Laserfiche WebLink
<br />REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION <br /> <br />DATE: 04-22-96 <br />ITEM NO: B- 2 <br /> <br />~tment roval: ~r MPro)\ed: Agenda Section: <br />~ Consent <br />Item Description: COMMUNICATION TOWERS - LAND USE REGULATION <br />Bacqround <br /> <br />In the past year Roseville has become a target for communications towers companies. The <br />highway corridors and the heavy concentration of users near these corridors and the regional <br />shopping center create this demand. <br /> <br />A communication tower is now used primarily for telecommunications such as cell phones, <br />mobile radio phones, digital phones and computerized data transmission. These towers may <br />range from 100 feet up to 250 feet in height and need to be located on 1 to 11/2 mile radius. In <br />Roseville, our planning, engineering and finance staff have been reviewing requests for permits. <br /> <br />The City land use code allows towers to be constructed to any height, but require the approval of <br />the Building Official or an appeal to the City Council. Most recently this occurred at the site <br />adjacent to the Roseville Water tower, wherein the applicant had originally proposed a tower <br />further north, within clear view of the Twin Lakes redevelopment. <br /> <br />Because these new communication towers are permitted anywhere within the city under the <br />current code, it would be prudent to reconsider the city's land use regulation of such towers. <br />For example, the permit to allow all towers (except City of Roseville controlled or owned <br />"designated" tower sites - similar to the Bumsville Ordinance- where the tower would be <br />considered a permitted land use) could be changed to a Conditional Use Permit and limited to <br />specific zones such as business and industrial districts only. The strategy here would be to create <br />a permitted "incentive" to place communications equipment on sites designated by the City with <br />restrictive covenants or lease conditions, but without need for further permits and hearings. A <br />draft ordinance, updated by the City Attorney's Office, is attached. The Council reviewed <br />the original version and asked for a second review prior to sending this to the planning <br />Commission for hearings. <br /> <br />If tower proponents insisted upon other sites, the conditions (only through a conditional use <br />permit) in the code include the following: <br /> <br />1) Height <br />2) Strength <br />3) Setback from residential districts, buildings, roads, other structures <br />4) Visual guidelines such as color, guy wires, support structure designs <br />5) Fencing and support services parking. <br /> <br />It may also be valuable to redefine the term "essential services" which are currently permitted in <br />any zoning district. Such towers could be misconstrued to be essential services. <br />