, refer
to committee, or amend. Motions shall take precedence in that order and the
first two shall be without debate.
14. All motions shall be carried by a majority vote of the members present,
except a call for the question. Any members or the Chair may call for a roll
call vote on any issue.
Page 2 of 4
15. A call for the question is not a motion, but an indication to the Chair that the
person making this statement is ready to have the motion or question acted
upon without further discussion.
16. All commission recommendations shall be sent to the City Council in written
meeting minutes and shall include a record of the division of votes on each
recommendation.
17. Any Commission member having a personal interest, a financial interest, or
a family member with a financial interest in any individual action to be
considered by the Commission shall:
a. Notify the Chair of the conflict in advance of the meeting.
b. Allow the Chair to explain the potential conflict to the Commission.
C. At the request of the Chair, the member shall excuse themselves from
the Commission in advance of the discussion and voting on this item.
18. In the event that a member is contacted prior to a Commission meeting by
a person with a concern regarding a pending issue, the member must:
a. Refrain from discussing any Planning Commission business with any
individual outside of a Planning Commission meeting. This includes
their own stand on the pending issue.
b Refrain from speculating on other Commission members' stand on the
pending issue.
19. Any Commission member who conducts themselves in a manner conflicting
with these By -Laws provides grounds for removal by the City Council.
20. Any rule not covered by these By -Laws shall be governed by Robert's Rules
of Order.
21. These By -Laws shall not be repealed or amended except by a five (5)
member vote of the Commission and after notice has been given at a
previous meeting. Changes in these By -Laws become effective upon
approval of the City Council.
Page 3 of 4
ADOPTED by the Otsego Planning Commission on this day of 2002.
Richard Nichols, Chair
ATTEST:
Judy Hudson, Zoning Administrator/City Clerk
APPROVED by the Otsego City Council on this day of 2002.
Larry Fournier, Mayor
ATTEST:
Judy Hudson, Zoning Administrator/City Clerk
Page 4 of 4