HomeMy WebLinkAboutDecember 11, 2000OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS
COLUMBIA HEIGHTS CITY COUNCIL
REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING
DECEMBER 11, 2000
1. CALL TO ORDER/ROLL CALL
The regular meeting of the City Council was called to order at 7:05 p.m. on Monday,
th
December 11, 2000 in the City Council Chambers, City Hall, 590 40 Avenue N.E.,
Columbia Heights.
Present: Councilmembers Szurek, Jolly, Wyckoff, Hunter, and Mayor Peterson
2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
3. ADDITIONS/DELETIONS TO MEETING AGENDA
None
4. CONSENT AGENDA
These items were enacted by one motion.
MOTION
A. by Szurek, second by Wyckoff, to approve Consent Agenda items as
follows:
1) Minutes for Approval
a. MOTION to approve the minutes of the November 27, 2000, Regular
Council Meeting as presented.
b. MOTION to approve the minutes of the December 4, 2000 Truth in
Taxation Meeting as presented.
2) Establish Work Session Meeting Dates for January, 2001
MOTION to establish a Work Session meeting date of Tuesday, January 2,
2001 beginning at 7:00 p.m.
Walt Fehst, City Manager, explained there would be a second Work Session meeting date
set, but as the third Monday in January is the Martin Luther King holiday, this needs to be
discussed.
3) Authorize Payment of North Metro Mayors Association Membership Fee
for 2001
MOTION to authorize payment of the 2001 Annual Membership Fee to the
North Metro Mayors Association in the amount of $8,762.00.
4) Authorize Transfer of Funds from General Fund to Forfeiture Fund
MOTION to approve the transfer of $2,900 from the General Fund to the
Police Department Forfeiture Fund; these funds to be used for DWI
enforcement and/or training.
5) Authorize Purchase of One Unmarked Downsized Vehicle for the Police
Department
MOTION to authorize the purchase of one 2001 Ford Taurus unmarked
mid-size vehicle from the State of Minnesota bid in the amount of
$15,769.46 including tax, with funding to come from 431-42100-5150; and
that the Mayor and City Manager are authorized to enter into a contract for
same.
6) Adopt Resolution No. 2000-80, being a resolution Establishing Senior
Citizen Eligibility Standards for Refuse, Sewage Disposal and Water
Supply Utility Rates
MOTION to waive the reading of Resolution No. 2000-80, there being
ample copies available to the public.
MOTION Move to adopt Resolution No. 2000-80, being a resolution
Establishing Senior Citizen Eligibility Standards for Refuse, Sewage
Disposal and Water Supply Utility Rates.
Fehst stated this would increase the maximum income limit for seniors from
$17, 700 to $17,900 to be eligible for reduced senior citizen rates.
RESOLUTION NO. 2000-80
RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING SENIOR CITIZEN ELIGIBILITY STANDARDS FOR
REFUSE, SEWAGE DISPOSAL AND WATER SUPPLY UTILITY RATES
WHEREAS, the City Council has previously established eligibility standards for senior citizens for
Refuse Service, Disposal, and Water Supply; and
WHEREAS, It has been the City's practice to maintain uniform eligibility standards whenever
possible:
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City of Columbia Heights as follows:
1. That anyone over 62 years of age with a maximum household income of $17,900 will
be eligible for reduced rates.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the above eligibility standard be effective January 1, 2001.
th
Passed this 11 day of December, 2000
Offered by: Szurek
Seconded by: Wyckoff
Roll Call: All ayes _
Gary L. Peterson, Mayor
________________________________
Patricia Muscovitz, Deputy City Clerk
7) Adopt Resolution No. 2000-79, being a resolution Designating
Depositories for City funds of the City of Columbia Heights
MOTION to waive the reading of Resolution No. 2000-79, there being
ample copies available to the public.
MOTION to adopt Resolution No. 2000-79, being a resolution
designating depositories for City funds of the City of Columbia Heights.
Fehst indicated the depositories would be Northeast State Bank and Wells Fargo
Bank of Minnesota.
RESOLUTION NO. 2000-79
RESOLUTION DESIGNATING OFFICIAL DEPOSITORIES AND
SAFE DEPOSIT ACCESS FOR THE CITY OF COLUMBIA HEIGHTS
IT IS HEREBY RESOLVED, that Northeast State Bank and Wells Fargo Bank of Minnesota,
N.A. are hereby designated as depositories of the funds of this corporation.
IT IS FURTHER RESOLVED, that checks, drafts, or other withdrawal orders issued against the
funds of this corporation on deposit with said banks shall be signed by the following:
Mayor
City Manager
Clerk-Treasurer
and that said banks are hereby fully authorized to pay and charge to the account of this
corporation any checks, drafts, or other withdrawal orders.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Northeast State Bank and Wells Fargo Bank of
Minnesota, N.A. as designated depositories of the corporation be and it is hereby requested,
authorized and directed to honor checks, drafts or other orders for the payment of money drawn
in this corporation's name, including those drawn to the individual order of any person or persons
whose name or names appear thereon as signer or signers thereof, when bearing or purporting to
bear the facsimile signatures of the following:
Mayor
City Manager
Clerk-Treasurer
and that Northeast State Bank and Wells Fargo Bank of Minnesota, N.A. shall be entitled to
honor and to charge this corporation for all such checks, drafts or other orders, regardless of by
whom or by what means the facsimile signature or signatures thereon may have been affixed
thereto, if such facsimile signature or signatures resemble the facsimile specimens duly certified to
or filed with the Banks by the City Clerk or other officer of his corporation.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that any and all resolutions heretofore adopted by the City
Council of the corporation and certified to as governing the operation of this corporation's
account(s) with it, be and are hereby continued in full force and effect, except as the same may be
supplemented or modified by the foregoing part of this resolution.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that all transactions, if any relating to deposits, withdrawals, re-
discounts and borrowings by or on behalf of this corporation with said banks prior to the adoption
of this resolution be, and the same hereby are, in all things ratified, approved and confirmed.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that any bank or savings and loan located in the State of
Minnesota may be used as depositories for investments purposes so long as the investments
comply with authorized investments as set forth in Minnesota Statutes.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that any brokerage firm located in the State of Minnesota may
be used as a depository for investment purposes so long as the investments comply with the
authorized investments as set forth in Minnesota Statutes.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the signatures of any one of the following named City
employees are required for access to safe deposit boxes:
Finance Director
City Manager
Assistant Finance Director
Accounting Coordinator
Passed this 11th day of December, 2000
Offered by: Szurek
Seconded by: Wyckoff
Roll Call: All ayes __________
Gary L. Peterson, Mayor
____________________________
Patricia Muscovitz, Deputy City Clerk
8) Approve Designation of an Official City Newspaper for 2001
MOTION to designate Focus News as the official City newspaper for
2001 and to authorize the Mayor and City Manager to enter into an
agreement with Focus News for required publications.
Fehst indicated the Focus News has been our official newspaper for years.
9) Authorize an Agreement with the League of Minnesota Cities Insurance
Trust for Worker’s Compensation coverage
MOTION to authorize the Mayor and City Manager to enter into an
agreement with League of Minnesota Cities Insurance Trust for worker's
compensation coverage based on their premium quotation of $120,930.
10) Adopt Resolution No. 2000-95, being a resolution adopting a budget for
the year 2001 and setting the total city levy collectable for the year 2001
and approving the HRA Levy of $94,752.
MOTION to waive the reading of Resolution No. 2000-95, there being
ample copies available to the public.
MOTION to adopt Resolution 2000-95, being a resolution adopting a
budget for the year 2001 and setting the total city levy collectable for the
year 2001 in the amount of $3,625,552 and approving the HRA levy of
$94,752.
Fehst stated this would adopt the City budget for 2001 and HRA levy for 2001.
RESOLUTION 2000-95
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL FOR THE CITY OF COLUMBIA HEIGHTS,
MINNESOTA ADOPTING A BUDGET FOR THE YEAR 2001, AND SETTING THE TOTAL
CITY LEVY COLLECTABLE FOR THE YEAR 2001 AND APPROVE THE HRA LEVY OF
$94,752
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL FOR THE CITY OF COLUMBIA HEIGHTS,
MINNESOTA: that the following is hereby adopted by the City of Columbia Heights.
Section A. The budget for the City of Columbia Heights for the year 2001 is hereby approved and adopted with
appropriations for each of the funds listed below.
Expense
General Fund 8,022,331
Community Development Fund 307,762
Economic Development Fund 119,045
Anoka County CDBG 249,011
Parkview Villa North 349,552
Parkview Villa South 161,445
Rental Housing 16,250
HRA Administration 106,752
State Aid 89,048
Cable Television 192,399
Library 597,234
DARE Project 8,825
Capital Improvement 1,958,305
Capital Equipment Replacement Funds 215,594
Central Garage Fund 507,070
Liquor 1,286,219
Water Utility Fund 1,433,109
Sewer Utility Fund 1,247,535
Refuse Fund 1,491,610
Storm Sewer Fund 323,185
Data Processing 274,732
Water Fund Debt Service 96,910
Sewer Fund Debt Service 3,677
Storm Sewer Fund Debt Service 84,914
Debt Service Fund 2,129,220
Total Expense Including Interfund Transfers 21,271,734
Section B. The estimated gross revenue to fund the budget of the City of Columbia Heights for all funds,
including general ad valorem tax levies and use of fund balances, as hereinafter set forth for the year 2001:
Revenue
General Fund 8,022,331
Community Development Fund 307,762
Economic Development Fund 119,045
Anoka County CDBG 249,011
Parkview Villa North 349,552
Parkview Villa South 161,445
Rental Housing 16,250
HRA Administration 106,752
State Aid 89,048
Cable Television 192,399
Library 597,234
DARE Project 8,825
Capital Improvement 1,958,305
Capital Equipment Replacement Funds 215,594
Central Garage Fund 507,070
Liquor 1,286,219
Water Utility Fund 1,433,109
Sewer Utility Fund 1,247,535
Refuse Fund 1,491,610
Storm Sewer Fund 323,185
Water Fund Debt Service 274,732
Sewer Fund Debt Service 96,910
Storm Sewer Fund Debt Service 3,677
Data Processing 84,914
Debt Service Fund 2,129,220
Total Revenue Including Interfund Transfers 21,271,734
RESOLUTION 2000-
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL FOR THE CITY OF COLUMBIA HEIGHTS, MINNESOTA
Section C. The following sums of money are levied for the current year, collectable in 2001, upon the taxable
ADOPTING A BUDGET FOR THE YEAR 2001, AND SETTING THE TOTAL
property in said City of Columbia Heights, for the following purposes:
CITY LEVY COLLECTABLE FOR THE YEAR 2001 AND APPROVE THE HRA LEVY OF $94,752
Estimated Area-Wide 930,000
Estimated General and Library Fund Levy 2,576,257
Estimated EDA Fund Levy 119,295
Total Proposed Levy 3,625,552
Section D. The City Council of the City of Columbia Heights hereby approves the Housing and Redevelopment
Authority Tax Levy for the fiscal year 2001 in the amount of $94,752.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL FOR THE CITY OF COLUMBIA HEIGHTS,
MINNESOTA: That the budget hearing was held on December 4th at 7:00 P.M. in the City Council Chambers.
The City Clerk is hereby instructed to transmit a certified copy of this resolution to the County Auditor of Anoka
County, Minnesota.
Mayor Gary L. Peterson
Patricia Muscovitz, Deputy City Clerk
11) Approve Resolution No. 2000-91, being a resolution approving
Appointment of Commissioners to the Housing and Redevelopment
Authority in and for Columbia Heights
MOTION to waive the reading of Resolution No. 2000-91, there being
ample copies available to the public.
MOTION to approve Resolution No. 2000-91, being a resolution
approving Appointment of Commissioners to the Housing and
Redevelopment Authority in and for Columbia Heights.
Fehst stated the appointees would be the two new Councilmembers Robert
Williams and Bruce Nawrocki.
RESOLUTION NO. 2000-91
BEING A RESOLUTION APPROVING APPOINTMENT OF COMMISSIONERS TO THE
COLUMBIA HEIGHTS HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
WHEREAS
, the City has, by the adoption of a formal resolution, duly created an Housing and
Redevelopment Authority (HRA) for the City of Columbia Heights, pursuant to Minnesota
Statutes, Chapter 469 (Act), and
WHEREAS
, the resolution provides that the Board of Commissioners of the HRA shall consist
of five members, who shall be residents of the area of operation of the HRA, and
WHEREAS
, the Mayor has this day appointed the following Commissioners of the HRA for the
terms as indicated:
Robert A. Williams Term Ending 1/3/2005
Bruce Nawrocki Term Ending 1/3/2005
Gary L. Peterson Term Ending 1/6/2003
and,
WHEREAS, the terms of the Commissioners shall coincide with their respective terms of office as
a City Councilmember.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of Columbia Heights hereby
approves appointment of the above named persons as Commissioners of the HRA for the terms as
indicated herein.
th
Passed this 11 day of December, 2000.
Offered by: Szurek
Seconded by: Wyckoff
Roll Call: All ayes ______________________________
Mayor Gary L. Peterson
_________________________________
Patricia Muscovitz, Deputy City Clerk
12) Adopt Resolution No. 2000-87 being a resolution adopting 2001-2003
Salary and Fringe Benefit Adjustment for Non-Union Supervisory
Employees
MOTION to waive the reading of Resolution No. 2000-87, there being
ample copies available to the public.
MOTION to adopt Resolution 2000-87, adopting changes in non-union
group salary ranges, and establishing salaries and changes in fringe
benefits for non-unionized supervisory City positions for calendar years
2001, 2002, and 2003.
Fehst stated this would include a yearly 3.5 per cent salary increase and a $20,
$30, and $30 per year insurance benefit increase, which follows City Council
guidelines.
