08-22-1994 Council Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

/*i five feet.2 While preparing to install her new antenna, Pcntcl became aware of the city's restrictions, and in January 1991 she filed for a variance pursuant to Mendota Heights, Minn., Zoning Ordinance § 5.5 (1981). The city evaluated Pentel's application through a planning report prepared by a city staff member, and at a planning commission meeting and two city council meetings. The city then sent Pentel a letter in February 1991 tell .ng her that her application had been denied. The letter did not state any factual reasons for the denial, or what Pentel could do to gain the city's approval. In an attempt to offer Pentel a reasonable accom.modation, as required by In re Federal Preemption of State and Local_Regulations Pertaining to Amateur R;idio Facilities. 101 F.C.C.2d 952, 50 Fed. Reg. 38,813 (1985) (..odified at 47 C.F.R. § 97.15(e) (1992)) [hereinafter 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-1 in that the city had not reasonably accommodated her. Agreeing that there were no disputed issues of material fact, Pentel and the city both moved for summary judgment. The District Court granted summary judgment in favor of the city on all claims.^ Pentel appeals. The parties failed to furnish this Court a copy of § 8B.4(1) of the Mendota Heights zoning ordinance, and the city was unable to furnish a copy when contacted by this Court. We do not pursue the issue, however, because the parties agree, and the District Court found, that this section limits Pentel's radio antenna tower to a maximum height of 25 feet. In addition to her preemption challenge, Pentel raised various other constitutional challenges that are not renewed here. -3-