2011_1205_Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

wwko-w SH"L+E REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION DATE: 12/5/2011 ITEM NO: 7 • c Department Approval City Manager Approval 1,00e Item Description: Request by George C. Brandt, Inc. and T-Mobile for an extension of the validation timeline for the approval of a telecommunication monopole facility as a conditional use at 2975 Long Lake Road(PF10-021). 1.0 BACKGROUND AND REQUESTED ACTION 1.1 A telecommunication monopole facility was approved by the City Council as a CONDITIONAL USE on October 11, 2010; the relevant site plan, public comments, City Council minutes, and resolution approving the telecommunication monopole facility as a CONDITIONAL USE are included with this staff report as Attachment A. 1.2 City Code Section 1009.02 E (Validation of Conditional Use Approvals) says the following: 8 "A conditional use approval shall be validated by the applicant through the commencement of the authorized use or of any necessary construction(subject to the permit requirements of Title 9 of this Code) in support of the conditional use within 1 year of the date of the approval.Notwithstanding this time limitation, the City Council may approve extensions of the time allowed for validation of the conditional use approval if requested in writing by the applicant; extension requests shall be submitted to the Community Development Department and shall identify the reasons) why the extension is necessary along with an anticipated timeline for validation of the conditional use approval." 1.3 Paul Farrington, local representative of T-Mobile's request for approval of the mm CONDITIONAL USE, has submitted a letter requesting an extension to the time allowed for validation; the letter is included with this staff report as Attachment B. Because of the reasons cited in the letter, construction of the approved monopole facility had not yet commenced in time to properly validate the approval, hence the requested extension. 2.0 EXTENSION ANALYSIS 2.1 The primary intent of§1009.02E is to discourage speculative applications—those applications seeking various approvals to improve the marketability of a property irrespective of a property owner's land use intentions. This provision prompts applicants to begin utilizing a property as approved or risk losing the approval. But there are always cases like this in which a project is delayed for a variety of reasons even though the mm property owner still intends to act upon the approval. For this reason, §1009.02E allows the applicant to request an extension and allows the City Council an opportunity to evaluate the request; if nothing significant has changed on or around the property, then there may not be a reason to deny the extension request. Conversely, if circumstances have changed and the approved use seems less appropriate than at the time of the approval, the City Council can deny the requested extension, in which case, the applicant PF 10-021 RCA 120511 Page 1 of 2