RESOLUTION 2000-87
ADOPTING CHANGES IN NON-UNION SUPERVISORY SALARY RANGES,
ESTABLISHING SALARIES FOR NON-UNIONIZED SUPERVISORY POSITIONS,
AND CHANGES IN FRINGE BENEFITS
WHEREAS, the City of Columbia Heights adopted a Wage Compensation Program for
Non-Unionized City Employees effective January 1, 1980 (Resolution 80-47), which indicated
that on an annual basis changes will be adopted in Group Salary Ranges based upon reliable
survey data; and,
WHEREAS, the City of Columbia Heights adopted a Comparable Worth Implementation
Plan effective January 1, 1988 (Resolution 88-50), to assure comparable compensation for
positions with comparable skill, efforts, responsibilities, and work conditions, and proportional
compensation for positions where such factors are different; and,
WHEREAS, the City of Columbia Heights annually reviews the Employer’s share for
various insurance programs for its non-unionized supervisory employees to compare what is paid
for other employee groups in the City.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT THE City of Columbia Heights
establishes salary ranges and Employer contribution to insurances for non-unionized supervisory
City positions, as indicated on Schedule A which is on file in the Office of the City Manager, for
calendar years 2001, 2002, and 2003; and,
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that movement through the salary range is contingent
upon satisfactory performance of the employee.
th
Passed this 11 day of December, 2000.
Offered by: Szurek
Seconded by: Wyckoff
Roll Call: All ayes ___________________________________
Mayor Gary L. Peterson
_______________________________________
Patricia Muscovitz, Deputy City Clerk
13) Adopt Resolution No. 2000-88 being a resolution adopting 2001-2003
Salary and Fringe Benefit Adjustment for Non-Union Essential and
Confidential Employees
MOTION to waive the reading of Resolution No. 2000-88, there being
ample copies available to the public.
MOTION to adopt Resolution 2000-88, adopting changes in non-union
group salary ranges, and establishing salaries and changes in fringe
benefits for non-unionized essential and confidential City positions for
calendar years 2001, 2002, and 2003.
RESOLUTION 2000-88
ADOPTING CHANGES IN NON-UNION ESSENTIAL AND CONFIDENTIAL
SALARY RANGES, ESTABLISHING SALARIES FOR NON-UNIONIZED ESSENTIAL
AND CONFIDENTIAL POSITIONS, AND CHANGES IN FRINGE BENEFITS
WHEREAS, the City of Columbia Heights adopted a Wage Compensation Program for
Non-Unionized City Employees effective January 1, 1980 (Resolution 80-47), which indicated
that on an annual basis changes will be adopted in Group Salary Ranges based upon reliable
survey data; and,
WHEREAS, the City of Columbia Heights adopted a Comparable Worth Implementation
Plan effective January 1, 1988 (Resolution 88-50), to assure comparable compensation for
positions with comparable skill, efforts, responsibilities, and work conditions, and proportional
compensation for positions where such factors are different; and,
WHEREAS, the City of Columbia Heights annually reviews the Employer’s share for
various insurance programs for its non-unionized essential and confidential employees to compare
what is paid for other employee groups in the City;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City of Columbia Heights establishes
salary ranges and Employer contribution to insurances for non-unionized essential and confidential
City positions, as indicated on Schedule B which is on file in the office of the City Manager for
calendar years 2001, 2002, and 2003; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that movement through the salary range is contingent
upon satisfactory performance of the employee.
th
Passed this 11 day of December, 2000.
Offered by: Szurek
Seconded by: Wyckoff
Roll Call: All ayes ____________________________________
Mayor Gary L. Peterson
__________________________________
Patricia Muscovitz, Deputy City Clerk
14) Adopt Resolution No. 2000-89 being a resolution adopting 2001-2003
Teamsters Labor Agreement – Police Officers
MOTION to waive the reading of Resolution No.2000-89, there being
ample copies available to the public.
MOTION to adopt Resolution 2000-89, regarding the Labor Agreement
between the City of Columbia Heights and the Teamsters, Local 320-
Police Officers, effective January 1, 2001 – December 31, 2003.
RESOLUTION 2000-89
REGARDING LABOR AGREEMENT BETWEEN CITY OF COLUMBIA HEIGHTS
AND TEAMSTERS, LOCAL 320, POLICE OFFICERS
WHEREAS, negotiations have proceeded between the Teamsters, Local 320, representing
Police Officers of the City, and members of the City negotiating team, and said negotiations have
resulted in a mutually acceptable contract for calendar years 2001, 2002, and 2003.
WHEREAS, a copy of said contract is available for inspection at the Office of the City
Manager and is made a part hereof by reference;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the contract agreement as negotiated, be
and is hereby established as the salary and fringe benefit program for calendar years 2001, 2002,
and 2003 for Teamsters, Local 320-Police Officers, bargaining unit employees of the City; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Mayor and City Manager be authorized to
execute this agreement.
th
Passed this 11 day of December, 2000.
Offered by: Szurek
Seconded by: Wyckoff
Roll Call: All ayes ________________________
Mayor Gary L. Peterson
_______________________________
Patricia Muscovitz, Deputy City Clerk
15) Adopt Resolution No. 2000-93, being a Resolution adopting a Revised
Personnel Policy Manual
MOTION to waive the reading of Resolution No. 2000-93, there being
ample copies available to the public.
MOTION to adopt Resolution 2000-93, being a resolution adopting a
revised Personnel Policy Manual.
Fehst stated changes were for housekeeping purposes, clarification of policies,
and were aligned to State Statutes and regulations, and Federal laws and
regulations.
RESOLUTION 2000-93
ADOPTING REVISED PERSONNEL POLICY MANUAL
WHEREAS, in order to establish an equitable and uniform procedure for dealing with
personnel matters, the City of Columbia Heights previously adopted a Personnel Policy Manual
dated November 13, 1989; and,
WHEREAS, a thorough review of the Personnel Policy Manual has been conducted; and,
WHEREAS, as a result of the review, revisions to the Personnel Policy Manual are
recommended for adoption; and,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Columbia Heights City Council that it
does hereby adopt the revised Personnel Policy Manual, dated December 11, 2000, a copy of
which is on file in the Office of the City Manager; and,
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that such revised Personnel Policy Manual be effective
December 11, 2000.
th
Passed this 11 day of December, 2000.
Offered by: Szurek
Seconded by: Wyckoff
Roll Call: All ayes _______________________________
Mayor Gary L. Peterson
_______________________________
Patricia Muscovitz, Deputy City Clerk
16) Adopt Resolution No. 2000-94, being a Resolution adopting the IUOE
Labor Agreement for 2001-2003
MOTION to waive the reading of Resolution No. 2000-94, there being
ample copies available to the public.
MOTION to adopt Resolution 2000-94, regarding the Labor Agreement
between the City of Columbia Heights and the International Union of
Operating Engineers, Local 49, effective January 1, 2001 – December 31,
2003.
RESOLUTION 2000-94
REGARDING LABOR AGREEMENT BETWEEN CITY OF COLUMBIA HEIGHTS
AND INTERNATIONAL UNION OF OPERATING ENGINEERS, LOCAL NO. 49
WHEREAS, negotiations have proceeded between the International Union of Operating
Engineers (IUOE), Local No. 49, representing employees of the Public Works Department and
members of the City negotiating team, and said negotiations have resulted in a mutually
acceptable contract for calendar years 2001, 2002, and 2003.
WHEREAS, a copy of said contract is available at the Office of the City Manager and is
made a part hereof by reference;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the contract agreement, as negotiated, be
and is hereby established as the salary and fringe benefit program for calendar years 2001, 2002,
and 2003, for IUOE bargaining unit employees of the City; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Mayor and City Manager be authorized to
execute this agreement.
th
Passed this 11 day of December, 2000.
Offered by: Szurek
Seconded by: Wyckoff
Roll Call: All ayes
________________________
Mayor Gary L. Peterson
_________________________________
Patricia Muscovitz, Deputy City Clerk
17) Adopt Resolution No. 2000-90, adopting the 2000-2001 Snow and Ice
Control Policy for the City of Columbia Heights
MOTION to waive the reading of Resolution No. 2000-90, there being
ample copies available to the public.
MOTION to approve and adopt Resolution No. 2000-90 adopting the
2000-2001 Snow and Ice Control Policy for the City of Columbia
Heights.
RESOLUTION NO. 2000-90
RESOLUTION ADOPTING THE SNOW AND ICE CONTROL POLICY
WHEREAS
, a Snow and Ice Control Policy has been developed and recommended by City staff;
and
WHEREAS
, adoption of said policy has been determined to be in the best interest of the City of
Columbia Heights,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED
, by the City Council of the City of Columbia
Heights that said Snow and Ice Control Policy is hereby approved and adopted.
th
Dated this 11 day of December, 2000.
Offered by:
Seconded by:
Roll Call: ____________________________
Mayor Gary L. Peterson
_______________________________
Patricia Muscovitz, Deputy City Clerk
18) Approval of Purchase Agreement for Single Family Residential Property
nd
at 1307 42 Avenue
MOTION to authorize the Mayor and City Manager to execute the
nd
purchase agreement for the acquisition of 1307 42 Avenue in the amount
of $111,500 for flood mitigation purposes with funds from the City’s
Storm Water Utility and DNR Flood Mitigation Grant funds on a 50/50
cost share.
Fehst stated this purchase is under the program to provide storm water relief with
50 percent paid by the storm water utility fund and 50 percent from DNR funds.
19) Authorize Final Payment for 1999 Alley Construction
MOTION to accept the work for 1999 Alley Improvements, City Project
9902 and to authorize payment of $36,959.08 to Ron Kassa Construction,
Inc. of Elko, Minnesota.
Fehst stated this payment is the close out of work from last year’s alley warranty
work.
20) Approve renewal of Joint Powers Agreement and Values First/SACCC
Coordinator Services
MOTION to approve the renewal of the Joint Powers Agreement with the
Southern Anoka County Community Consortium and the payment of the
annual fees for FY 2001 and 2002.
Fehst stated the joint consortium of Hilltop, Fridley, the school districts and
Columbia Heights contribute to the Values First Program. Our Chief of Police
serves on this board. He indicated that Barb Warren, Coordinator, has brought
great credibility to this program.
21) Establish Hearing Dates Re: License Revocation or Suspension of Rental
th
Properties at 4421 5 Street NE
MOTION to establish a Hearing Date of December 27, 2000 for
Revocation or Suspension of a License to Operate a Rental Property
th
within the City of Columbia Heights against Steve Anderson at 4421 5
Street NE
22) Adopt Resolution No. 2000-96, being a resolution declaring the Contents
of the Building on the property located at XXXX North Upland Crest as
Hazardous
MOTION to waive the reading of Resolution No. 2000-96, there being
ample copies available to the public.
MOTION to adopt Resolution No. 2000-96, being a resolution directing
the removal of hazardous conditions located at XXXX North Upland
Crest N.E., to charge all costs in the form of a special assessment to the
property in an amount not to exceed $15,000; and furthermore, to
authorize the Mayor and City Manager to enter into agreements for the
same.
Fehst stated that this project took 4 or 5 days to clean up, and asked for Council
approval to assess the homeowner for clean up costs.
RESOLUTION NO. 2000-96
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL FROM THE CITY OF COLUMBIA
HEIGHTS REQUESTING REMOVAL OF HAZARDOUS STRUCTURES LOCATED
AT XXXX NORTH UPLAND CREST N.E
.
WHEREAS,
there are substandard buildings located at XXXX North Upland Crest which has
been unsafe for a period in excess of six months, and
WHEREAS,
Minnesota Statute 463.15 to 463.26 authorizes municipalities to address hazardous
and substandard structures and properties, and
WHEREAS,
the City of Columbia Heights finds this property to be hazardous based on the
following code violations as contained in the Findings of Fact:
Findings of Fact
Dangerous Building Definitions Chapter 3 of the 1994 Uniform Code for the Abatement of
Dangerous Buildings:
302(9) Whenever, for any reason, the building or structure, or any portion thereof, is manifestly
unsafe for the purpose for which it is being used.
302(17) Whenever any building or structure is in such a condition as to constitute a public
nuisance known to the common law or in equity jurisprudence.
THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED
on the Building Officials conclusions that, the structure at
=
XXXX North Upland Crest is substandard, it is full of debris, and lacks minimum standards for
habitable space per 1998 MN State Building Code and 1994 Uniform Code for the Abatement of
Dangerous Buildings, and the Building Official is recommending the structure be abated by
removal of the contents and restoration of mechanical systems.
Conclusions of Council
That all relevant parties have been duly notified of this action.
That the structure on the property at XXXX North Upland Crest is hazardous and in violation of
many local, state and national code requirements.
That the structure can be rehabilitated to bring them into compliance with local, state and national
code requirements.
Order of Council
11. The dwelling and accessory structure located at XXXX North Upland Crest, Columbia
Heights, Minnesota, are hazardous buildings pursuant to Minn. Stat. 463.152, 463.616.
12. Pursuant to the foregoing findings and in accordance with Minnesota Statutes, the City
Council hereby orders the record owner of the above-hazardous building, or his/her heirs,
to abate the buildings hazards.
13. The City Council further orders that if the City is compelled to take any correction action
herein, all necessary costs expended by the City will be assessed against the real estate
concerned, and collected in accordance with Minn. Stat. 463.22.
14. The Mayor, the Clerk, City Attorney and other officers and employees of the City are
authorized and directed to take such action, prepare, sign and serve such papers as are
necessary to comply with this order, and to assess the cost thereof against the real estate
described above for collection, along with taxes.
th
Passed this 11 day of December, 2000.
Offered by: Szurek
Seconded by: Wyckoff
Roll Call: All ayes
____________________________
Mayor Gary L. Peterson
_____________________________
Patricia Muscovitz, Deputy City Clerk
23) Approve Rental Housing License Applications
MOTION to approve the items listed for rental housing license
applications for December 11, 2000
24) Approve License Applications
MOTION to approve the items as listed on the business license agenda for
December 11, 2000 and to deny the application by James Eng for a motor
vehicle sales license at 5101 University Avenue as it would not be in
compliance with zoning regulations.
25) Payment of Bills
MOTION to pay the bills as listed out of proper funds.
Wyckoff questioned the vehicle sale. Police Chief Tom Johnson indicated that two
vehicles were sold at the Hennepin County Auction for amounts above which would
normally be received through a sale at the City Auction.
