Laserfiche WebLink
! <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br /> <br />CASE # <br /> <br />CONSIDER AMENDING PROPOSED TOWERS ORDINANCE <br /> By: Planning Intern Kirk Skoog <br /> <br />Background: <br /> <br />On May 27, 1997, the Finance Committee directed Staff to provide more information <br />from area cities and also cities in Washington and Scott Counties regarding tower <br />ordinances. <br /> <br />Observations: <br /> <br />Included is a spreadsheet which lists the results of a survey of selected cities in the areas <br />that were recommended by the Finance Committee. About half of those contacted are <br />currently in the process of developing a towers ordinance. Other than Ramsey, <br />requirements are listed only for those cities that have a towers ordinance in place. Ail of <br />these implemented ordinances have been approved within the last year. This data is an <br />example of the large variation of ordinances that have been enacted by cities. I have <br />attempted to summarize the requirements, however, many of these have additional <br />conditions which must be met in order to obtain approval. These variations exist <br />primarily because of the infancy of the federal regulations and technology involved. <br /> <br />Also included is a list of minimum site standards, a sample application form, a modei <br />antenna site lease, two lists of rates charged by other cities for antennas on City property, <br />and a proposed resolution to amend the 1997 Schedule of Rates, Fees, and Charges to <br />include a monthly or yearly antenna lease rate for City property. Council may wish to <br />consider these documents in its discussion and possibly adopt them. <br /> <br />If Council decides to amend the ordinance significantly, and these amendments require <br />another public hearing, then Staff recommends that Council also extend the towers <br />moratorium, which currently expires on July 5, 1997. A resolution to extend the <br />moratorium by 90 days is included for your consideration. <br /> <br />The possible changes that were debated at the Finance Committee meeting on May 27, <br />1997, were issues related to requiring a conditional use permit on private and/or City <br />owned land. Hence, Council could avoid extending the moratorium by approving the <br />ordinance in its current form, which is the most restrictive form of those debated. <br />Council could then decide to ease the restrictions of the ordinance at a later date. <br /> <br />/I <br /> <br /> <br />