07-25-1994 Council Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

five feet.^ While proparlnq to install her new antenna, Pentol becane aware of the city'a restrictions, and in January 1991 she filed for a variance pursuant to Mendota Heiqhts, Minn*, ZoninqOrdinance § S.S (1981). The city evaluated Pentel'a application through a planning report prepared by a city etaff »e«ber, and at a planning coiittileslon meeting and two city council meeting*. city then sent Pentel a letter in February 1991 telling h*» that her application had been denied. The letter did not state any factual findings, reasons for the denial, or what Pentel could do to gain the city's approval. In an attempt to offer rantel a reasonable accommodation, as reguired by In.ft rfdlfdl .FfffflPtiQn Qf Amateur Radio racilitimi, 101 r.c.c.2d 952, 50 fed. Reg. 38.813 (1985) (codified at 47 C.r.R. I 97.15(e) (1992)) [hereinefter PRB-1). the city council granted Pentel a special-use permit that allowed her to continue using her existing antenna, which she had erected in contravention of the city's zoning ordinance. Pentel then filed suit against the city in the District Court, claiming that the city's ordinance was preempted by PRB-l in that the city had not reasonably accomsiodated her. Agreeing that there ^•re no disputed issues of material fact, Pentel and the city both moved for summary )udgsent. The District Court granted sumrary judgment in favor of the city on all claims.* Pentel appeals. ^Th# parties failed to furnish this Court a copy of • of the Mendota Heights toning ordinance, and the city was unable to furnish a copy when contacted by this Court, ue do issue, however, because the parties agree, and the District cour. found, that this section limit* Pental's radio antenna tower to a maximum height of 2^ feet. *In addition to her preemption challenge, Pentel raiseJ v^riou* otnar constitutional challenge* that are not renewed here - J -