Report to the Planning Commission -
October 16, 1997

Request: Ordinance Amending Height Restrictions for Towers

PROPOSAL

Impetus

At its September 2, 1997 meeting, the City Council requested that staff review the history of the definition of "protected residential property" in Code Section 19.47 and examine the impacts of amending the definition to include multiple family residential zoning districts. The issue was raised within the discussion of an application by U. S. West Wireless for a 93 foot monopole tower at Heritage Plaza Shopping Center, 10508 France Ave. The 93 foot tower was proposed, and later approved, for a location 60 feet from the property line of the Heritage Hills apartment complex and approximately 110 feet from the nearest Heritage Hills apartment building. Because the apartment complex is zoned R-4 and therefore does not qualify as "protected residential property", the proposed tower conforms with the existing height restrictions in Section 19.47. Had the apartment complex qualified as "protected residential property", the tower would not have been allowed at 93 feet at that location. This case raised the question, "why do the current height restrictions protect single family residences to a higher degree than multiple family residences?"

History

The definition of "protected residential property" and the current method of limiting structure height within the City has its origins within the so called "Skyline Ordinance." In the late 1980s, the construction of several tall buildings in the vicinity of Normandale Blvd. and 84th Street prompted neighborhood residents to call for an ordinance that would require a greater separation between single family homes and tall buildings. One of the tall structures the residents were concerned about was a potential condominium tower. Thus, the ordinance focused on the relationship between single family zoning districts (R-1, R-1A, and RS-1) and tall buildings, whether office buildings or multiple family buildings.

The neighborhood residents sponsored an initiative and were successful in placing the proposed "Skyline Ordinance" on the November 7, 1989 official ballot (a copy of the ballot is enclosed). The initiative was defeated in the general election but the Council requested that staff do further research on the issue. After discussion at numerous Planning Commission meetings in 1990, the City Council adopted the bulk of the present language of Section 19.47, and the present definition of "protected residential property", at its September 10th, 1990 meeting.

Section 19.47 limits the height of structures based upon their proximity to "protected residential property." To fall within the protected definition, property must meet each of the following three criteria: 1) be zoned R-1, R-1A, or RS-1; 2) be guided for residential use, whether low, medium, or high density; and 3) be used or subdivided for use as residential property. Apparently, multiple family zoning districts were not included in the definition because they were seen as transitional uses (i.e. a progression from a one story detached house, to a three or four story apartment or condominium building, to a ten story office building). Tall multiple family structures were also viewed, for better or worse, as structures from which to be protected rather than structures needing protection. Moreover, given the fact that most multiple family zoning districts in Bloomington are adjacent to commercial areas, to include multiple family districts in the protected definition would have had a much more limiting effect upon commercial development and redevelopment within the City.

Change in Definition

Although the Code can be changed to base the height limit of towers on proximity to residential property of any type (single or multi-family), staff would not recommend a direct change to the "protected residential definition." To add multiple family zoning districts to this definition would have major impacts on commercial redevelopment within the City. For example, absent a variance or planned development exception, such a change would place a cap of 80 feet at the current Northwest Financial Center site and a cap of three stories or 40 feet at the Country Inn and Suites site along Killebrew Drive.

Towers

When the Code was revised in 1996 to adopt restrictions for towers, the height limits were integrated within the existing height limitation framework of Section 19.47 rather than creating a new system. One way to address the concern of treating single and multiple family residential zoning districts consistently with respect to tower heights is to adopt a new definition, "designated residential property", that includes both single and multiple family residential uses. Tower height limits would then be based on proximity to "designated residential property" rather than "protected residential property". Such an approach has been used in the enclosed proposed ordinance.

Another change proposed in the ordinance would cap tower height outside of industrial zoning districts at 100 feet for single user towers and 120 feet for multi-user towers. Staff senses little demand for towers over 100 feet in non-industrial zoning districts. Both of the 100 foot plus towers erected after the tower ordinance amendments of 1996 are in industrial zoning districts. Wireless providers can clearly provide coverage to the City by limiting tower heights to 100 feet or less in non-industrial zoning districts, as evidenced by Airtouch, ATT Wireless, Sprint PCS, Aerial, U.S. West Wireless, and Nextel. The purpose of the revised height cap is to restrict tall towers from inappropriate areas such as school sites and neighborhood commercial centers and to provide further incentive for towers to locate in industrial zoning districts.

Impact

The following table illustrates the impact of the ordinance revisions upon existing wireless towers within the City. It is important to note that 13 of these 14 towers would remain in compliance after the ordinance revisions are adopted. Of these wireless towers, the only one to be made non-conforming by the proposed ordinance revision is the U.S. West Wireless tower at Heritage Plaza, 10508 France Ave. S. It is this U.S. West Wireless tower that originally sparked the discussion of an ordinance amendment due to its proximity to residential property. Even in the vicinity of this non-conforming tower (the greater Valley West area), there would still be numerous locations available for a 93 foot monopole as illustrated by the enclosed map of the Valley West area.

*Given exception for public utility/public safety radio towers

For more information, contact:

Planning Division
PH: 952-563-8920, FAX: 952-563-8949
E-mail: planning@ci.bloomington.mn.us

Tower HOME

Home | Contact us | Site map | Search
Web and accessibility policies | Website feedback