Findings of Fact and Decision CUP 1996-04CITY OF CHANHASSEN
CARVER AND HENNEPIN COUNTIES, MINNESOTA
FINDINGS OF FACT
AND DECISION
IN RE:
The revocation of Conditional Use Permit #1996-04 for an Amateur Radio Tower. On August 26,
1996, the City Council approved Conditional Use Permit #1996-04 for a 75 -foot amateur radio
tower located at the subject property. This conditional use permit has become void due to its
discontinued use for at least six (6) months and may now be revoked by the city per Section 20-236
and Section 20-237 of City Code.
On December 14, 2015, the Chanhassen City Council met at its regularly scheduled meeting to
consider the revocation of Conditional Use Permit #1996-04. The City Council conducted a
public hearing on the proposed conditional use permit, which was preceded by published and
mailed notice. The City Council heard testimony from all interested persons wishing to speak
and now makes the following:
FINDINGS OF FACT
1. The property is currently zoned Rural Residential (RR).
2. The property is guided by the Land Use Plan for Residential Large Lot.
3. The legal description of the property is: Lot 18, Block 1, The Hesse Farm Addition
(PID: 253300150)
4. Conditional Use Findings:
a. Will not be detrimental to or endanger the public health, safety, comfort, convenience or
general welfare of the neighborhood or city.
Finding: The conditional use has not been in use on the property for at least the past six
(6) months, but most likely for much longer. The revocation of the conditional use permit
will not be detrimental or endanger the public health, safety, comfort, convenience or
general welfare of the neighborhood or city.
b. Will be consistent with the objectives of the City's Comprehensive Plan and this chapter.
Finding: The revocation of the conditional use permit is consistent with the City's
Comprehensive Plan and complies with Chanhassen City Code.
c. Will be designed, constructed, operated and maintained so to be compatible in
appearance with the existing or intended character of the general vicinity and will not
change the essential character of that area.
Finding: There will not be any required alteration to the property for the revocation of
the conditional use permit. Therefore, the appearance and existing or intended character
of the neighborhood in the general vicinity will not be changed.
d. Will not be hazardous or disturbing to existing or planned neighboring uses.
Finding: There will not be any required work done on the property for the revocation of
the conditional use permit. Therefore, there will not be any hazardous or disturbing
conditions for existing or planned neighboring uses.
e. Will be served adequately by essential public facilities and services, including streets,
police and fire protection, drainage structures, refuse disposal, water and sewer systems
and schools; or will be served adequately by such facilities and services provided by the
persons or agencies responsible for the establishment of the proposed use.
Finding: There will be no alternation in services required by the revocation of the
conditional use permit. The property is adequately serviced by the city or through
services provided by the persons or agencies responsible for the property.
f. Will not create excessive requirements for public facilities and services and will not be
detrimental to the economic welfare of the community.
Finding: The use of public facilities and services will not be altered by the revocation of
the conditional use permit.
g. Will not involve uses, activities, processes, materials, equipment and conditions of
operation that will be detrimental to any persons, property or the general welfare because
of excessive production of traffic, noise, smoke, fumes, glare, odors, rodents, or trash.
Finding: The revocation of the conditional use permit will not involve uses that have the
potential to create any adverse conditions, as previously stated.
h. Will have vehicular approaches to the property which do not create traffic congestion or
interfere with traffic or surrounding public thoroughfares.
Finding: Access by motorized vehicles to the property is currently adequate and will not
be altered by the revocation of the conditional use permit.
i. Will not result in the destruction, loss or damage of solar access, natural, scenic or
historic features of major significance.
Finding: The revocation of the conditional use permit will not result in the destruction,
loss or damage of solar access, natural, scenic or historic features of major significance.
Will be aesthetically compatible with the area.
Finding: The property is currently aesthetically compatible with their surrounding area
and this compatibility will not be changed by the revocation of their conditional use
permit.
k. Will not depreciate surrounding property values.
Finding: The revocation of the conditional use permit will not have any effect on the
surrounding property values.
1. Will meet standards prescribed for certain uses as provided in this article.
Finding: The revocation of the conditional use permit is consistent with City Code
regarding Conditional Use Permits.
5. The staff report, Planning Case #2015-25, dated December 14, 2015, prepared by Drew
Ingvalson, et al, is incorporated herein.
DECISION
The City Council approves the revocation of Conditional Use Permit 91996-04, Planning
Case #2015-25.
ADOPTED by the Chanhassen City Council this 14`x' day of December, 2015.
CITY OF CHANHASSEN
(SEAL)
BY: A zxv/�
Denny La fenburger, Mayor Ll