Wyckoff asked if the personnel policy changes would be given to the employees? Fehst
stated this could be done.
Wyckoff questioned the alley contract warranty work. Kevin Hansen, Public Works
Director, stated that the construction company has met all specifications and warranty
work. Hansen stated there is also a one-year warranty after acceptance by the Council.
The final cost was $10,000 under what was originally projected.
Wyckoff questioned “games of skill”. Chief Johnson indicated they are games such as
pinball and video arcade games.
Bruce Nawrocki spoke relative to the proposed budget. He felt the increase of 10% to
property taxes was out of line. He gave figures comparing other metro cities. He stated
that we have one of the highest tax rates in the Metro area.
All ayes. Motion carried.
Upon vote:
5. PROCLAMATIONS, PRESENTATIONS, RECOGNITIONS AND GUESTS
A. Proclamations - none
B. Presentations - none
C. Introduction of New Employees
Tina Foss – Park and Recreation Department
Keith Windschitl, Recreation Director, introduced and welcomed Tina Foss, as the new
Recreation Department Clerk Typist II. Tina Foss thanked the City Council.
D. Recognition
Mayor Peterson awarded Harold Hoium with a Certificate of Appreciation and a picture
of the people who worked on the project. Mr. Hoium thanked him.
6. PUBLIC HEARINGS
A. Public Hearing for Revocation/Suspension of Rental Housing License at 4600
Polk Street
Mayor Peterson closed the Public Hearing as the property is in compliance with the
Residential Maintenance Code.
th
B. Public Hearing for Revocation/Suspension of Rental Housing License at 4023 6
Street
Mayor Peterson closed the Public Hearing as the property is in compliance with the
Residential Maintenance Code.
C. Public Hearing for Revocation/Suspension of Rental Housing License at 1206-
1208 Circle Terrace
Mayor Peterson closed the Public Hearing as the property is in compliance with the
Residential Maintenance Code.
D. Public Hearing for Revocation/Suspension of Rental Housing License at 4055-
4057 University Avenue
Mayor Peterson opened the Public Hearing.
Dana Alexon, Assistant Fire Chief, gave a history since July of 1999 of the rental license
violations, extensions granted, contacts with the owner, and outstanding inspection fees.
Council discussed the violations and which items could be completed during the winter.
Theresa Wacoviak, 4057 University Avenue, a renter at this site, informed Council of
attempts to have the landlord correct problems, and of her attempts to purchase this
property. She was concerned about being evicted. Jim Hoeft, City Attorney, stated
eviction could range from 60 to 120 days. He stated referrals could be made to Judacare
for tenant’s rights and that she should meet with the Assistant Fire Chief for details.
Mayor Peterson closed the public hearing.
MOTION
by Hunter, second by Wyckoff, to waive the reading of Resolution
All ayes. Motion
No.2000-98, there being ample copies available to the public.
carried.
MOTION
by Hunter, second by Wyckoff, to adopt Resolution No. 2000-98,
being a Resolution of the City Council of the City of Columbia Heights approving
Revocation pursuant to Ordinance Code Section 5A.408(1) of the Rental License
Allayes
held by Kwei Fang regarding property at 4055-4057 University Avenue. .
Motion carried.
RESOLUTION 2000-98
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL FOR THE CITY OF COLUMBIA HEIGHTS
APPROVING REVOCATION PURSUANT TO ORDINANCE CODE SECTION
5A.408(1) OF THAT CERTAIN RESIDENTIAL RENTAL LICENSE HELD BY KWEI
FANG (HEREINAFTER "LICENSE HOLDER").
WHEREAS, LICENSE HOLDER IS THE LEGAL OWNER OF THE REAL PROPERTY
4055-4057 UNIVERSITY AVENUE
LOCATED AT COLUMBIA HEIGHTS, MINNESOTA,
AND WHEREAS, PURSUANT TO COLUMBIA HEIGHTS CODE SECTION 5.104(1)(A),
WRITTEN NOTICE SETTING FORTH THE CAUSES AND REASONS FOR THE PROPOSED
COUNCIL ACTION CONTAINED HEREIN WAS GIVEN TO THE LICENSE HOLDER ON
OCTOBER 18, 2000DECEMBER 11, 2000
OF A PUBLIC HEARING TO BE HELD ON .
NOW, THEREFORE, IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE FOREGOING, AND ALL ORDINANCES
AND REGULATIONS OF THE CITY OF COLUMBIA HEIGHTS, THE CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF COLUMBIA HEIGHTS MAKES THE FOLLOWING:
FINDINGS OF FACT
July 29, 1999
1. That on, Matt Field and John Larkin, inspectors for the City of Columbia
Heights, inspected the property and noted a total of thirteen violations. Compliance orders listing the
violations were mailed by regular mail to the owner at the address listed on the Rental Housing
License Application.
October 5, 1999
2. That on, Matt Field and John Larkin, inspectors for the City of Columbia
Heights, were scheduled to inspect the property, but the owner called and requested an time
extension. A 30-day time extension was granted. An extension letter listing the violations was mailed
by regular mail to the owner at the address listed on the Rental Housing License Application.
November 19, 1999
3. That on, Matt Field and John Larkin, inspectors for the City of Columbia
Heights were scheduled to inspect the property, but called and advised that there were problems with
his tenants and that he would not be able to let us in to the building. A 30-day time extension was
granted. An extension letter listing the violations was mailed by regular mail to the owner at the
address listed on the Rental Housing License Application.
In a series of problems with the owner showing up and with the owner’s tenants not cooperating with
the owner in regards to allow inspectors into the building, extensions on the outside violations were
granted until spring. In the meantime, the inspectors attempted to reinspect the violations on the
inside of the building.
March 28, 2000
4. That on, Gary Gorman and Rich Hinrichs, inspectors for the City of
Columbia Heights, reinspected unit number 4055 and noted that all violations were corrected.
Inspectors were not able to get into unit number 4057, in which five violations remained and four
violations remained on the exterior of the property. Compliance orders listing the violations were
mailed by regular mail to the owner at the address listed on the Rental Housing License Application.
April 27, 2000
5. That on, Gary Gorman and Rich Hinrichs, inspectors for the City of Columbia
Heights, reinspected and noted that nine violations remained uncorrected. Inspectors were not able to
get into unit number 4057, in which five violations remained and four violations remained on the
exterior of the property. The owner once again requested a time extension, stating that all tenants in
the building were given eviction notices and that he wanted to get the tenants out and make the
repairs and the have the reinspection performed. The extension was granted to June 29, 2000.
Compliance orders listing the violations were mailed by regular mail to the owner at the address listed
on the Rental Housing License Application.
June 29, 2000
6. That on , Gary Gorman and Rich Hinrichs, inspectors for the City of Columbia
Heights, reinspected and noted that three violations remained uncorrected. Inspectors were able to
get into unit number 4057, in which all violations were corrected. It was noted that three violations
remained on the exterior of the property. Compliance orders listing the violations were mailed by
regular mail to the owner at the address listed on the Rental Housing License Application.
August 14, 2000
7. That on, Gary Gorman and Rich Hinrichs, inspectors for the City of
Columbia Heights, reinspected and noted that three violations remained uncorrected. The owner
once again requested a time extension, stating that the contractor that was contracted to do the work
had not show up after starting the work. The extension was granted to October 18, 2000. An
extension notice listing the violations was mailed by regular mail to the owner at the address listed on
the Rental Housing License Application.
October 18, 2000
8. That on, Gary Gorman and Rich Hinrichs, inspectors for the City of
Columbia Heights, reinspected and noted that three violations remained uncorrected. The owner
once again requested a time extension, stating that the contractor had performed some additional
work on the wall but had not been back to finish the job. Assistant Fire Chief Alexon contacted the
contractor and received information that there was an ongoing dispute between the owner and the
contractor regarding payment. The extension was denied. A thirty day notice was given to have all
completed, tenants that are remaining were notified and compliance orders listing the violations were
mailed by regular mail to the owner at the address listed on the Rental Housing License Application.
November 14, 2000
9. That on, Gary Gorman and Rich Hinrichs, inspectors for the City of
Columbia Heights, reinspected and noted that three violations remained uncorrected. Compliance
orders listing the violations were mailed by certified mail to the owner at the address listed on the
Rental Housing License Application.
10. That based upon said records of the Enforcement Officer, the following conditions and
violations of the Citys Housing Maintenance Code were found to exist, to-wit:
=
A. FAILURE TO CORRECT VIOLATION OF THE HOUSING
MAINTENANCE CODE
B. FAILURE TO SUBMIT REINSPECTION FEES OF $250.00
11 That all parties, including the License Holder and any occupants or tenants, have been
given the appropriate notice of this hearing according to the provisions of the City Code
Section 5A.306(1) and 5A.303(1)(d).
CONCLUSIONS OF COUNCIL
4055-4057 University Avenue
1. That the building located at is in violation of the provisions of
the Columbia Heights City Code as set forth in the Compliance Order attached hereto.
2. That all relevant parties and parties in interest have been duly served notice of this hearing,
and any other hearings relevant to the revocation or suspension of the license held by License Holder.
3. That all applicable rights and periods of appeal as relating to the license holder, owner,
occupant, or tenant, as the case may be, have expired, or such rights have been exercised and
completed.
ORDER OF COUNCIL
1. The rental license belonging to the License Holder described herein and identified by license
F4539
number is hereby revoked/suspended (cross out one)
2. The City will post for the purpose of preventing occupancy a copy of this order on the
buildings covered by the license held by License Holder
3. All tenants shall remove themselves from the premises within 60 days from the first day of
posting of this Order revoking the license as held by License Holder.
th
Passed this 11 day of December, 2000
Motion by: Hunter
Second by: Wyckoff
Roll call: All ayes ______________________________
Mayor Gary L. Peterson
____________________________
Patricia Muscovitz, Deputy City Clerk
E. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 1424, Being an Ordinance Regulating the
Zoning of Wireless Communications Towers and Wireless Communications
Facilities (Tower Siting Ordinance)
MOTION
by Szurek, second by Jolly, to waive the reading of Ordinance No.
All ayes. Motion
1424, there being ample copies available for the public.
carried.
MOTION
by Szurek, second by Jolly, to adopt Ordinance No. 1424, Columbia
Heights Tower Siting Ordinance, an Ordinance of the City Council of the City of
Columbia Heights, Minnesota, regulating the zoning of wireless communication
towers and wireless communications facilities; providing intent and definitions;
providing minimum standards for location, visual impact and approval of wireless
communications towers; providing minimum standards for the location, visual
impact and approval of wireless communications antennas and facilities; providing
for shared use of wireless communications towers; providing for inspections;
providing for conflict; providing for severability; providing for inclusion in the city
code; providing for an effective date.
All ayes. Motion carried. (Ordinance attached to the end of this document)
F. Reconvene Public Hearing to Approve Modified Redevelopment Plan for CBD
Redevelopment Project and TIF Plan for TIF District (Redevelopment) No. 9.
MOTION
by Hunter, second by Szurek, to waive the reading of Resolution No.
Upon vote: Szurek –
2000-67, there being ample copies available to the public.
yes, Jolly – yes, Wyckoff – no, Hunter – yes, Peterson – yes. Motion carried,
4 ayes to 1 nay.
MOTION
by Hunter, second by Szurek, to adopt Resolution 2000-67, being a
Resolution Approving a Modified Redevelopment Plan for the Central Business
District Redevelopment Project and a Tax Increment Financing Plan for Tax
Increment Financing District (Redevelopment) No. 9. (Transition Block
Redevelopment Project – Crest View/Real Estate Equities)
th
Joyce Shellito, 403 7 Street, asked when the project would be completed and was
concerned there would not be sufficient parking for the Assisted Senior Living facility.
Peterson estimated the project would be completed in March 2001.
Shirley Barnes, Crest View Corporation, addressed her parking concerns. Jolly
addressed the need for this type of facility in the community.
Bruce Nawrocki felt this project is too large for this small area, and was concerned about
sufficient play space for children of the residents. He stated the increased storm and
sanitary sewer output from the area should be a concern. He disagreed with the 44 street
parking permits committed to NEI. Nawrocki stated that property taxes would increase
with these additional new children attending local schools. He requested the project be
re-evaluated.
Bobby Williams, 4047 Cleveland Street, agreed that we have a need for this facility.
Keith Jans, Real Estate Equities, answered earlier comments, stating there is an 80 by
200 foot play area for children, parking for the rental units exceeds the requirement of 2
stalls per unit, the sewer problem is a long standing issue, street parking along NEI is
now being used by their students, and the school district is anxious to have more students
as their funding is based on numbers. He thanked the City Council for their support of
this project.
Hunter says he supports and is proud of this project.
Mary Callaghan, 4219 Jackson, expressed concern on increased water usage, sewer and
storm water capacities, and fire vehicle access.
Wyckoff indicated she would vote no on this development. She sited contacts with
residents who have concerns about this project, she was not agreeable to the use of Tax
th
Increment Financing funds, exclusive parking permits to NEI along 44 Avenue, and
would like to see a smaller number of town homes placed here.
Jolly supported the project.
Marilyn Wick-Schneider, a Fridley resident, stated renters do pay a share of property
taxes as renters, and are contributing members and workers in the community. She
supported the project.
Peterson felt this is an excellent development. He reminded everyone that initially the
project included “for sale” townhomes, but was dropped only to meet NEI parking
requirements. He respects the engineer’s advice that this will create no additional sewer
and storm water management problems. He felt these water problems need to be
addressed separately, possibly through home inspections requiring disconnection of any
water being pumped to the sanitary sewer system. Peterson was pleased that this new
development would bring new children to the community. He referenced the small
amount his property taxes have increased in thirty years. Peterson stated that Columbia
Heights staff has done an excellent job providing services to the community.
Szurek – yes, Jolly – yes, Wyckoff – no, Hunter – yes, Peterson – yes.
Upon vote:
Motion carried, 4 ayes to 1 nay.
