Laserfiche WebLink
<br />Mayor Gamec: <br /> <br />aye <br /> <br />Motion carried. <br /> <br />Case #11: <br /> <br />Introduce Ordinance to Amend City Code Section 9.15 Towers; Case of City <br />of Ramsey <br /> <br />Associate Planner Gladhill stated that the moratorium on construction of cell towers is set to <br />expire on September 17, 2008. He summarized the proposed changes in the ordinance: <br />Antennas may be co-located on existing structures in parks; however, no new towers may be <br />constructed within parks; Height limits have been adjusted to 100 feet (from 175 feet in <br />industrial) in all zoning districts; an additional 20 feet. may be granted if a minimum of two <br />services are co-located on the tower; The 10 acre requirement for lot size has been eliminated; lot <br />size will be regulated by setback, which is the height of the tower plus 10 feet on residential and <br />public/quasi public parcels; Setbacks for the towers in industrial and commercial areas will <br />default to the underlying zoning district except when adjacent to a residential zone; when <br />adjacent to a residential zone, the setback shall be the height of the tower plus 10 feet adjacent to <br />the residential zone. He stated that the Planning Commission has recommended these revisions <br />and noted that the City Attorney has recommended some language changes on page 160 and 163. <br />He showed a map of the proposed overlay district. <br /> <br />Councilmember Elvig stated that the map shows 33 square miles with two towers and that isn't <br />adequate coverage for all areas. He stated that he doesn't understand this because he has traveled <br />to places like Montana which has far fewer towers and he has adequate cell service. <br /> <br />Community Development Director Miller stated that one of the reasons for this is that sometimes <br />when there are fewer towers, such as in Montana, they allow much higher towers. She stated that <br />having a tower that is 300 or 400 feet tall will give a much greater coverage area and lower <br />towers have a smaller coverage distance. <br /> <br />Associate Planner DaInes stated that this is also affected by the number of users, which is why <br />towers in a rural area can cover a much larger area. <br /> <br />Councilmember Elvig stated that he would like to see the City have authority for aesthetic <br />controls for the towers and their attachments. <br /> <br />Councilmember Jeffrey agreed and noted that he has seen cell towers in Arizona disguised as a <br />palm tree. <br /> <br />Councilmember Strommen stated that Afton is .constructing a cell tower that looks like a pine <br />tree. <br /> <br />Councilmember Dehen asked if there was anything in the Telecommunications Act that would <br />prevent the City from regulating for aesthetic purposes. <br /> <br />City Council / July 22, 2008 <br />Page 19 of 23 <br />