Agenda - Planning Commission - 03/06/2000

Home

10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. t6. 17. lg. 19. 20. 21. That there is existing tree cover in the proposed location for the tower That the Applicant has submitted support documents with the application consisting of the following: 'a) a written description of the proposal from U.S. West to the City Zoning Administrator dated November 16, 1999; b) a color rendering of the monopole tower and equipment cabinets; c) a written description of the design criteria by Valmont Microflect dated August 25, 1998; d) a certificate of survey of the Site; e) site plan packet dated October 28, 1999, consisting of Sheet Z-1 Title Sheet, Sheet Z-2 Vicinity Map, Sheet Z-3 Site Plan, Sheet Z-4 Enlarged Site Plan and Sheet Z-5 Elevation; f) aerial view of area. That Section 9.15.09 of the City Code restricts tower heights in Residential Districts to 75 feet unless the Applicant can demonstrate to City Council that the additional increase in height is needed to accommodate a second user and the surrounding topography, structures, vegetation and other factors make the height limit for a complying tower impractical. That the Applicant has stated that the tower will be designed to accommodate a total of 4 users and that there are no other structures in the area at the height needed to provide seamless coverage. That the Applicant has stated that access to the Site may be required 2 or 3 times a year for maintenance purposes and is proposed from an existing farm equipment access on St. Francis Blvd. N.W. That the proposed use will substantially impair the use or market value of surrounding properties. That the proposed use is proposed to be located in the side yard of the existing residence; Section 9.15.03 of the City Code requires that towers be located in the rear yard of residential parcels. That the proposed use will be hazardous or disturbing to existing or future neighboring uses. That the proposed use will be served adequately by essential public facilities and services. That the proposed use will not create excessive additionaI requirements at public cost for public facilities and services and will be detrimental to the economic welfare of the community. That the proposed use will not involve equipment and conditions of operation that will be detrimental to any persons, property, or the general welfare by reason of excessive production of traffic, noise, smoke, fumes, glare, or odors. That in order to protect the health and welfare of the community, fencing and screening is necessary and is not provided for in the Applicant's proposal. RESOLUTION #00-01- Page 2 of 3