1998-03-25 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

March 25, 1998 Plan Commission Minutes Page 4 63102-1733. The application asks for permission to erect and operate a 125' high telecommunications tower per Section 34-64 of the University City Zoning Code. The Chairperson noted the Commission's procedures and criteria for reviewing conditional use permits and amendments to them. He specifically stated that the Plan Commission must consider whether the use: a) complies with all applicable provisions of the Zoning Code; b) at the specific location will contribute to and promote the community welfare or convenience; c) will not cause substantial injury to the value of neighboring property; d) complies with the overall neighborhood development plan and existing zoning district provisions; and e) will provide, if applicable, off-street parking and loading areas in accordance with the standards contained in the Zoning Code. The Plan Commission must also find that the evidence presented also supports the conclusion that the proposed conditional use: 1) Is located within the geographic area necessary to meet the applicant’s engineering requirements. 2) The existing towers, structures or buildings within the applicant’s required geographic area are not of sufficient height to meet system engineering requirements. 3) Existing towers or structures do not have sufficient structural strength to support the applicant’s proposed telecommunications antennas. 4) The proposed telecommunications antennas would not experience or cause signal interference with telecommunications antennas on existing towers or structures. 5) The fees, costs, or other contractual terms required by the owner(s) of existing tower(s), structure(s), or building(s) within the required geographic area of the applicant or to retrofit the existing tower(s) or structure(s) are not reasonable. Costs exceeding that of a new tower are presumed to be unreasonable. 6) There are not other limiting conditions that render existing towers, structures or buildings within the applicant’s required geographic area unsuitable. 7) The design of the tower or structure, including the telecommunications antennas, shelter, and ground layout maximally reduces visual degradation and otherwise complies with the provisions and intent of this ordinance. 8) The proposal minimizes the number and size of the towers or structures that will be required in the geographic area surrounding the proposed site. 9) The applicant did not fail to take advantage of available shared use options provided by this ordinance or otherwise. The Chairperson called upon the applicant. Mr. Baron introduced Greg Stockell, Site Acquisition Manager, AT&T, 400 S. Woodsmill Road, th Chesterfield, MO 63017 and W. Paul Zemitsch of Sequel L.L.C., 711 N. 11 Street, St. Louis, MO 63101 who would both be testifying on behalf of the applicant. Mr. Baron gave an overview of the proposal stating how the application meets all of the requirements of Section 34-64 of the University City Zoning Code. He further stated that there had been negotiations with the University City School District about locating antennas at the high school but after 10 months of negotiations an agreement could not be met. Chairperson Solodar called on Frank B. Hill, Zoning Administrator to provide the staff report. Mr. Hill stated thathis is the first application for a telecommunications tower since the recent passage t of the ordinance putting our city's zoning requirements in compliance with the 1996 Telecommunications Act. In its pertinent sections it mandates the following of local governments: 1) The local zoning requirements may not unreasonably discriminate among wireless wpoffice\wpdata\m-3-25.plc