Laserfiche WebLink
<br />. <br /> <br />- <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />- <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />Planning Commission Minutes <br />September 24, 1991 <br /> <br />Page 4 <br /> <br />6. <br /> <br />Ordinance Amendment/Section 900.12 "Uses bv District" to Create a New <br />Overlav District Titled "Antenna Support Structure Overlav District" bv <br />Kenneth Van Patten/P.H. <br /> <br />Steve Rohlf, Building and Zoning Administrator, stated that Kenneth Van <br />Patten has an existing radio tower which was put up legally. Since <br />then the Ci ty annexed the Township of Elk River, and the property was <br />subsequently rezoned to residential. Therefore, the radio tower is now <br />legally grandfathered-in nonconforming. The applicant would like to <br />bring his antenna tower into conformity with the City Zoning <br />Ordinance. Mr. Rohlf reviewed the three options in order to <br />accommodate the antenna tower as explained in his memo. <br /> <br />Chairman Johnson opened the public hearing. <br /> <br />Ken Larson (Head, Hempel, Seifert & Vander Weide) attorney representing <br />Mr. Ken Van Patten, stated that he drafted the first version of the <br />text amendment, the City Attorney and staff then reviewed it. Mr. <br />Larson briefly reviewed the text amendment as submitted in exhibit #1. <br />He stated that staff helped them review the alternatives available to <br />them under the current ordinance. They shared staff's concerns as far <br />as rezoning the property I-lor I -2 because it would be a departure <br />from the Growth Management Plan. Therefore they arrived at the overlay <br />zoning district. <br /> <br />Commissioner Spotts asked who else in the metropolitan area had this <br />type of district? <br /> <br />Mr. Larson stated that overlay districts are rare for this type of usej <br />instead land is usually zoned specifically for the purpose of this type <br />of tower. The ordinance he drafted was based on the Golden Valley <br />ordinance. <br /> <br />. Steve Rohlf stated that Tim Keane was in agreement with the ordinance <br />as it gives the City more ability to say no, when appropriate. Peter <br />Beck, City Attorney, thought it would be adding extra baggage to the <br />current ordinance. <br /> <br />Mr. Larson stated that Mr. Van Patten was concerned with the wordage in <br />Exhibit 1 (a). and would like to amend it to read: that the antenna <br />tower should be designed so that if it collapses, all portions of it <br />will land within the lot on which it is situated. Mr. Larson further <br />stated that Mr. Van Patten will secure a statement by a qualified <br />registered engineer that this tower is desie:ned to collaDse entirely <br />on the site. Mr. Larson felt that they would be able to have such a <br />letter by the time this issue was presented to the City Council. <br /> <br />Mr. Van Patten gave a brief summary of the industry standards as far as <br />wind velocity. <br /> <br />Chairman Johnson closed the public hearing. <br /> <br />Mr. Rohlf stated that Ken Van Patten is his ex brother-in-law and felt <br />that there was no conflict of interest. <br />