BY COUNCILOR STENBERG:01-0833R
RESOLUTION GRANTING A SPECIAL USE PERMIT TO RJR COMMUNICATIONS, INC./KBJR TV-6 FOR DAYTIME USE OF STROBE LIGHTS ON THE TOWER LOCATED AT 410 WEST TENTH STREET.
WHEREAS, RJR Communications, Inc./ KBJR TV-6 has submitted to the city council a request for a special use permit for daytime use of strobe lights on the new 800+ foot tall TV tower on property located at and described as Lot 72, Block 135, Duluth Proper Third Division, and located at 410 West Tenth Street; and said permit application was duly referred to the city planning commission for a study, report, and public hearing, and the city planning commission has subsequently reported its approval to the city council; and
WHEREAS, the approval was made because of the city planning commission's findings that appropriate safeguards will exist to protect the comprehensive plan and to conserve and to protect property values in the neighborhood if conditions are observed.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that a special use permit is hereby granted
to RJR Communications, Inc./ KBJR to allow for the for daytime use of strobe
lights on the new 800+ foot tall TV tower at 410 West Tenth Street, on
the condition that the tower lighting be maintained in accordance with
the SG-60 high intensity obstruction lighting system as specified in the
SG-60 Specifications as identified as Public Document No. ________ and
that the permittee maintain perpetual compliance with FAA regulations,
and the terms and conditions of Sections 10-37 and 50-35(z) of the Duluth
The planning commission approved
this resolution, by a vote of 7-1, at its November 13, 2001, meeting. In
making their recommendation, the planning commission considered the following
(a) The recent completion of the new tower and the removal of the tower that was damaged by ice in 1999 has necessitated this application. The applicant has previously maintained the properties in compliance with the terms and conditions of the existing special use permit resolution and previous ordinances related to supporting elements of the tower;
(b) Use of the strobe lights will reduce the long-term maintenance and environmental costs to paint the 800+ foot structure;
(c) With the variable intensity of the strobes and the automatic change to the red lights for non daylight hours, the only visual impacts are limited to periods of fog on overcast days;
(d) Existing permitted tower strobe lights have had no mentionable objection;
(e) Due to their illuminating power, strobes are anticipated to be of high visibility during periods of overcast;
(f) The use of these lights is not necessary for orange and white painted towers.
(a) Will the proposed special use result in a random pattern of development with little contiguity to existing or programmed development? No, this action will have no adverse effect on existing or programmed development. The dominant land use is communication antenna;
(b) Will the requested use cause anticipated negative fiscal or environmental impacts upon the community? No, there is no fiscal or environmental impact. This request satisfies federal safety regulations;
(c) Will conditions and safeguards protect the comprehensive plan and conserve and protect property and property values in the neighborhood? Yes, this permit process, as part of a federal compliance requirement, achieves all of these values;
(d) What appropriate conditions and safeguards, including performance bonds and a specified period of time for the permit, are necessary? Perpetual compliance with City Code and federal requirements are appropriate conditions for this application.
In making their recommendation,
the planning commission finds that the ordinance governing the application
is Section 50-32, which requires that the following facts, features, or
events show compliance:
(a) The application was filed on October 25, 2001;
(b) A public hearing was held before the planning commission on November 13, 2001;
(c) Notice of the public hearing was published on November 2,9and 12, 2001, and mailed to property owners within 350 feet of the subject site on November 8, 2001;
(d) Perpetual compliance with Section 50-35(z) is a reasonable condition.
Date Filed: October 25, 2001
Action Deadline: February 23, 2002