RESOLUTION NO. 2000 - 67
RESOLUTION APPROVING A MODIFIED REDEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE
CENTRAL BUSINESS DISTRICT REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AND A TAX
INCREMENT FINANCING PLAN FOR TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT
(REDEVELOPMENT) NO. 9
BE IT RESOLVED By the City Council of the City of Columbia Heights, Minnesota (City) as
follows:
Section 1. Recitals.
1.01. The City of Columbia Heights ("City") has previously established the Central Business
District Redevelopment Project (the "Project") and a redevelopment plan therefor (the
“Redevelopment Plan”), originally administered by the Housing and Redevelopment Authority in and
for the City of Columbia Heights ("HRA").
1.02. By resolution approved January 8, 1996, the City transferred the control, authority and
operation of the Project from the HRA to the Columbia Heights Economic Development Authority
("Authority").
1.03. The Authority has proposed the establishment within the Project of Tax Increment
Financing District (Redevelopment) No. 9 (the "TIF District") and a Tax Increment Financing Plan
("TIF Plan") therefor, pursuant to the HRA Law and Minnesota Statutes, Sections 469.174 through
469.179 ( the "TIF Act").
1.04. The Authority has caused to be prepared a document titled "City of Columbia Heights,
Minnesota, Columbia Heights EDA Tax Increment Financing Plan for Tax Increment Financing
District (Redevelopment) No. 9 (Transition Block Redevelopment Project - Crest View/Real Estate
Equities)" (the “Plan”).
1.05. The Authority has submitted the Plan to the City Planning and Zoning Commission,
which has found that it conforms to the comprehensive City plan.
1.06. Estimates of the fiscal and economic implications of the Plan were presented to the
appropriate school and county boards and officials at least 30 days before the public hearing on the
Plan.
1.07. By resolution approved September 25, 2000, the Authority has approved the Plan and
has recommended approval thereof by this Council, and such resolution, and its findings and
supporting documentation is hereby incorporated herein.
1.08. This City Council has fully reviewed the contents of the Plan and on this date
conducted a public hearing thereon, at which the views of all interested persons were heard.
Section 2. Findings; Project.
2.01. It is hereby found and determined that within the Project there is a need to improve the
tax base and housing and employment opportunities, and to provide an impetus for commercial
development.
2.02. It is further specifically found and determined that:
a) the land within the Project would not be made available for development without
the public intervention and financial assistance described in the Plan;
b) the Plan will afford maximum opportunity, consistent with the sound needs of the
City as a whole, for the development of the Project by private enterprise; and
c) the Project and the Plan conform to the general plan for development of the City
as set forth in the comprehensive municipal plan.
2.03. It is found and determined that it is necessary and desirable for the sound and orderly
development of the Project and the City as a whole, and for the protection and preservation of the
public health, safety, and general welfare, that the authority of the TIF Act be exercised by the City to
provide public financial assistance as described in the Plan.
2.04. It is further found and determined, and it is the reasoned opinion of the City, that the
development proposed in the Plan for TIF District No. 9 could not reasonably be expected to occur
solely through private investment within the reasonably foreseeable future and the increased market
value of the site that could reasonably be expected to occur without the use of tax increment financing
would be less than the increase in the market value estimated to result from the proposed
development after subtracting the present value of the projected tax increments for the maximum
duration of the district permitted by the plan.
2.05. The proposed public improvements to be financed in part through tax increment
financing are necessary to permit the City to realize the full potential of the TIF District and Project in
terms of development intensity, housing and employment opportunities, and tax base.
2.06. The Plan conforms to the general plan of development of the City as a whole.
2.07. The Plan will afford maximum opportunity, consistent with the sound needs of the
City as a whole, for the development of the TIF District and Project by private enterprise.
2.08. TIF District No. 9 is a redevelopment district under Section 469.174, subd. 10 of the
TIF Act, based on the findings described in the Plan, which are incorporated herein by reference, and
other records on file with the City, which are also incorporated herein by reference.
2.09. Reasons and facts supporting the findings herein are set forth in the TIF Plan. The
City has also relied upon the reports and recommendations of its staff as well as the personal
knowledge of members of the City Council in reaching its conclusions regarding TIF District No. 9.
2.10. The City elects to make a qualifying local contribution under Minnesota Statutes,
Section 273.1399, subd. 6(d), and therefore anticipates that the TIF District will be exempt from state
aid loss under that statute.
Section 3. Plan Adopted; Certification; Filing.
3.01. The Plan is hereby approved and adopted and the Redevelopment Plan is hereby
modified accordingly.
3.02. The Board hereby makes all the findings set forth in the Plan, which is incorporated
herein by reference.
3.03. City staff and consultants are authorized to take all actions necessary to implement the
Plan, including negotiation and preparation of agreements in connection with development and
redevelopment within the TIF District and Project area. City staff and consultants are further
authorized and directed to transmit a certified copy of this resolution together with a certified copy of
the Plan to Anoka County with a request that the original tax capacity of the property within TIF
District No. 9 be certified to the City pursuant to Section 469.177, subd. 1 of the TIF Act, and to file
a copy of the Plan with the Minnesota Commissioner of Revenue as required by the TIF Act.
th
Passed this 11 day of December, 2000
Offered by: Hunter
Seconded by: Szurek
Roll Call: All ayes
Mayor Gary L. Peterson
________________________________
Patricia Muscovitz, Deputy City Clerk
7. ITEMS FOR CONSIDERATION
A. Other Ordinances and Resolutions
1. Adopt Resolution 2000-97, Being a Resolution Approving Contract for
Private Development and Associated Agreements between the Columbia
Heights Economic Development Authority and Columbia Heights
Transition Block, LLC.
MOTION
by Hunter, second by Szurek, to waive the reading of
Resolution No. 2000-97, there being ample copies available to the public.
All ayes. Motion carried.
MOTION
by Hunter, second by Szurek, to adopt Resolution 2000-97,
being a Resolution approving Agreements Relating to a Proposed
Development in Tax Increment Financing District No. 9 with the City
(Transition block-Crest View/Real Estate Equities).
Ken Anderson, Community Development Director, stated all actions necessary
for this development have been approved by the Economic Development
Authority, and he explained all grants and loans made available to the
developer.
Szurek – yes, Jolly – yes, Wyckoff – no, Hunter – yes, Peterson –
Upon vote:
yes. Motion carried, 4 ayes to 1 nay.
RESOLUTION NO. 2000-97
RESOLUTION APPROVING AGREEMENTS RELATING TO A PROPOSED
DEVELOPMENT IN TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT NO. 9 WITHIN THE
CITY
BE IT RESOLVED By the City Council of the City of Columbia Heights, Minnesota
(City) as follows:
Section 1. Recitals.
1.01. The City of Columbia Heights ("City") has previously established the Central
Business District Redevelopment Project (the "Project") and a redevelopment plan therefor (the
“Redevelopment Plan”), originally administered by the Housing and Redevelopment Authority in
and for the City of Columbia Heights ("HRA").
1.02. By resolution approved January 8, 1996, the City transferred the control,
authority and operation of the Project from the HRA to the Columbia Heights Economic
Development Authority ("Authority").
1.03. The Authority has proposed the establishment within the Project of Tax Increment
Financing District (Redevelopment) No. 9 (the "TIF District") and a Tax Increment Financing
Plan ("TIF Plan") therefore, pursuant to the HRA Law and Minnesota Statutes, Sections 469.174
through 469.179 ( the "TIF Act").
1.04. The Authority and the City have approved a document titled "City of Columbia
Heights, Minnesota, Columbia Heights EDA Tax Increment Financing Plan for Tax Increment
Financing District (Redevelopment) No. 9 (Crestview/Real Estate Equities Project)" (the “Plan”)
and the creation of the Tax Increment Financing District (Redevelopment) No. 9 described in the
Plan (the “TIF District”).
1.05. The City Council has reviewed certain agreements presented to it, and certain
agreements presented to the Authority, in connection with development of an affordable housing
project (the “Affordable Housing Project”) and a senior housing project (the “Senior Housing
Project”) proposed within the TIF District and has determined that approval of such agreements
will be in the best interests of the City and its residents and will further the public health, safety,
and welfare.
Section 2. Approvals.
2.01. The following documents are hereby approved, and the authorized officials directed to
execute the same, subject to modifications that do not alter the substance of the transactions and
are approved by such officials, provided that execution of the documents by such officials is
conclusive evidence of their approval:
a. The Community Development Block Grant Agreement in the amount of $127,000
by and between the City and Columbia Heights Housing Limited Partnership I.
b. The Community Development Block Loan Agreement in the amount of $104,000
by and between the City and Columbia Heights Housing Limited Partnership I.
c. The Livable Community Act Fund Grant in the amount of $235,350 by and
between the City and Columbia Heights Transition Block LLC.
d. The Livable Community Act Fund Grant in the amount of $235,350 by and
between the City and Crest View ONDC I.
e. The Payment in Lieu of Taxes (P.I.L.O.T) Agreement pertaining to the
Affordable Housing Project.
2.02. The City hereby approves all actions taken or approved by the Authority with
regard to the Affordable Housing Project and the Senior Housing Project, including but not
limited to the Authority’s approval of a Resolution Approving Contract For Private Development
And Awarding The Sale Of, And Providing The Form, Terms, Covenants And Directions For The
Issuance Of Its $175,100 Taxable Tax Increment Revenue Note, Series 2000 and a Resolution
Approving Contract For Private Development And Awarding The Sale Of, And Providing The
Form, Terms, Covenants And Directions For The Issuance Of Its $780,000 Taxable Tax
Increment Revenue Note, Series 2000.
2.03. City staff and consultants are authorized to take all actions necessary to implement
the agreements hereby approved.
th
Passed this 11 day of December, 2000
Offered by: Hunter
Second by: Szurek
Roll Call: Szurek – aye, Jolly – aye, Hunter – aye, Peterson – aye, Wyckoff - nay
Mayor Gary L.
Peterson
_________
Patricia Muscovitz, Deputy City Clerk
B. Bid Considerations - none
C. Other Business - none
8. ADMINISTRATIVE REPORTS
A. Report of the City Manager - none
B. Report of the City Attorney - none
9. GENERAL COUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS
A. Minutes of Boards and Commissions
1) Meeting of the November 29, 2000 Park and Recreation Commission
10. CITIZENS FORUM
(At this time, citizens have an opportunity to discuss with the Council items not on the
regular agenda.)
Bobby Williams, Councilmember elect, questioned job classifications and salary
adjustments. Jolly stated past practice for position evaluations was through the HAY
System.
Linda Magee, Assistant to the City Manager, stated that in 1984 the Legislature passed a
pay equity act which required all public entities to conduct a job evaluation of positions
based on know-how, problem solving, accountability and working conditions. The City
used and still uses the Hay System of job evaluation. It is an evaluation of positions –
not people. Currently, the State has a reporting system and a statistical method of
determining whether cities are in compliance. If a supervisor feels a position needs to be
re-evaluated, that position is reviewed. It may or may not result in a change.
She stated that the City of Columbia Heights has six bargaining units represented by five
unions. Job evaluations and classifications are not a negotiable item. If a union
position is re-evaluated and an adjustment is necessary, the position will be placed within
the appropriate wage schedule, if one exits. If it doesn’t exist, the wage schedule would
be negotiated.
Peterson expressed the Council’s appreciation of Ms. Magee’s work and her work with
union negotiations.
Peterson requested the high school students present introduce themselves. Karen Ponser
and Melissa Pannes, from Mr. Thomas’s Civics class were present.
11. ADJOURNMENT
Mayor Peterson adjourned at 9:05 pm.
_________________________________
Patricia Muscovitz, Deputy City Clerk
COLUMBIA HEIGHTS
TOWER SITING
O
RDINANCE NO. 1424
Table of Contents
1. Purpose 2
2. Definitions 3
3. Applicability 6
4. Exempt from City Review.......................................................................................................................................7
5. Permitted Locations.................................................................................................................................................7
6. Existing Towers.......................................................................................................................................................8
7. Co-Location Use, Modification and Relocation of Existing Towers......................................................................9
8. Application to Locate Wireless Communications Facility on Existing Tower.....................................................10
9. Wireless Communications Facilities on Antenna Support Structures..................................................................11
10. Application to Locate Wireless Communications Facility on Antenna
Support Structure................................................................................................................................................12
11. Utility Pole-Mounted Wireless Communication Facilities...................................................................................14
12. Application for Utility Pole-Mounted Wireless Communications Facility..........................................................15
13. Construction of New Towers................................................................................................................................16
a. Conditions of Approval for Wireless Communications Towers...................................................................16
b. Requirements for Separation Between Towers.............................................................................................16
c. Standards for Co-Location.............................................................................................................................17
d. Tower Design and Type.................................................................................................................................18
e. Landscaping Minimum Requirements...........................................................................................................19
f. Visual Impact Standards................................................................................................................................19
14. Application Process for New Towers...................................................................................................................21
15. Annual Registration Requirement.........................................................................................................................24
a. Wireless Communications Facilities.............................................................................................................24
b. Wireless Communications Towers................................................................................................................24
16. General Requirements...........................................................................................................................................25
a. Duration of Permits........................................................................................................................................25
b. Assignment and Subleasing...........................................................................................................................25
c. Aesthetics.......................................................................................................................................................25
d. Federal and State Requirements....................................................................................................................26
e. Licenses or Franchise.....................................................................................................................................26
f. Discontinued Use...........................................................................................................................................26
g. Abandoned Tower or Antenna......................................................................................................................26
h. FCC Emissions Standards.............................................................................................................................27
i. Maintenance...................................................................................................................................................28
j. Emergency.....................................................................................................................................................28
k. Equipment Cabinets.......................................................................................................................................29
l. Equipment on Site..........................................................................................................................................29
m. Inspections.....................................................................................................................................................29
n. Security..........................................................................................................................................................29
o. Advances in Technology................................................................................................................................30
17. Review of Applications.........................................................................................................................................30
18. Appeals 30
19. Revocation 30
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF COLUMBIA HEIGHTS, MINNESOTA,
REGULATING THE ZONING OF WIRELESS COMMUNICATIONS TOWERS AND WIRELESS
COMMUNICATIONS FACILITIES; PROVIDING INTENT AND DEFINITIONS; PROVIDING MINIMUM
STANDARDS FOR LOCATION, VISUAL IMPACT AND APPROVAL OF WIRELESS COMMUNICATIONS
TOWERS; PROVIDING MINIMUM STANDARDS FOR THE LOCATION, VISUAL IMPACT AND APPROVAL
OF WIRELESS COMMUNICATIONS ANTENNAS AND FACILITIES; PROVIDING FOR SHARED USE OF
WIRELESS COMMUNICATIONS TOWERS; PROVIDING FOR INSPECTIONS; PROVIDING FOR CONFLICT;
i
PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; PROVIDING FOR INCLUSION IN THE CITY CODE; PROVIDING FOR
AN EFFECTIVE DATE
WHEREAS,
the City of Columbia Heights, Minnesota (the “City”) has received numerous inquiries from wireless
communications service providers for the location and construction of wireless communications towers in the City; and
WHEREAS,
47 U.S.C. § 332(c)(7) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended by the Telecommunications Act of 1996,
expressly preserves the zoning authority of local governments relating to wireless communications towers and related facilities; and
WHEREAS,
the City has a limited number of potential sites that would be acceptable for the installation of wireless
communications towers and facilities; and
WHEREAS,
the citizens of the City have expressed great concern about the location of wireless communications towers and
related facilities within the City, related to preserving the residential character of the community, promoting the integrity of the City’s
residential neighborhoods and addressing safety issues; and
WHEREAS,
the limited number of potential wireless communications tower and wireless communications antenna sites
requires the City to address the needs of competing wireless service providers; and
WHEREAS,
City staff and the Planning and Zoning Commission have studied and recommended appropriate siting policies to
permit the placement of wireless communications towers and related facilities in locations that will balance the interests of public safety,
aesthetics, property values and the provision of wireless communications services by the use of such facilities; and
WHEREAS,
the City Council has determined that the current zoning provisions within the City Code are inadequate as they
relate to compatibility of wireless communications tower siting with surrounding properties, proliferation of towers and encouraging co-
location of antennas; and
WHEREAS,
City staff has drafted amendments to the City Code determined to be necessary to protect the aesthetic, health,
safety and welfare concerns found to exist.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF COLUMBIA HEIGHTS, MINNESOTA, AS
FOLLOWS:
Section 1.
