Laserfiche WebLink
STATUS OF ISSUE: Mr. Dugan has requested a 375' setback variance from SF -2, SF -3 and 2F <br />zoning districts. The applicant states that there are no properties within the geographic area that <br />meets their engineering needs and also meet the City Ordinance of a 500' setback from <br />residential zoning districts. Mr. Dugan's initial application did not address masking or <br />camouflaging at all. After staff contacted Mr. Dugan to inform him of the masking <br />requirements, he submitted a revised application addressing masking at ground level, but did not <br />address masking of the entire 180 foot monopole. <br />RECOMMENDATION: Conduct a public hearing on the requested variance of the setback <br />requirements of Zoning Ordinance Sec. 28.106(c) and consider said request. Because the <br />ordinance requires an affirmative showing by the applicant that he meets the masking and <br />camouflaging requirements in Sec. 28.113(a) and (b) before Council can grant such a variance, <br />staff has no choice but to recommend denial. <br />Pursuant to Sec. 28.113(d), "no variance shall be granted except by % vote [6 votes] of the <br />governing body in favor of the grant of said variance.... Any variance granted may include <br />such conditions or requirements associated with the grant of variance as the City Council <br />shall deem necessary and appropriate." <br />