APA Minnesota

material or appearance standards for residential roofs

admin — Wed, 15 Feb 2012 02:27:07 +0000

The City of New Prague is wondering if any cities have specific material or appearance standards for residential roofs (such as restrictions on using corrugated metal on a residential home). Thanks,

Hookah Bars & Tobacco Sampling

admin — Wed, 08 Feb 2012 23:56:18 +0000

We have recently had a couple of inquiries about opening a hookah bar or lounge within the City. I am wondering how other cities within Minnesota have handled this with the smoking ban. Has your city classified it as “sampling”? Have you adopted additional land use controlsor outright prohibited sampling? Feel free to contact me at gkruschke@ci.faribault.mn.us with any information you may have. Thanks for any information you may be able to provide.

Zoning Issue Question

admin — Tue, 07 Feb 2012 22:48:46 +0000

We received an inquiry for an indoor archery facility within the City. Eventually they would like to add other retail/commercial components such as pro shop. What zoning district do other cities consider this type of use permitted—industrial or commercial? I can see the indoor archery facility as a possible permitted use in an industrial district, but the pro shop is more of a commercial use.

Urban ag issue conflicts with city regulations

admin — Tue, 07 Feb 2012 22:47:29 +0000

We have permitting issues for our hoop house and we are at a loss on how to resolve this.

Here is our story:
We are a restaurant business in Duluth Minnesota that has started an urban farm to grow some produce for the restaurant. We are located in a R1 zoning which allow for urban agriculture. We have installed a hoop house 20′ W x 32′ in which we want to operate an aquaponic system year around.

When we initially inquired about regulations and permitting, on two occasions we were told that we didn’t need a permit since the structure was dimmed ‘non-permanent’ (lacking a solid foundation and constructed of parts that can be disassembled. Car ports are in this category, sheds are not). Once the structure up and the aquaponic system in place, we called-in an inspector to get a permit to bring in the electricity from the house. This resulted in a ‘Stop Work Oder’ after a revision of the initial determination of ‘non-permanent’ structure.

To be deemed non-permanent this hoop house couldn’t be longer than 30′ (which was overlooked twice by the by the Building Safety Office, ours is 32′ or, in the case that it is longer than 30′, it couldn’t be up for more than 180 days.

At this point we cannot shorten the structure without a great expense and months of delays since the aquaponic setup is in place and occupies most of the length of the hoop house, the 4500 gal tank being in the ground.

Taking the hoop house skin off for 6 month wouldn’t make any sense.

To qualify for a permit, the structure must be certified for a snow load-bearing weight of 42 pounds per square foot. When we called the manufacturer (one of the largest in Minnesota), they told us that they wouldn’t sell us one of their hoop house if they had to certify for such a load bearing.

We could possibly, using the existing structure of the tiered aquaponic system, strengthen the roof of the hoop house ourselves, but we would have to have this certified by an engineering firm which will certainly be absolutely prohibitive.

The greatest irony at this point is that we are allowed to keep the hoop house up until May under the 180 days temporary structure provision which makes the load-bearing requirement irrelevant! In short we could keep it up every winter – regardless of the possibility (very remote for us) of someone getting crushed while sleeping under this structure during a heavy snow storm – if we take it down during the summer!

Farmers don’t seem to be facing this kind of issue. Why are we, if we are zoned for urban agriculture?

Could we get an exemption if our structure is duly insured and we signed a responsibility weaver clearing the city and county of all responsibility?

Could this be brought in front of the Building Appeal Board?

How could we get a variance?

Required clear space for fire trucks

admin — Fri, 03 Feb 2012 02:07:26 +0000

The Minnesota Fire Code clearly states that any fire apparatus access road shall have an unobstructed width of not less than 20 feet and that such width shall not be reduced by parked cars at any time. (503.2.1 and 503.5, International Fire Code.) Do any of your Cities enforce that requirement on local residential public streets that are less than 34 feet between curb faces? If not, how do you reconcile the conflict? Does your Fire Chief ever raise the issue? Do any of your Cities enforce that requirement on private residential streets? Same questions. I’ve run into this problem with a client

mixed use zoning district question

admin — Fri, 03 Feb 2012 02:06:39 +0000

The city of New Hope is considering implementing a mixed use zoning district for its city center area. As we deal with dimensional and bulk standards, we are considering implementing a Floor Area Ratio (FAR) minimum of 0.5. My question, does your community have a FAR minimum or maximum for its mixed use/downtown area, and if so what is the min/max and how has that played out while working with developers.

Much appreciated!

Sign brightness

admin — Sat, 28 Jan 2012 15:02:31 +0000

In the City of Bloomington we regulate video sign brightness to 500 Nits. However, regular signs are not regulated as to the brightness. Recently, we have a large red sign which is so bright it makes the white walls in the bedroom 400 feet away red. We are evaluating options for amendments to prohibit this from occurring. Does anyone regulate general illumination from signs and if how, how is it measured.

cost evaluation models

admin — Wed, 18 Jan 2012 01:32:41 +0000

The City of Brainerd is looking for cost evaluation models showing a breakdown of revenues and expenses for municipal services by City block or some other workable geographic area. If possible, we’d like to find a suitable method to determine the cost of providing municipal services vs. the amount of revenue received from property taxpayers to provide such services.

New Subdivision Ordinance

admin — Thu, 12 Jan 2012 04:09:08 +0000

The City of Cambridge is looking at adopting a new Subdivision Ordinance. We are interested in requiring all properties that need a building permit to re-plat or remove all old property lines (even if they are lots of record, etc.). We would like to know if there are any communities that do this and how the ordinance language reads. We would like to have the option of Minor Subdivisions where 4 or fewer lots do not require the platting process, but can just be approved administratively. Can anyone tell me how the minor subdivisions read and whether or not the old property lines truly go away without requiring them to plat (how are the smaller parcels being described when the larger parcel is a lot and block)? Thank you.

Marcia Westover, City of Cambridge

Property owners extending their mowed lawns and even gardens/fire pits/other improvements into adjacent park areas

admin — Thu, 12 Jan 2012 04:07:20 +0000

The City of New Prague has recently implemented a requirement in our Subdivision Ordinance for Park dedication that requires a developer to install permanent boundary stakes at every other lot corner which clearly identifies the area as public property. In the past we’ve had issues with adjacent property owners extending their mowed lawns and even gardens/fire pits/other improvements into park areas and this would seem to clearly identify the park boundary for both the City and adjacent property owners. What I’m wondering is if any cities that have a similar requirement would be willing to share their sign examples with me (size, text used, etc.). Thanks,

Kenneth D. Ondich

Planning Director

City of New Prague