Section 9.116(16)(a)(ix) of the City Code is hereby repealed.
Section 2.
Chapter 9 of the City Code is hereby amended to include a new Section 9.615, to read as follows:
“9.615 Wireless Communications Towers and Antennas.
Purpose.
1) The purpose of this Section is to provide a uniform and comprehensive set of standards for the development and installation
of wireless communications towers, antennas and related facilities. The regulations and requirements contained herein are
intended to: (i) regulate the placement, construction and modification of wireless communications towers and related wireless
communications facilities in order to protect the health, safety, and welfare of the public and the aesthetic quality of the City; and
(ii) encourage managed development of wireless communications infrastructure, while at the same time not unreasonably
interfering with the development of the competitive wireless communications marketplace in the City of Columbia Heights.
It is intended that the City shall apply these regulations to accomplish the following:
a) Minimize the total number of towers throughout the community through siting standards;
b) Encourage the location of towers in non-residential areas and with compatible uses;
c) Provide for the appropriate location and development of wireless communications towers, antennas and related facilities within the
City, to the extent possible, to minimize potential adverse impacts on the community;
d) Minimize adverse visual impacts of wireless communications towers and related facilities through careful design, siting, landscape
screening, and innovative camouflaging techniques utilizing current and future technologies;
e) Promote and encourage shared use/co-location of towers and antenna support structures;
f) Maintain and preserve the existing residential character of the City of Columbia Heights and its neighborhoods and to promote the
creation of a convenient, attractive and harmonious community;
2
g) Promote the public safety and avoid the risk of damage to adjacent properties by ensuring that wireless communications towers and
related wireless communications facilities are properly designed, constructed, modified, maintained and removed;
h) Ensure that wireless communications towers and related wireless communications facilities are compatible with surrounding land
uses;
i) Encourage the use of alternative support structures, co-location of new antennas on existing wireless communications towers,
camouflaged towers, and construction of towers with the ability to locate three or more providers;
j) Maintain and ensure that a non-discriminatory, competitive and broad range of wireless communications services and high quality
wireless communications infrastructure consistent with federal law are provided to serve the community; and
k) Ensure that wireless communications facilities comply with radio frequency emissions standards as promulgated by the Federal
Communications Commission.
This Section is not intended to regulate satellite dishes, satellite earth station
antennas, residential television antennas in private use, multichannel multipoint
distribution service antennas, or amateur radio antennas.
Definitions.
2) For the purposes of this Section the following terms and phrases shall have the meaning ascribed to them herein:
Accessory Structure
means a structure or portion of a structure subordinate to and serving the principal structure on the same
§
lot.
Accessory Use
§ shall have the meaning set forth in the Land Use and Development Ordinance.
Antenna
§ means a device fabricated of fiberglass, metal or other material designed for use in transmitting and/or
receiving communications signals and usually attached to a wireless communications tower or antenna support
structure.
Antenna Support Structure
§ means any building or structure, excluding towers, used or useable for one or more
wireless communications facilities.
Buffer or Buffering
§ means a natural or landscaped area or screening device intended to separate and/or partially
obstruct the view of adjacent land uses or properties from one another so as to lessen the impact and adverse
relationship between dissimilar, unrelated or incompatible land uses.
City
§ means the City of Columbia Heights, Minnesota, and any and all departments, agencies and divisions thereof.
City Code
§ means the Columbia Heights City Code, as amended from time to time.
City Council or Council
§ means the Columbia Heights City Council or its designee.
City Manager
§ means the City Manager of the City of Columbia Heights, Minnesota or the City Manager’s designee.
Co-location
§ means the use of a single wireless communications tower, antenna support structure and/or site by more
than one provider.
Conditional Use
§ means those uses that are generally compatible with other uses permitted in a zoning district, but that
require individual review of their location, design, configuration, intensity and structures, and may require the
imposition of conditions pertinent thereto in order to ensure the appropriateness of the use at a particular location. This
definition shall only apply to this specific Section and shall not apply to other Sections or provisions of the Land Use
and Development Ordinance.
Conditional Use Permit
§ means a permit specially and individually granted by the Council after a public hearing
thereon by the Planning Commission for any conditional use so permitted in any zoning district. In approving a
conditional use permit, the Council may impose reasonable conditions to accomplish the objectives of this Section with
respect to use, screening, lighting, hours of operation, noise control, maintenance, operation or other requirements.
Equipment Cabinet or Shelter
§ means a structure located near a wireless communications facility that contains
electronics, back-up power generators and/or other on-site supporting equipment necessary for the operation of the
facility.
3
Existing Tower
§ means any tower designated as an existing tower by subsection 6 of this Section for which a permit
has been properly issued prior to the effective date of this Ordinance, including permitted towers that have not yet been
constructed so long as such approval is current and not expired. After the effective date of this Ordinance, any tower
approved and constructed pursuant to the provisions of this Section shall thereafter be treated as an existing tower for
purposes of regulation pursuant to this Ordinance and the Land Use and Development Ordinance.
Guyed Tower
§ means a wireless communications tower that is supported, in whole or in part, by guy wires and ground
anchors or other means of support besides the superstructure of the tower itself.
Land Use and Development Ordinance
§ means Chapter 9 of the Columbia Heights Code, as it may be amended from
time to time.
Microwave Dish Antenna
§ means a dish-like antenna used to transmit and/or receive wireless communications signals
between terminal locations.
Monopole Tower
§ means a wireless communications tower consisting of a single pole or spire supported by a
permanent foundation, constructed without guy wires and ground anchors.
Non-Conformity
§ shall have the meaning given in Minn. Stat. § 394.22, Subd. 8, or successor statutes, and shall be
governed by the provisions of the Land Use and Development Ordinance (Non-Conformities).
Ordinance
§ means this Ordinance No. 1424.
Panel Antenna
§ means an array of antennas designed to direct, transmit or receive radio signals from a particular
direction.
Pico Cell
§ means a low-power cell whose coverage area extends 300 to 500 yards.
Planning Commission
§ means the Columbia Heights Planning and Zoning Commission.
Provider
§ (when used with reference to a system) means a person or entity that provides wireless communications
service over a wireless communications facility, whether or not the provider owns the facility. A person that leases a
portion of a wireless communications facility shall be treated as a provider for purposes of this Section.
Satellite Dish
§ means an antenna device incorporating a reflective surface that is solid, open mesh, or bar configured
that is shallow dish, cone, horn, or cornucopia-shaped and is used to transmit and/or receive electromagnetic signals.
This definition is meant to include, but is not limited to, what are commonly referred to as satellite earth stations,
TVROs and satellite microwave antennas.
Self-support/Lattice Tower
§ means a tower structure requiring no guy wires for support.
Stealth or Camouflaged Tower, Equipment Cabinet or Facility
§ means any wireless communications tower,
equipment cabinet or facility designed to hide, obscure or conceal the presence of the tower, antenna, equipment
cabinet or other related facility. The stealth technology used must incorporate the wireless communications tower,
equipment cabinet and facility into and be compatible with the existing or proposed uses of the site. Examples of
stealth facilities include, but are not limited to: architecturally screened roof-mounted antennas, antennas integrated into
architectural elements, and wireless communications towers designed to look like light poles, power poles, trees, flag
poles, clocks, steeples or bell towers.
Utility Pole-Mounted Facility
§ means a wireless communications facility attached, without regard to mounting, to or
upon an electric transmission or distribution pole, street light, traffic signal, athletic field light, utility support structure
or other similar facility located within a public right-of-way or utility easement approved by the Planning Commission.
The facility shall include any associated equipment shelters regardless of where they are located with respect to the
mount.
Whip Antenna
§ means an omni-directional antenna used to transmit and/or receive radio signals.
Wireless Communications Facility
§ means a facility that is used to provide one or more wireless communications
services, including, without limitation, arrays, antennas and associated facilities used to transmit and/or receive
wireless communications signals. This term does not include wireless communications towers, over-the-air reception
devices that deliver or receive broadcast signals, satellite dishes regulated by 47 C.F.R. § 25.104, devices that provide
direct-to-home satellite services (“DBS”) or devices that provide multichannel multi-point distribution services
(“MMDS”) as defined and regulated by 47 C.F.R. § 1.4000, as amended.
4
Wireless Communications Services
§ means those services specified in 47 U.S.C. §§ 332(c)(7)(C) and 332(d)(1)-(2),
and any amendments thereto.
Wireless Communications Tower
§ means a guyed, monopole or self-support/lattice tower, or extension thereto,
constructed as a freestanding structure, supporting one or more wireless communications facilities used in the
provision of wireless communications services.
Zoning Administrator
§ means the person appointed by the City Manager as provided in the Land Use and
Development Ordinance.
Applicability.
3) The requirements of this Section apply to the extent provided herein to all new, existing, replacement, re-located or
expanded and/or modified wireless communications towers and wireless communications facilities. The requirements of this
Section apply throughout the City. It is the express intent of the City to impose, to the extent permitted by applicable law, all
requirements of this Section to all land within the City, whether publicly or privately held, including, without limitation, private
property, City property, church property, utility property and school property.
Non-Essential Services.
a) Wireless communications towers and wireless communications facilities will be regulated
and permitted pursuant to this Section and not regulated or permitted as essential services, public utilities or private
utilities.
Attempt to Locate on Existing Tower or Antenna Support Structure.
b) Every owner/operator seeking to locate a
wireless communications facility within the City must attempt to locate on an existing wireless communications tower
or antenna support structure as required by subsections 7 through 8 of this Section.
Exempt from City Review.
4) The following activities shall be permitted without City approvals:
a)Amateur Radio - the installation of any antenna and its supporting tower, pole or mast to the extent City regulation is
preempted by state or federal law.
b)Residential Television Antennas - the installation of residential television antennas in private use to the extent preempted by
state and federal law.
Satellite Dishes – the installation of satellite dishes to the extent preempted by state or federal law.
Mobile News–the use of mobile services equipment providing public information coverage of news events of a temporary or
emergency nature.
Permitted Locations.
5) The following applies to all wireless communications towers, including re-located or expanded and/or
modified towers, but not to existing towers:
a) Wireless communications towers less than 120 feet in height shall be a permitted use in the I-1 and I-2 zoning districts.
b) Wireless communications towers greater than or equal to 120 feet in height shall be a conditional use in the I-1 and I-2
zoning districts.
c) Wireless communications towers less than 80 feet in height shall be a permitted use in the RB, CBD and GB zoning
districts.
d) Wireless communications towers greater than or equal to 80 feet in height shall be a conditional use in the RB, CBD
and GB zoning districts.
e) Wireless communications towers less than 80 feet in height shall only be allowed as a conditional use in the R-1, R-2,
R-3, R-4 and LB zoning districts.
f) Wireless communications towers greater than or equal to 80 feet in height shall not be a permitted use in the R-1, R-2,
R-3, R-4 and LB zoning districts.
g) Except where superseded by the requirements of county, state or federal regulatory agencies possessing jurisdiction
over wireless communications towers, equipment cabinets and wireless communications facilities, such towers,
equipment cabinets and facilities shall be stealth towers, stealth equipment cabinets and stealth facilities camouflaged
to blend into the surrounding environment using stealth technology in a manner pre-approved by the City on a case-by-
case basis.
5
h) Utility pole-mounted facilities shall be permitted as accessory uses in all zoning districts. Applications for such
facilities shall be subject to the conditions set forth in this Section.
Existing Towers.
