Agenda - Council - 04/24/2001 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Motion by Councilmember Anderson, seconded by Councilmember Hendriksen, to table action. Motion carried. Voting Yes: Mayor Gamec, Councilmembers Anderson, Hendriksen, Kurak, and Zimmerman. Voting No: None. Leon Fisher stated that he owned the land to the west of the Pehlkes and indicated that be'would be willing to give up land on his property for the drainage easement in exchange for an access from 152"a Avenue. Mayor Gamec directed Mr. Fisher to meet with staff regarding the issue. Case #8: Request for a Conditional Use Permit to Construct a Monopole Telecommunication Tower; Case of American Tower Corporation / Development Director Frolik stated that the City has received."~n application from American Corporation to construct and operate a 175-foot monoP61e telecommunication tower for on the property located at 14165 Ramsey ,B/oulevard, which is owned by Bruce Volk. is proposing to construct a 175 foot/monopole tower along the east s~de of Mr. Volk acre parcel. The apphcant ~s propos)ng to lease a 10,244 square feet area. The proposed 1 ~ti ~ :~ will be to the northeast of the existing Auto Repair building located on the subject prot C'k~.,, The site is zoned Business/Warehouse and properties to the north, east, and west are alsoX"z~ Business Warehou~,e/.'. Property on the south side of the railroad tracks is zoned B-3 Higlr~ ,ss. The p~oposed lease area will contain a six foot chain link fence around a 50-foot by area. TMs area will contain the 12-foot by 20-foot / equipment shelter and provides enough su/pport equipment for future co-tocators. The site will be heavily landscaped with trees Staff feels that the landscaping plan exceeds City standards. The subject has access through a gravel driveway derived from Ramsey Boulevard. The ap/pI'icant,is losing to extend the existing gravel driveway to the east and to the north to a/gcess the tow, er ~atio~ . The applicant has submitted information stating that if the tower wer,~,ever to fall, it ¢/! tld'-c, ollapse on top of itself into-a "fall zone." The fall zone is indicated on tl)e site plan and is si ni,fic~tly set back from any structure or easement on the subject prope .,r~y/City Code establishes that n'~xnew tower shall be approved unless the Council finds that t/he equipment planned for the"~oposed tower cannot be accommodated on an existing tee/er or structure within a one mile ira,,d'i..xs~of the proposed tower. There are no tall structures ir~..-the one mile search area that would sat/,s"f~ the desired seamless coverage. The City is currently constructing a water tower to the north .o~'4he subject property that could facilitate the prpf~osed telecommunication service. However, the,'~ ~p~licant has stated that due to the projecte~July completion date for the water tower and their inte" hfi,,on to also co- locate on the ex/sting }yater tower located offof County Road #5 and Dysprosiurn-Skexet, the new water tower site doe~,not meet their immediate need to fill the existing coverage gaps byNJanuary 200 I, and does not/u' ltimately provide for a higher coverage area. The applicant has statexd and provided propagat,i'bn maps explaining that the existing 120 foot tower approximately one mi, l~to the west of the sUbject property is not high enough to meet their desired coverage needs. Tlie,y stated that co-lochting on this tower would still provide several gaps in coverage. There wil'l' be~, -t36- City Council/January 23, 2001 Page 19 of 34 I I I I I I, I I I I I I I I I I I