Agenda - Planning Commission - 04/20/2015 - Joint with EPB

Home

RELEVANT LINKS: Williams Island Synagogue, Inc. v. City ofAventura, 358 F.Supp.2d 1207 (S.D. Fla. 2005). Guru Nanak Sikh Society of Yuba City v. County of Sutter, 326 F.Supp.2d 1140 (E.D. Cal. 2003). Cottonwood Christian Center v. Cypress Redevelopment Agency, 218 F.Supp.2d 1203 (C.D. Cal. 2002). Civil Liberties for Urban Believers v. City of Chicago, 342 F.3d 752 (C.A.7 (Ill.) 2003). 47 U.S.C. § 332(c)(7). 47 U.S.C. § 303 (v). 47 C.F.R. § 25.104. Village of Euclid, Ohio v. Ambler Realty Co., 272 U.S. 365, 47 S. Ct. 114 (1926). Since RLUIPA was adopted in 2000, numerous cases have been brought in federal court concerning the law's application to various city zoning requirements. However, federal courts in the 8th Circuit (which includes Minnesota) have not ruled on many RLUIPA cases. If a city has concerns about RLUIPA, the city should consult its attorney for specific guidance. 4. Federal law considerations: Telecommunications Act of 1996 The federal Telecommunications Act of 1996 influences local zoning regulation of wireless telecommunications towers and antennas. Under the Act, local governments may generally regulate the placement, construction, and modification of cell towers through zoning ordinances and land use regulations. However, local zoning regulations may not unreasonably discriminate among providers of functionally equivalent services. Local zoning regulations also may not prohibit or have the effect of prohibiting the provision of wireless services. Under the Act any decision to deny a request to place, construct or modify cell towers must be in writing and supported by substantial evidence in the written record. In addition, cities may not regulate the placement, construction or modification of cell towers on the basis of the environmental effects of radio frequency emissions to the extent they comply with the Federal Communication Commission's regulations. To avoid conflicts with federal law, the city should consult the city attorney before adopting zoning provisions that regulate telecommunication towers and antennas. The Federal Communications Commission has exclusive jurisdiction over direct to home satellite dishes. Its regulations preempt local ordinances that prohibit or regulate satellite dishes of one meter or less in all areas and two meters or less in commercial areas. Cities may apply to the FCC for a waiver to allow local regulation of satellite dishes upon a showing by the applicant that local concerns of a highly specialized or unusual nature create a necessity for local regulation 5. Federal and state constitutional concerns Zoning regulations limit the ability of landowners to use their property in any manner they wish. League of Minnesota Cities Information Memo: 1/20/2015 Zoning Guide for Cities Page 12