Agenda - Planning Commission - 03/02/1998

Home

Page 2 February 25, 1998 Z.B. Signs -- City denies permit to rebuild billboard damaged by storm Universal Outdoor Inc. v. City of Cottage Grove, Court of Appeals of Minnesota, No. C7-97-J347 (Minnesota) 1998 Universal Outdoor Inc. owned a legal, nonconforming billboard in the city of Cottage Grove, Minn. Universal applied to the city for a permit to rebuild the billboard after it was damaged by a storm. The city zoning ordinance prohibited the reconstruction of nonconforming billboards that were damaged if the cost of repairs was more than 50 percent of the sign's fair market value. The city building inspector found the .damage to the sign was greater than 50 percent of its fair market value, so the sign couldn't be rebuilt. The city refused to issue the permit, and Universal appealed. · Ufiiversal appealed to court, where its appraiser presented evidence that the sign's fair market value was between $60,000 and $65,000 before the windstorm. The appraiser's calculation included all reconstruction costs and the income the sign generated. The appraiser estimated it would cost about $6,675 to repair the sign. The court awarded Universal judgment without a trial. It' found that based on the difference between the sign's fair market value and the cost to repair it, the Image didn't exceed 50 percent of the sign's value. '~ he city appealed. DECISION: Reversed, returned to the trial court. The case was returned to the trial court for it to properly determine the fair market value of Universal's sign and whether the damage to the sign was 50 percent or more of that value. The cou. rt mistakenly adopted a calculation of fair market value that included the sign's'ability to generate income, and then compared that value to the cost of repairing the physical structure. Including income potential in determining the Sign's fair market value but not in determining the amount of damage would .. always result in a fair market value that exceeded by more than 50 percent any possible damage to the structure itself. This would effectively guarantee the perpetual.life of a nonconforming billboard. Because the city ordinance referred to both value and damage of the sign, the replacement cost approach to fair market value would better effectuate the policy behind the ordinance. If, however, the trial court used the income approach in calculating fair market value, it also had to consider the storm's effect on income potential in determining whether the damage was 50 percent or more of market value. Home Business -- Is fence construction business 'customary home occupation'? Saglibene v. Baum, Supreme Cottrt of New York, Appellate Division, Second Department, No. 96-09506 (New York) 1998 The city of New Rochelle, N.Y., issued Saglibene a criminal summons for