6)
Except where otherwise noted, existing towers shall not be rendered non-conforming uses by this Section. The City encourages
the use of these existing towers for purposes of co-locating additional wireless communications facilities. Any and all
towers erected and in use or approved on or before the effective date of this Ordinance shall be treated as existing
towers. These towers shall be considered conforming uses with respect to this Section and the City shall allow co-
location on these towers subject to the requirements of subsection 7 of this Section so long as the providers utilize the
most visually unobtrusive equipment that is technologically feasible.
b)Owners of existing towers shall be required to comply with the requirements and procedures set forth in subections 13 and 14
(“Construction of New Towers” and “Application Process for New Towers”) to replace an existing tower.
c)Owners of existing towers shall be required to comply with the applicable requirements and procedures set forth in
subsections 6, 7, 8 and 13 (“Existing Towers,” “Co-location Use, Modification and Relocation of Existing Towers,”
“Application to Locate Wireless Communications Facility on Existing Tower,” and “Construction of New Towers”) to
modify or relocate an existing tower or to co-locate a wireless communications facility on an existing tower.
d)Increases in height of an existing wireless communications tower, modification of an existing wireless communications tower
or conversion of an existing wireless communications tower to a stealth or camouflage structure shall be treated as a
new tower and subject to all the applicable requirements of this Section.
e)Owners of existing wireless communications towers shall be required to comply with the requirements set forth in subsection
15 (“Annual Registration”) and subsection 16 (“General Requirements”).
Co-Location Use, Modification and Relocation of Existing Towers.
7)
a)Any owner of an existing tower or antenna support structure containing additional capacity suitable for installation or co-
location of wireless communications facilities shall permit providers to install or co-locate said facilities on such
towers or antenna support structures; provided that no existing tower or antenna support structure shall be used to
support wireless communications facilities for more than three separate providers. Any co-location of wireless
communications facilities shall be subject to mutually agreeable terms and conditions negotiated between the parties.
Any existing tower may be modified or relocated to accommodate co-location of additional wireless communications facilities as
follows:
(i) An application for a wireless communications permit to modify or relocate a wireless communications tower
shall be made to the Zoning Administrator. The application shall contain the information required by
subsection 14(b)-(c) of this Section. The Zoning Administrator shall have the authority to issue a wireless
communications permit without further approval by the Council or the Planning Commission, except as
provided in this Section. Any denial of an application for a wireless communications permit to modify or
relocate a wireless communications tower for purposes of co-location shall be made in accordance with
subsection 14(e) of this Section.
(ii) The total height of the modified tower and wireless communications facilities attached thereto shall not
exceed the maximum height allowed for a permitted wireless communications tower in the zoning district in
which the tower is located, unless a conditional use permit is granted by the City.
(iii) Permission to exceed the existing height shall not require an additional distance separation from designated
areas as set forth in this Section. The tower’s pre-modification height shall be used to calculate such distance
separations.
(iv) A tower which is being rebuilt to accommodate the co-location of additional wireless communications
facilities may be moved on the same parcel subject to compliance with the requirements of this Section.
(v) A tower that is relocated on the same parcel shall continue to be measured from the original tower location
for the purpose of calculating the separation distances between towers as provided herein.
6
Application to Locate Wireless Communications Facility on Existing Tower.
8)
a) An application for a wireless communications permit to locate or re-locate a wireless
communications facility on an existing tower must be submitted to the Zoning Administrator
on the designated form and shall, at a minimum, contain the following:
(i) Name, address and telephone number of the applicant;
(ii) Location of the existing tower, along with the tower owner’s name and telephone
number;
(iii) Number of applicant’s wireless communications facilities to be located on the subject
tower;
(iv) A sworn and certified statement in writing by a qualified engineer that the wireless
communications facility will conform to any and all other construction standards set
forth by the City Code, and federal and state law;
(v) An application fee in the amount set by the Council for each wireless communications
facility listed on the application;
(vi) A copy of all licenses and/or franchises required by federal, state or local law for the
construction and/or operation of a wireless communications system in the City;
(vii) A scaled site plan clearly indicating the location, type and height of the proposed
wireless communications facility, on-site land uses and zoning, elevation and stealth
design drawings of the proposed wireless communications facility and the supporting
tower, topography, and any other information deemed by the City to be necessary to
assess compliance with this Ordinance and the Land Use and Development
Ordinance;
(viii) An inventory of the applicant’s existing towers and wireless communications
facilities, if any, that are either within the jurisdiction of the City or within one mile of
the City limits, including specific information about the location, height, and design of
each wireless communications facility or tower;
(ix) A certification that the applicant will comply with all applicable federal, state or local
laws including all the provisions of the Land Use and Development Ordinance; and
(x) A certification that the site described in the application is located on an existing tower
and the owner/operator agrees to the co-location of the subject wireless
communications facility.
b) An application for a wireless communications permit to locate or re-locate a wireless
communications facility that proposes to co-locate said facility on an existing tower and that
satisfies the requirements set forth in this Section, shall receive expedited treatment in the
review process.
c) So as to further expedite the permitting process and to promote the efficient use of existing sites, the City encourages
the users of existing towers to submit a single application for approval of multiple users on a single existing site.
Applications for approval at multiple user sites shall be given priority in the review process. The fee to be submitted
with a multiple user application shall be the fee specified in this subsection multiplied by the number of users listed in
such application.
7
d) A petitioner shall submit any additional information requested by the City for
purposes of evaluating the permit request.
e) In granting or denying a wireless communications permit to locate or re-
locate a wireless communications facility on an existing tower, the Zoning Administrator shall prepare
a written record of decision including findings of fact.
Wireless Communications Facilities on Antenna Support Structures.
9)
a) All wireless communications facilities to be located on antenna support structures shall be subject to the following
minimum standards:
(i) Wireless communications facilities shall only be permitted on buildings which are at least thirty-five (35) feet
tall.
(ii) Wireless communications facilities shall be permitted on the City’s water tower; provided that the City may
impose reasonable conditions which ensure that such facilities do not interfere with access to or maintenance
of the tower.
(iii) If an equipment cabinet associated with a wireless communications facility is located on the roof of a
building, the area of the equipment cabinet shall not exceed ten (10) feet in height, four hundred (400) square
feet in area nor occupy more than ten percent (10%) of the roof area. All equipment cabinets shall be
constructed out of nonreflective materials and shall be designed to blend with existing architecture and
located or designed to minimize their visibility.
b) Antenna dimensions.
(i) Unless a conditional use permit is obtained from the City, whip antennas and their supports must not exceed
25’ in height and 12” in diameter and must be constructed of a material or color which matches the exterior
of the antenna support structure.
(ii) Unless a conditional use permit is obtained from the City, panel antennas and their supports must not exceed
8’ in height or 2.5’ in width and must be constructed of a material or color which matches the exterior of the
building or structure, so as to achieve maximum compatibility and minimum visibility.
(iii) Unless a conditional use permit is obtained from the City, microwave dish antennas located below sixty-five
(65) feet above the ground may not exceed six (6) feet in diameter. Microwave dish antennas located sixty-
five (65) feet and higher above the ground may not exceed eight (8) feet in diameter.
c) Notwithstanding anything to the contrary, wireless communications facilities
and related equipment shall not be installed on antenna support structures in residential zoning
districts, unless a conditional use permit is obtained from the City.
d) Wireless communications facilities located on antenna support structures,
and their related equipment cabinets, shall be located or screened to minimize the visual impact of
such facilities and equipment cabinets upon adjacent properties. Any such screening shall be of a
material and color that matches the exterior of the building or structure upon which it is situated.
Wireless communications facilities and related equipment cabinets shall be of a stealth design, and
shall have an exterior finish and/or design as approved by the City.
Application to Locate Wireless Communications Facility on Antenna Support Structure.
10)
a) An application for a wireless communications permit to locate or re-locate a
wireless communications facility on an antenna support structure must be submitted to the Zoning
Administrator on the designated form and shall, at a minimum, contain the following:
(i) Name, address and telephone number of the applicant;
(ii) Location of the antenna support structure, along with the property owner’s name and telephone number;
(iii) Number of applicant’s wireless communications facilities to be located on the subject property;
8
(iv) A sworn and certified statement in writing by a qualified engineer that the wireless communications facility
will conform to any and all requirements and standards set forth in the City Code, and federal and state law;
(v) An application fee in an amount set by the Council for each wireless communications facility listed on the
application;
(vi) A copy of all licenses and/or franchises required by federal, state or local law for the construction and/or
operation of a wireless communications system in the City;
(vii) A scaled site plan clearly indicating the location, type and height of the proposed wireless communications
facility, on-site land uses and zoning, elevation and stealth design drawings of the proposed wireless
communications facility and the rooftop and building, topography, a current survey, landscape plans, and any
other information deemed by the City to be necessary to assess compliance with this Ordinance and the Land
Use and Development Ordinance;
(viii) An inventory of the applicant’s existing towers and wireless communications facilities, if any, that are either
within the jurisdiction of the City or within one mile of the City limits, including specific information about
the location, height, and design of each wireless communications facility or tower;
(ix) A certification that the applicant will comply with all applicable federal, state or local laws including all the
provisions of this Ordinance and the Land Use and Development Ordinance; and
(x) A certification that the site described in the application is located on an existing antenna support structure and
the owner/operator agrees to the location or co-location of the subject wireless communications facility.
b) An application for a wireless communications permit to locate or re-locate a
wireless communications facility that proposes to co-locate said facility on an antenna support
structure and that satisfies the requirements set forth in this Section, shall receive expedited
treatment in the review process.
c) So as to further expedite the permitting process and to promote the efficient
use of existing sites, the City encourages the users of antenna support structures to submit a single
application for approval of multiple users on a single existing site. Applications for approval at
multiple user sites shall be given priority in the review process. The fee to be submitted with a
multiple user application shall be the fee described in this Section multiplied by the number of users
listed in such application.
d) An applicant must submit a proposed stealth design for camouflaging its
wireless communications facility, unless this requirement is preempted by the operation of applicable
laws or regulations.
e) A petitioner shall submit any additional information requested by the City for
purposes of evaluating the permit request.
In granting or denying a wireless communications permit to locate or re-locate a wireless communications facility on an antenna
support structure, the Zoning Administrator shall prepare a written record of decision including findings of fact.
Utility Pole-Mounted Wireless Communications Facilities.
11)
a) Utility pole-mounted wireless communications facilities may be permitted as accessory uses in all zoning districts if the
provider uses pico cell equipment. Such facilities shall only be permitted in public rights-of-way that are at least 100
feet in width. To the greatest practical extent, utility pole-mounted wireless communications facilities shall be sited
where they are concealed from public view by other objects such as trees or buildings. When it is necessary to site
such a facility in public view, to the greatest practical extent it shall be designed to limit visual impact on surrounding
land uses, which design must be approved by the City.
b) The height of a utility pole-mounted facility shall not exceed two (2) feet above the pole structure.
c) Equipment cabinets associated with utility pole-mounted wireless communications facilities which are located within
the public right-of-way shall be of a scale and design that make them no more visually obtrusive than other types of
utility equipment boxes normally located within the right-of-way and shall be located in a manner and location
approved by the City. To the greatest practical extent, equipment cabinets associated with utility pole-mounted
facilities which are located outside of the public right-of-way shall be concealed from public view or shall be
9
architecturally designed using stealth technology or buffered to be compatible with surrounding land uses, except that
such shelters located in residential zoning districts must be screened from the view of residents and pedestrians.
d) Equipment cabinets associated with utility pole-mounted wireless communications facilities which are located outside
the public right-of-way shall meet the setback requirements for accessory buildings and structures for the zoning
district in which the equipment cabinet is located.
e) Generators associated with equipment shelters must meet with the requirements of the City
Code.
Application for Utility Pole-Mounted Wireless Communications Facility.
12)
a) An application for a wireless communications permit to locate or re-locate a utility pole-mounted wireless
communications facility must be submitted to the Zoning Administrator on the designated form and shall, at a
minimum, contain the following:
(i) Name, address and telephone number of the applicant;
(ii) Location of the utility pole-mount, along with the property owner’s name and telephone number;
(iii) Number of applicant’s wireless communications facilities to be located on the subject property;
(iv) A sworn and certified statement in writing by a qualified engineer that the wireless communications facility
will conform to any and all requirements and standards set forth in the City Code, and federal and state law;
(v) An application fee in the amount set by the Council for each wireless communications facility listed on the
application;
(vi) A copy of all licenses and/or franchises required by federal, state or local law for the construction and/or
operation of a wireless communications system in the City;
(vii) A scaled site plan clearly indicating the location, type and height of the proposed wireless communications
facility, on-site land uses and zoning, elevation and stealth design drawings of the proposed wireless
communications facility and utility pole-mount, topography, a current survey, landscape plans, and any other
information deemed by the City to be necessary to assess compliance with this Ordinance and the Land Use
and Development Ordinance;
(viii) An inventory of the applicant’s existing towers and wireless communications facilities, if any, that are either
within the jurisdiction of the City or within one mile of the City limits, including specific information about
the location, height, and design of each wireless communications facility or tower;
(ix) A certification that the applicant will comply with all applicable federal, state or local laws including all the
provisions of this Ordinance and the Land Use and Development Ordinance; and
(x) A certification that the site described in the application is located on a utility pole-mount and the
owner/operator agrees to the location of the wireless communications facility.
b) An application for a wireless communications permit to locate or re-locate a wireless
communications facility that proposes to co-locate said facility on an already existing utility pole-mount and that
satisfies the requirements set forth in this Section, shall receive expedited treatment in the review process.
c) A petitioner shall submit any additional information requested by the City for purposes of
evaluating the permit request.
d) In granting or denying a wireless communications permit to locate or re-locate a utility pole-
mounted wireless communications facility, the Zoning Administrator shall prepare a written record of decision
including findings of fact.
Construction of New Towers.
13)
Conditions of Approval for Wireless Communications Towers.
(a)
10
(i) Setback. The distance between the base of any proposed wireless communications tower, measured from the
center of a tower, and the nearest lot line shall be at least equal to the height of the tower, provided that this
distance may be reduced to a specified amount if an applicant provides a certification from the tower
manufacturer or a qualified engineer stating that the tower is designed and constructed in such a way as to
crumple, bend, collapse or otherwise fall within the specified distance.
In no event shall the distance between the base of a proposed wireless communications tower, measured from
the center of the tower, and the nearest lot line be less than twenty (20) percent of the tower height.
