Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Land Use Wireless topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Supervisors grant appeal, remove post-approval condition tied to unrelated property violations for Sherwood Road cell tower

5744721 · September 10, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

The Board granted an appeal by a wireless applicant and removed a planning-commission-added condition that would have delayed issuance of a building permit until unrelated code violations across the 22-acre property were remediated.

The Mendocino County Board of Supervisors on Sept. 9 granted an appeal by a wireless applicant (Verizon) and modified the Planning Commission's approval of a use permit for a 65-foot monopine-style cellular facility on Timberline Road, deleting a commission-added condition that would have required elimination of existing property-code violations before a building permit could be issued.

Background: The Planning Commission approved Use Permit U 2024-0004 on June 19 with a condition (No. 29) intended to ensure that code violations on the 22-acre host parcel were cured prior to building permit issuance. The applicant appealed, arguing the condition exceeded the commission's authority, risked unreasonable delay and could conflict with federal and state rules governing wireless facilities.

Board action and rationale: County planning staff referred the commission's concerns to Code Enforcement, which issued an inspection report documenting several violations on the property. Applicants and the property owner presented proposals and bids to address the identified items; counsel for the applicant argued that tying a tower building permit to unrelated, county-wide remediation on a large parcel would be disproportionate and legally risky. The Board adopted a resolution deleting Condition 29 and renumbering conditions; it also extended the permit expiration to a 10-year term from the Board action.

What remains: Deleting Condition 29 does not relieve the property of Code Enforcement's authority; staff can still pursue violations under existing enforcement tools. Veronica Rosenberg, the landowner, told the board she had been actively working to address the site's condition and said the tower would help generate resources needed to maintain the property.

Votes and next steps: The Board adopted the resolution granting the appeal unanimously. Planning staff will renumber conditions and reflect the 10-year term in the permit as directed.