Agenda - Council - 10/14/1997 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

CASE BILLBOARDS/NON-CONFORMING USES By: William K. Goodrich, City Attorney Background: Pursuant to City Code, Section 9.12.1104, Subd. 11, billboards...are not permitted in any zoning district. Therefore, only non- conforming billboards are now existing in the City. Billboards are defined by City Code as: A sign which directs attention to a business, commodity, service, entertainment, or attraction sold, offered or existing elsewhere than upon the same lot or parcel where such sign is displayed. As a result of the July 1, 1997 windstorm, several billboards were damaged, some beyond repair. Upon learning this information, the city sent letters to twelve various sign companies advising them that, in conformance with city Code, a billboard damaged by more than 50% of the sign market value could not be repaired. Subse- quent to this letter, an attorney representing one of the affected sign companies brought to the City's attention a June 25, 1997 Court Order issued by a Tenth Judicial District Judge interpreting the city of Cottage Grove's non-conforming use ordinance language (the "Court Order"). This language is very similar to that contained in city Code Section 9.12.13. A copy of the Court Order is attached. The Court in its order reasoned that since the market value of the sign in question was $60,000.00 - $65,000.00 and the cost of its replacement less than $7,000.00, the sign should be allowed to be repaired since the damage is less than 50% of its fair market value. I have spoken with the attorney representing the City of Cottage Grove who advises that in his opinion, the Judge's reasoning in the Court Order is flawed and the decision has been appealed to the Court of Appeals, whose decision has yet to be rendered. The major objection to the Court Order is that the Judge used one appraisal method to determine the sign's value and a different method to determine its replacement cost, and therefore an inconsistency exists. The City has two alternatives, the first is to continue to deny the billboard reconstruction. We could do this based on: (1) state that District Court decisions are not binding legal precedent; (2) there are some minor differences in our ordinance language which could possibly distinguish Ramsey's code language from Cottage Grove; and (3) the Court of Appeals may reverse the District Court.