(ii) Structural requirements. All wireless communications tower designs must be certified by a qualified engineer
specializing in tower structures and licensed to practice in the State of Minnesota. The certification must
state the tower design is structurally sound and, at a minimum, in conformance with the City’s Building Code,
the State Building Code, and any other standards outlined in the Land Use and Development Ordinance, as
amended from time to time.
(iii) Height. The height of permitted wireless communications towers shall be as specified in subsection 5 of this
Section.
Requirements for Separation Between Towers.
b)
(i)
Except for wireless communications facilities located on roof-tops or utility pole-mounted facilities, the
minimum wireless communications tower separation distance shall be calculated and applied irrespective of
jurisdictional boundaries.
(ii)
Measurement of wireless communications tower separation distances for the purpose of compliance with
this Section shall be measured from the base of a wireless communications tower to the base of the existing
or approved wireless communications tower.
(iii)
Proposed towers must meet the following minimum separation requirements from existing towers or
towers previously approved but not yet constructed at the time a development permit is granted pursuant to
this Section:
MINIMUM TOWER SEPARATION DISTANCE
Height of Height of Minimum
Existing Tower Proposed Tower Separation
Less than 50’ Less than 50’ 100’
“ 50’-100’ 200’
“ 101’-150’ 400’
“ 151’-200’ 800’
50’-100’ Less than 50’ 100’
“ 50’-100’ 400’
“ 101’-150’ 600’
“ 151’-200’ 800’
101’-150’ Less than 50’ 100’
“ 50’-100’ 400’
“ 101’-150’ 600’
“ 151’-200’ 800’
151’-200’ Less than 50’ 100’
“ 50’-100’ 600’
“ 101’-150’ 800’
“ 151’-200’ 1000’
For the purpose of this subsection, the separation distances shall be measured by drawing
or following a straight line between the center of the base of the existing or approved
structure and the center of the proposed base, pursuant to a site plan of the proposed
wireless communications tower.
Standards for Co-location.
c) This subsection is designed to foster shared use of wireless communications towers.
11
(i) Construction of Excess Capacity. Any owner of a wireless communications tower shall permit other
providers to install or co-locate antennae or wireless communications facilities on such towers, if available
space and structural capacity exists; provided, however, that no wireless communications tower shall be used
to support wireless communications facilities for more than three separate providers. Any co-location of
wireless communications facilities shall be subject to mutually agreeable terms and conditions negotiated
between the parties. All new wireless communications towers shall be constructed with excess capacity for
co-location as follows:
Less than 80 feet in height One additional user
80 feet to 119 feet in height Two or more additional users (up to a maximum
of three users)
120 feet in height or greater Three additional users
(ii) Notwithstanding anything to the contrary, all new monopole towers over 80 feet in
height and existing monopole towers that are extended to a height over 80 feet shall
be designed and built to accommodate at least two providers, and up to a maximum
of three providers if technically possible.
(iii) Notwithstanding anything to the contrary, all new guyed towers, and existing guyed
towers that are replaced or modified shall be designed and built to accommodate
three providers.
(iv) Site area. The site or leased footprint shall contain sufficient square footage to
accommodate the equipment/mechanical facilities for all proposed providers based
upon the structural capacity of the tower.
(v) Setbacks. If it is determined that a proposed wireless communications tower cannot
meet setback requirements due to increases in tower height to accommodate the co-
location of at least one additional wireless communications service provider,
minimum setback requirements may be reduced by a maximum of fifteen (15) feet,
unless such a reduction would decrease the distance between the base of the tower
and the nearest lot line to less than twenty (20) percent of the tower height, in which
case set-back requirements may be reduced to a distance that is equal to or greater
than twenty (20) percent of the tower height.
d) Tower Design and Type.
(i) All proposed wireless communications towers shall be monopole towers or stealth
towers. Self-supporting towers or guyed lattice towers shall only be permitted as a
replacement of like structures.
(ii) Utility pole-mounted facilities or extensions on utility poles to accommodate the mounting of wireless
communications facilities shall be of the monopole type.
(iii) Antennas shall be of the uni-cell variety whenever feasible or mounted internal to the wireless
communications tower structure.
(iv) Stealth wireless communications towers, equipment cabinets and related facilities shall be required in all
zoning districts.
Landscaping Minimum Requirements.
e) Wireless communications towers shall be landscaped with a buffer of plant
materials that effectively screens the view of the tower compound from surrounding property. The standard buffer
shall consist of a landscaped strip at least ten (10) feet wide outside the perimeter of the compound. Existing mature
growth and natural land forms on the site shall be preserved to the maximum extent possible. In some cases, such as
wireless communications towers sited on large, wooded lots, natural growth around the property perimeter may be a
sufficient buffer. All areas disturbed during project construction shall be replanted with vegetation. The owner of a
wireless communications tower is responsible for all landscaping obligations and costs. A landscaping plan for the
purpose of screening the base of the tower from view shall be submitted to the Zoning Administrator for approval prior
to the issuance of a building permit for the tower. The City may waive the enforcement of this condition if it is deemed
unnecessary.
Visual Impact Standards.
f) To assess the compatibility with and impact on adjacent properties of a proposed wireless
communications tower site, an applicant seeking to construct, relocate or modify a wireless communications tower may
12
be required to submit a visual impact analysis. The requirements of this subsection shall be required for any
application to construct a tower greater than 80 feet in height. The applicant may request a review of a proposed
wireless communications tower location, prior to submission of an application, to determine whether or not a visual
impact analysis will be required. The applicant shall be advised of the requirement to submit a visual impact analysis
by the City within ten (10) working days following the City’s receipt of the applicant’s application for construction of a
new wireless communication tower or the relocation or modification of an existing tower.
(i) Whenever a visual impact analysis is required, an applicant shall utilize digital
imaging technology to prepare the analysis in a manner acceptable to the City. At a
minimum, a visual impact analysis must provide the following information:
a. The location of the proposed wireless communications tower
illustrated upon an aerial photograph at a scale of not more than one inch
equals 300 feet (1” = 300’). All adjacent zoning districts within a 3,000 foot
radius from all property lines of the proposed wireless communications tower
site shall be indicated; and
b. A line of site analysis which shall include the following information:
1. certification that the proposed wireless communications tower meets or exceeds standards
contained in this Section;
2. identification of all significant existing natural and manmade features adjacent to the
proposed wireless communications tower site and identification of features which may
provide buffering and screening for adjacent properties and public rights-of-way;
3. identification of at least three specific points within a 2,000 foot radius of the proposed
wireless communications tower location, subject to approval by the Zoning Administrator,
for conducting the visual impact analysis;
4. copies of all calculations and a description of the methodology used in selecting the points
of view and collection of data submitted in the analysis;
5. graphic illustration of the visual impact of the proposed wireless communications tower,
at a scale that does not exceed 5 degrees of horizontal distance, presented from the
specific identified points;
6. identification of all screening and buffering materials under the permanent control of the
applicant (only screening and buffering materials located within the boundaries of the
proposed site shall be considered for the visual impact analysis); and
7. identification of all screening and buffering materials that are not under the permanent
control of the applicant but are considered of a permanent nature due to ownership or use
patterns, such as a public park, vegetation preserve, required development buffer, etc.
(ii) Screening and buffering materials considered in the visual impact analysis shall not
be removed by future development on the site. However, screening and buffering
materials considered in the visual impact analysis shall be replaced if they die.
(iii) An applicant shall provide any additional information that may be required by the
Zoning Administrator to fully review and evaluate the potential impact of the
proposed wireless communications tower.
Application Process for New Towers.
14)
a) The use of existing structures to locate wireless communications facilities
shall be preferred to the construction of new wireless communications towers. To be eligible to
construct a new wireless communications tower within City limits, an applicant must establish to the
satisfaction of the City that the applicant is unable to provide the service sought by the applicant from
available sites, including co-locations within the City and in neighboring jurisdictions; and the applicant
13
must demonstrate to the reasonable satisfaction of the City that no other suitable existing tower or
antenna support structure is available, including utility poles; and that no reasonable alternative
technology exists that can accommodate the applicant’s wireless communications facility due to one
or more of the following factors:
(i) The structure provides insufficient height to allow the applicant’s facility to function
reasonably in parity with similar facilities;
(ii) The structure provides insufficient structural strength to support the applicant’s wireless communications
facility;
(iii) The structure provides insufficient space to allow the applicant’s wireless communications facility to function
effectively and reasonably in parity with similar equipment;
(iv) Use of the existing structure would result in electromagnetic interference that cannot reasonably be corrected;
(v) The existing structure is unavailable for lease under a reasonable leasing agreement;
(vi) Use of the structure would create a greater visual impact on surrounding land uses than the proposed
alternative or otherwise would be less in keeping with the goals, objectives, intent, preferences, purposes,
criteria or standards of this Ordinance, the Land Use and Development Ordinance and land development
regulations; and/or
(vii) Other limiting factors.
b) An applicant must submit any technical information requested by the City or
its designated engineering consultant as part of the review and evaluation process.
c) An application for a wireless communications permit to construct a wireless
communications tower must be submitted to the Zoning Administrator on the designated form and
shall contain, at a minimum, the following information:
(i) Name, address and telephone number of the applicant;
(ii) Proposed location of the wireless communications tower, along with all studies, maps and other information
required by subsections 13 and 14 of this Section (applicant shall submit information for only one proposed
tower per application);
(iii) Number of applicant’s wireless communications facilities to be located on the subject tower and the number
of spaces available for co-location;
(iv) A sworn and certified statement in writing by a qualified engineer that the wireless communications tower
will conform to all requirements set forth in the City Code, and federal and state law;
(v) An application fee in the amount set by the Council;
(vi) A copy of all licenses and/or franchises required by federal, state or local law for the construction and/or
operation of a wireless communications system in the City;
(vii) A scaled site plan clearly indicating the location, type and height of the proposed wireless communications
tower, on-site land uses and zoning, elevation and stealth design drawings of the proposed tower, topography,
and any other information deemed by the Zoning Administrator to be necessary to assess compliance with
this Ordinance and the Land Use and Development Ordinance;
(viii) An inventory of the applicant’s existing towers and wireless communications facilities, if any, that are either
within the jurisdiction of the City or within one mile of the City limits, including specific information about
the location, height, and design of each wireless communications facility or tower;
(ix) The names, addresses and telephone numbers of all owners of existing towers or antenna support structures
within an area equal to one hundred percent (100%) of the search ring for the wireless communications
facility proposed to be located on the proposed new tower;
14
(x) Written documentation in the form of an affidavit that the applicant made diligent, but unsuccessful efforts for
permission to install or co-locate the proposed wireless communications facility on all existing towers or
antenna support structures located within an area equal to one hundred percent (100%) of the search ring for
the proposed site of the wireless communications facility;
(xi) Written, technical evidence from a qualified engineer that the proposed wireless communications facility
cannot be installed or co-located on an existing tower or antenna support structure located within the City and
must be located at the proposed site in order to meet the coverage requirements of the proposed wireless
communications service, together with a composite propagation study which illustrates graphically existing
and proposed coverage in industry-accepted median received signal ranges;
(xii) A written statement from a qualified engineer that the construction and placement of the proposed wireless
communications tower will comply with Federal Communications Commission radiation standards for
interference and safety and will produce no significant signal interference with public safety communications
and the usual and customary transmission or reception of radio, television, or other communications services
enjoyed by adjacent residential and non-residential properties; and
(xiii) A certification that the applicant will comply with all applicable federal, state or local laws including all the
provisions of this Ordinance and the Land Use and Development Ordinance.
d) A proposed wireless communications tower that exceeds the height
limitations for a permitted tower in the GB, RB, CBD, I-1 or I-2 zoning districts, or any proposed
wireless communications tower under eighty (80) feet in the R-1, R-2, R-3, R-4, or LB districts, shall
only be allowed upon approval of a conditional use permit. The City Council may establish any
reasonable conditions for approval that are deemed necessary to mitigate adverse impacts
associated with the conditional use, to protect neighboring properties, and to achieve the objectives of
this Ordinance and the Land Use and Development Ordinance. Such a conditional use permit shall
be required in addition to a wireless communications permit.
e) In granting or denying a wireless communications permit to construct a wireless
communications tower, the Zoning Administrator shall prepare a written record of decision including findings of fact.
Proposed wireless communication towers that meet the standards and requirements contained herein, including
location and height limitations, may be approved administratively by the Zoning Administrator. Proposed wireless
communication towers that do not meet the standards and requirements contained herein, including location and height
limitations, may be denied administratively by the Zoning Administrator, provided that the written record of decision
including findings of fact is accepted by the Council.
Annual Registration Requirement.
15)
Wireless Communications Facilities.
a) To enable the City to keep accurate, up-to-date records of the location of
wireless communications facilities within City limits, on an annual basis, no later than February 1 of each year, or upon
change in ownership of wireless communications facilities, the owner/operator of such facilities shall submit
documentation to the Zoning Administrator providing:
(i)
Certification in writing that the wireless communications facility conforms to the requirements, in effect
at the time of construction of the facility, of the State Building Code and all other requirements and standards
set forth in the City Code, and federal and state law by filing a sworn and certified statement by a qualified
engineer to that effect. A wireless communications facility owner/operator may be required by the City to
submit more frequent certification should there be reason to believe that the structural and/or electrical
integrity of the wireless communications facility is jeopardized. The City reserves the right upon reasonable
notice to the owner/operator of the wireless communications facility to conduct inspections for the purpose of
determining whether the wireless communications facility complies with the State Building Code and all
requirements and standards set forth in local, state or federal laws; and
(ii)
The name, address and telephone number of any new owner, if there has been a change of ownership of
the wireless communications facility.
Annual payment of a registration fee, as set by the Council, for each wireless
communications facility located within the City shall be submitted to the City at the time of
submission of the documentation required above.
