08-22-1994 Council Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

r five feet.‘ While preparing to install her new antenna, Pentel becane aware of the city's restrictions, and in January 1991 she filed for a variance pursuant to Kendota Heights, Minn., Zoning Ordinance § 5.5 (1981). The city evaluated Pentel's application through a planning report prepared by a city staff nenber, and at a planning connission neeting and two city council meetings. The city then sent Pentel a letter in February 1991 telling her that her application had been denied. The letter did not state any factual findings, reasons for the denial, cr what Pentel could do to gain the city's approval. In an attempt to offer Pentel a reasonable accommodation, as required by In re Federal Preemption of State and Local Peculations Pertaining to Amateur Padio Facilities. 101 F.C.C.Zd 952 , 50 .^ed. .Peg. 38,813 (1985) (codified at 47 C.F.R. § 97.15(e) (1992)) [hereinafter PR3-1], 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 citv's tonina ordinance. Pe.ntel then filed suit against the city in the District Court, claiming that the city's ordinance was preempted by PP.B-1 in that the city had not reasonably accomodated her. Agreeing that there were no cisputed issues of material fact, Pentel and the city both moved for summary judgm.e.nt. The District Court granted su.m.mary judgment in favor of the oitv on all claims.^ Pentel aooeals. The parties failed to furnish t.his Court a copy of § 8B.4(1) of the Mendota Heights zoning ordina.nce, and the city was unable to furnish a copy when contacted by this Court. We do not pursue t.he issue, however, because the parties agree, and the District Court found, t.hat this section limits Pentel's radio antenna tower to a maximum height of 25 feet. ^In addition to her preemption challenge, Pe.ntel raised various other constitutional c.hallenges that are not renewed here. _ T _