My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
4.1. BASR 07-24-2001
ElkRiver
>
City Government
>
Boards and Commissions
>
Planning Commission
>
Board of Adjustments
>
BOA Packets
>
2000-2009
>
2001
>
07-24-2001
>
4.1. BASR 07-24-2001
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/23/2015 10:36:12 AM
Creation date
7/23/2015 10:36:10 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Government
type
BASR
date
7/24/2001
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
30
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
Memo to Planning Commission/Qwest <br /> July 24,2001 <br /> Page 5 <br /> • to, other lands or structure in the same area.The hardship is particular to the land <br /> and structure involved in that the property is only 225 feet wide which does not <br /> allow any location on the site to meet the 150 foot setback from both the east and <br /> west property lines.By shifting the tower to the north the tower will be at a lower <br /> elevation on the hill and the tower will have to be taller to meet the coverage <br /> requirements. <br /> 3. The literal application of the provisions of this ordinance would deprive the <br /> petitioner of rights enjoyed by other properties in the same district under the terms <br /> of this ordinance.There are two other site in the city with mono-pole towers,AT&T <br /> and APT, that do not meet setback requirements. There are also 3 guyed lattice <br /> towers located near the intersection of Count Road 33 and Proctor Road and a <br /> lattice tower near the high school which do not meet setback requirements. The <br /> proposed tower does meet the setback requirements of the underlying Al zoning <br /> district. <br /> 4. The special conditions and circumstances are not a consequence of the petitioner's <br /> own action or inaction.The need for the variance is a consequence of the width of <br /> the lot and the topography of the site. <br /> 5. The variance will not be injurious to or adversely affect the health,safety or welfare <br /> of the residents of the City or the neighborhood where the property is located and <br /> will in keeping with spirit and intent of the ordinance. <br /> • <br /> Rezoning <br /> Staff recommends that the Planning Commission recommend approval of the rezoning <br /> request to AT based on the following findings: <br /> 1. The proposed rezoning is compatible with the surrounding land uses. <br /> 2. The proposed rezoning is necessary in order to provide effective wireless <br /> telecommunication coverage for the city. <br /> 3. The rezoning is in accordance with the Comprehensive Plan for the city. <br /> Conditional Use Permit <br /> Staff recommends that the Planning Commission recommend approval of the conditional <br /> use permit for a 150 foot tall wireless telecommunication tower and supporting equipment. <br /> 111/ <br /> S:\PLANNING\SCOTT\CU01-25.DOC <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.