15
Wireless Communications Towers.
b) To enable the City to keep accurate, up-to-date records of the location and
continued use of wireless communications towers within City limits, on an annual basis, no later than February 1of
each year, or upon change in ownership of a wireless communications tower, the owner/operator of each tower shall
submit documentation to the Zoning Administrator providing:
(i)
Certification in writing that the wireless communications tower is structurally sound and conforms to the
requirements, in effect at the time of construction of the tower, of the State Building Code and all applicable
standards and requirements set forth in the City Code, and federal and state law, by filing a sworn and
certified statement by a qualified engineer to that effect. The tower owner may be required by City to submit
more frequent certifications should there be reason to believe that the structural and/or electrical integrity of
the tower is jeopardized;
(ii)
The number of providers located on the tower and their names, addresses and telephone numbers;
(iii)
The type and use of any wireless communications facilities located on the tower; and
(iv)
The name, address and telephone number of any new owner of the tower, if there has been a change of
ownership of the tower.
An annual payment of a registration fee, as set by the Council, for each tower located within the City shall be submitted
to the City at the time of submission of the documentation required above.
General Requirements.
16) The following conditions apply to all wireless communications towers and wireless communications
facilities in the City:
Duration of Permits.
a) If substantial construction or installation has not taken place within one year after City approval
of a wireless communications permit, the approval shall be considered void unless a petition for time extension has
been granted by the City Council. Such a petition shall be submitted in writing at least 30 days prior to the expiration
of the approval and shall state facts showing a good faith effort to complete the work permitted under the original
permit.
Assignment and Subleasing.
b) No wireless communications facility, tower or antenna support structure or wireless
communications permit may be sold, transferred or assigned without prior notification to the City. No sublease shall
be entered into by any provider until the sublessee has obtained a permit for the subject wireless communications
facility or tower or antenna support structure. No potential provider shall be allowed to argue that a permit should be
issued for an assigned or subleased wireless communications facility or tower or antenna support structure on the basis
of any expense incurred in relation to the facility or site.
Aesthetics.
c) Wireless communications towers and wireless communications facilities shall meet the following
requirements:
(i) Signs. No commercial signs or advertising shall be allowed on a wireless communications tower or a
wireless communications facility.
(ii) Lighting. No signals, lights, or illumination shall be permitted on a wireless communications tower or a
wireless communications facility, unless required by the Federal Aviation Administration or other applicable
authority. If lighting is required, the lighting alternatives and design chosen must cause the least
obtrusiveness to the surrounding community. However, an applicant shall obtain approval from the City if
i.e.
the Federal Aviation Administration requires the addition of standard obstruction marking and lighting (,
red lighting and orange and white striping) to the tower. An applicant shall notify the Zoning Administrator
prior to making any changes to the original finish of the tower.
(iii) Graffiti. Any graffiti or other unauthorized inscribed materials shall be removed promptly or otherwise
covered in a manner substantially similar to, and consistent, with the original exterior finish. The City may
provide a wireless communications tower or equipment cabinet owner and/or operator written notice to
remove or cover graffiti within a specific period of time or as required by other appropriate sections of the
City Code as presently existing or as may be periodically amended. In the event the graffiti has not been
removed or painted over by the owner and/or operator within the specified time period, the City shall have
the right to remove or paint over the graffiti or other inscribed materials. In the event the City has to remove
or paint over the graffiti, then the owner and/or operator of the wireless communications tower or equipment
cabinet or structure on which the graffiti existed, shall be responsible for all costs incurred.
16
Federal and State Requirements.
d) All wireless communications towers and wireless communications facilities must
meet or exceed the standards and regulations of the Federal Aviation Administration, the Federal Communications
Commission, and any other agency of the state or federal government with the authority to regulate wireless
communications towers and facilities. If such standards and regulations change, then the owners of the wireless
communications towers and wireless communications facilities subject to such standards and regulations must bring
such towers and facilities into compliance with such revised standards and regulations within six (6) months of the
effective date of such standards and regulations, unless a different compliance schedule is mandated by the controlling
state or federal agency. Failure to maintain or bring wireless communications towers and wireless communications
facilities into compliance with such revised standards and regulations shall constitute a violation of this Ordinance and
shall be subject to enforcement under the City Code. Penalties for violation may include fines and removal of the tower
or wireless communications facility at the owner’s expense.
Licenses or Franchise.
e) An owner of a wireless communications tower or wireless communications facility must
notify the City in writing within 48 hours of any revocation or failure to renew any necessary license or franchise.
Discontinued Use.
f) In the event the use of a wireless communications tower or wireless
communications facility is discontinued, the owner and/or operator shall provide written notice to the City of its intent
to discontinue use and the date when the use shall be discontinued.
Abandoned Tower or Antenna.
g) The City may require removal of any abandoned or unused
wireless communications tower or wireless communications facility by the tower or facility owner within thirty (30)
days after notice from the City of abandonment. A wireless communications tower or wireless communications facility
shall be considered abandoned if use has been discontinued for one hundred eighty (180) consecutive days.
(i) Removal by City. Where a wireless communications tower or wireless communications facility is abandoned
but not removed within the specified time frame, the City may remove the facility or remove or demolish the
tower and place a lien on the property following the procedures (but not the criteria) for demolition of an
unsafe building/structure of the City’s housing code.
(ii) Towers Utilized for Other Purposes. Where a wireless communications tower is utilized for other purposes,
including but not limited to light standards and power poles, it shall not be considered abandoned; provided,
however, that the height of the tower may be reduced by the City so that the tower is no higher than necessary
to accommodate previously established uses.
(iii) Restoration of Area. Where a wireless communications tower or facility is removed by an owner, said owner,
at no expense to the City, shall restore the area to as good a condition as prior to the placement of the tower
or facility, unless otherwise instructed by the City.
(iv) Surety or Letter of Credit for Removal. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, a surety or letter of credit
shall be submitted by the property owner(s) or tower operator(s) to ensure the removal of abandoned wireless
communications towers. The surety or letter of credit shall be utilized to cover the cost of removal and
disposal of abandoned towers and shall consist of the following:
a. submission of an estimate from a certified structural engineer indicating the cost to remove and dispose
of the tower; and
b. either a surety or a letter of credit, equivalent to one hundred percent (100%) of the estimated cost to
remove and dispose of the tower. The form of the surety or the letter of credit shall be subject to
approval by the Zoning Administrator and the City Attorney.
FCC Emissions Standards.
h) At all times, owners and/or operators of wireless communications facilities shall comply
with the radio frequency emissions standards of the Federal Communications Commission.
(i) Testing required. All existing and future wireless communications facilities shall be tested in accordance
with applicable laws and regulations. Such testing, to the extent it is required, shall comply with standards
and procedures prescribed by the Federal Communications Commission.
(ii) Inspections. The City reserves the right to conduct random radio frequency emissions inspections. The cost
for such random inspections shall be paid from the wireless communications annual registration fees, unless
an owner and/or operator is found to be in non-compliance with Federal Communications Commission RF
emissions standards, whereupon the non-compliant owner and/or operator shall reimburse the City in full for
the cost of the inspection.
17
Maintenance.
i) All wireless communications facilities, wireless communications towers and antenna support structures
shall at all times be kept and maintained in good condition, order, and repair, and, maintained in stealth condition (if
stealth or camouflage is a permit requirement). The same shall not menace or endanger the life or property of any
person, and shall retain original characteristics. All maintenance or construction on a wireless communications tower,
wireless communications facility or antenna support structure shall be performed by licensed maintenance and
construction personnel. The City shall notify a provider in writing regarding any specific maintenance required under
this Section. A provider shall make all necessary repairs within thirty (30) days of such notification. Failure to effect
noticed repairs within thirty (30) days may result in revocation of a tower owner’s or provider’s permit and/or removal
of the tower, wireless communications facility or antenna support structure.
Emergency.
j) The City reserves the right to enter upon and disconnect, dismantle or otherwise remove any wireless
communications tower or wireless communications facility should the same become an immediate hazard to the safety
of persons or property due to emergency circumstances, as determined by the Zoning Administrator or his designee,
such as natural or manmade disasters or accidents, when the owner of any such tower or facility is not available to
immediately remedy the hazard. The City shall notify any said owner of any such action within twenty-four (24) hours.
The owner and/or operator shall reimburse the City for the costs incurred by the City for action taken pursuant to this
subsection.
Equipment Cabinets.
k) Equipment cabinets located on the ground shall be constructed out of non-reflective materials
and shall be screened from sight by mature landscaping and located or designed to minimize their visibility. All
equipment cabinets shall be no taller than ten (10) feet in height, measured from the original grade at the base of the
facility to the top of the structure, and occupy no more than four hundred (400) square feet in area, unless a waiver is
granted by the City upon written request from a provider.
Equipment On Site.
l) No mobile or immobile equipment or materials of any nature shall be stored or parked on the
site of a wireless communications tower or wireless communications facility, unless used in direct support of a wireless
communications tower or wireless communications facility or for repairs to the wireless communications tower or
wireless communications facility currently underway.
Inspections.
m) The City reserves the right upon reasonable notice to the owner/operator of a wireless communications
tower or antenna support structure, including utility poles and rooftops, to conduct inspections for the purpose of
determining whether the tower or other support structure and/or related equipment cabinet complies with the State
Building Code and all applicable requirements and standards set forth in local, state or federal law and to conduct
radiation measurements to determine whether all antenna and transmitting equipment are operating within Federal
Communications Commission requirements.
Security.
n)
(i) An owner/operator of a wireless communications tower shall provide a security
fence or equally effective barrier around the tower base or along the perimeter of
the wireless communications tower compound.
(ii) If high voltage is necessary for the operation of the wireless communications tower
or antenna support structure, “HIGH VOLTAGE - DANGER” warnings signs shall
be permanently attached to the fence or barrier and shall be spaced no more than 20
feet apart, or on each fence or barrier frontage.
(iii) “NO TRESPASSING” warning signs shall be permanently attached to the fence or barrier and shall be
spaced no more than 20 feet apart.
(iv) The letters for the “HIGH VOLTAGE - DANGER” and “NO TRESPASSING” warning signs shall be at
least six (6) inches in height. The two warning signs may be combined into one sign. The warning signs
shall be installed at least 4.5 feet above the finished grade of the fence or barrier.
Advances in Technology.
o) All providers shall use and apply any readily available advances in technology that lessen
the negative aesthetic effects of wireless communications facilities and wireless communications towers to the
residential communities within the City. Every five (5) years, the City may review existing structures and compare the
visual impact with available technologies in the industry for the purpose of removal, relocation or alteration of these
structures in keeping with the general intent of this Section. Such removal, relocation or alteration may be required by
the City pursuant to its zoning power and authority.
18
Review of Applications.
17) The City shall process all applications for wireless communications towers and wireless communications
facilities in a timely manner and in accordance with established procedures. The reason for the denial of any application filed in
accordance with this provision shall be set forth in writing, and shall be supported by substantial evidence in a written record.
Appeals.
18) At any time within 30 days after a written order, requirement, determination or final decision has been made by the Zoning
Administrator or other official in interpreting or applying this Section, except for actions taken in connection with prosecutions
for violations thereof, the applicant or any other person affected by such action may appeal the decision in accordance with the
provisions of the Land Use and Development Ordinance.
Revocation.
19) A material breach of any terms and conditions of a permit issued for a wireless communications tower or wireless
communications facility under this Ordinance and the Land Use and Development Ordinance may result in the revocation by the
City of the right to operate, utilize or maintain the particular tower or wireless communications facility within the City following
written notification of the violation to the owner or operator, and after failure to cure or otherwise correct said violation within
thirty (30) days. A violation of this Section shall be subject to enforcement in accordance with the Land Use and Development
Ordinance. Penalties for a violation of a permit or this Section may include fines and removal of the wireless communications
”
tower or wireless communications facility at the owner’s expense.
Section 3. CAPTIONS.
The captions throughout this Ordinance are intended solely to facilitate reading and reference to the
sections and provisions of this Ordinance. Such captions shall not affect the meaning or interpretation of this Ordinance.
Section 4. CALCULATION OF TIME.
Unless otherwise indicated, when the performance or doing of any act, duty, matter or
payment is required under this Ordinance, and a period of time or duration for the fulfillment of doing thereof is prescribed and is fixed
herein, the time shall be computed so as to exclude the first and include the last day of the prescribed or fixed period of duration time.
Section 5. SEVERABILITY.
If any term, condition or provision of this Ordinance shall, to any extent, be held to be invalid or
unenforceable by a valid order of any court or regulatory agency, the remainder hereof shall be valid in all other respects and continue to
be effective. In the event of a subsequent change in applicable law such that the provision which had been held invalid is no longer
invalid, such provision shall thereupon return to full force and effect without further action by the City of Columbia Heights and shall
thereafter be binding on the permittee and the City.
Section 6. REPEAL OF LAWS IN CONFLICT.
All City laws and ordinances in conflict with any provision of this Ordinance
are hereby repealed to the extent of any conflict.
Section 7. INCLUSION IN THE CITY CODE.
The provisions of this Ordinance shall become and be made a part of the City
Code of the City of Columbia Heights. The sections of this Ordinance may renumbered or relettered to accomplish such, and the word
“ordinance” may be changed to “section,” “article,” or any other appropriate word.
Section 8. NO RECOURSE AGAINST THE CITY.
Every permit shall provide that, without limiting such immunities as the
City or other persons may have under applicable law, a permittee shall have no monetary recourse whatsoever against the City or its
elected officials, boards, commissions, agents, employees or volunteers for any loss, costs, expense or damage arising out of any provision
or requirement of this Ordinance or because of the enforcement of this Ordinance or the City’s exercise of its authority pursuant to this
Ordinance, a permit, or other applicable law, unless the same shall be caused by criminal acts or by willful gross negligence. Nothing
herein shall be construed as a waiver of sovereign immunity.
Section 9. EFFECTIVE DATE.
This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect from and after thirty (30) days after its passage.
First Reading: November 13, and November 27, 2000
Second Reading: December 11, 2000
Date of Passage: December 11, 2000
Offered by: Szurek
Second by: Jolly
Roll Call: All ayes
______________________________
Mayor Gary L. Peterson
_______________________________
Patricia Muscovitz, Deputy City Clerk
19