97-8452r
27
RESOLUTION NO. 8452
RESOLUTION DENYING A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
FOR A TELECOMMUNICATIONS TOWER AT
200 WEST 78TH STREET
Be it resolved by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota as follows:
I. The City Council hereby makes the following findings of fact.
FINDINGS OF FACT
1. The City of Richfield (the "City") regulates, by ordinance, commercial wireless
telecommunication towers and antennas.
2. The primary source of such regulations is contained in subsection 426 of the City
Code which establishes regulations for the height, location, design and installation of
commercial wireless telecommunication towers and subsection 531 of the Zoning
Ordinance which requires approval of a conditional use permit for towers in the I
(industrial) district.
3. On or about January 24, 1997 the City received an application for a conditional use
permit (the "Application") from James Moeller, representative for U.S. Tower Providers
(the "Applicant"). On or about February 11, 1997 the City received an application fee
and additional information from the Applicant to make it a complete application. The
Application was to construct a 150 foot telecommunications tower at 200 West 78th
Street.
4. The property at 200 West 78th Street is currently occupied by Minnesota Mini-
Storage. Seven buildings are located on the property for the purpose of providing
rentable storage space. The proposed tower would be located in the center of the
property.
5. Subsection 426.05, subd. 3 of the City Code limits CWTS towers and equipment to the
rear or interior side yard. Subsection 506.07 provides the following definition for a rear
yard: "A yard extending across the entire width of the lot and situated between the
rear lot line and the nearest line of the principal building, as projected to the side lot
line(s)". Subsection 506.07 provides the following definition for a side yard: "A yard
lying between the side lot line and the nearest line of the building extending between
the front yard and the rear yard, or in the absence of either such front or rear yard, to
the front or rear lot lines".
6. The proposed tower location is not in the rear or interior side yard of the property. . On
April 13, 1981, the property owner received setback variances to construct the
buildings with a rear yard setback of five feet. The location of the buildings provides
insufficient room in the rear and interior side yard of the property for the tower to be
located.
7. The Applicant was informed of this situation and told that he needed to apply for and
receive a variance or submit a petition to the City requesting a change in the language
of the City Code.
Resolution No. 8452
-2-
8. The Applicant chose not to petition for a change in the City Code or apply for a
variance but requested that the Application be placed on the agenda for Planning
Commission review.
9. The Application came before the Planning Commission for review on February 25,
1997. The Applicant appeared at the Planning Commission meeting and was given
an opportunity to present evidence in favor of the Application.
10. The Planning Commission expressed concern that the Application did not indicate that
any telecommunication companies were prepared to lease space on the tower, it did
not contain evidence indicating that the proposed location would fit into the service
networks for the number of users they proposed, and it did not include evidence
supporting the need for a tower of the proposed height and location.
11. Following a public hearing, the Planning Commission found that the application did not
meet the requirements of subsection 426 of the City Code and voted to recommend
denial of the Application to the City Council.
12. The Application came before the City Council for review and action at its March 24,
1997 meeting. The Applicant did not appear at the City Council meeting. Following a
public hearing, the City Council voted to deny the Application.
II. The City Council hereby makes the following conclusions:
CONCLUSIONS
1. The proposed tower location fails to meet requirements of subsection 426.05 of the
City Code to place the tower in a rear or interior side yard.
2. The Applicant has not applied for or received a variance from the requirement of
subsection 426.05 of the City Code that a tower be located in a rear or interior side
yard.
III. Based upon the foregoing, each of which serves as an independently adequate
basis, the Council hereby makes the following decision:
DECISION'
The application for a conditional use permit by James Moeller for U.S. Tower
Providers to allow the construction of a 150-foot telecommunications tower at 200 West
78th Street is hereby in all respects DENIED.
Adopted by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 14th day of April,
1997.
~ ~- l'~4:~_
Martin J. Kirsch, J yor
ATTEST: ~L
~f,~
Thomas P. Ferber, City Clerk '-