My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Agenda - Planning Commission - 02/01/2000
Ramsey
>
Public
>
Agendas
>
Planning Commission
>
2000
>
Agenda - Planning Commission - 02/01/2000
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/21/2025 9:21:38 AM
Creation date
9/8/2003 3:47:09 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Document Type
Agenda
Meeting Type
Planning Commission
Document Date
02/01/2000
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
136
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
Commissioner Nixt inquired if it would it be possible to construct the tower at 1674 Avenue and <br />get seamless coverage. <br /> <br />Mr. Mitchell explained that the proposed location would give maximum distance. He explained <br />that U.S. West could co-locate, but it would limit the coverage to the north. <br /> <br />Conunissioner Nixt questioned the cost difference with co-locating or constructing a new tower. <br /> <br />Mr. Mitchell replied that did not have the numbers available. <br /> <br />Commissioner Nixt stated that he would not be inclined to allow a 180-foot tower in a residential <br />area. <br /> <br />Commissioner Johnson replied that the Commission needs to determine restrictions, rather than <br />whether or not the tower can exist. <br /> <br />Mr. Landowski inquired if there are any other sites available for the tower. <br /> <br />Mr. Bocian reviewed the area along T.H. #47 in which the tower would need to be constructed. <br /> <br />Commissioner Jensen inquired if U.S. West researched locating the tower near Cross of Hope. <br /> <br />Mr. Bocian replied that the Cross of Hope site is too far north. He explained that if the tower <br />were to be constructed at a reduced height, there would be a need for more towers to achieve the <br />same coverage. <br /> <br />Don Kveton, 11556 Meadow Lane NE, Blaine, stated that he owns BeBop Cafd and was put in <br />the same situation; but the City of Blaine prohibited the tower because it was proposed to be <br />located in a residential area. He questioned why the tower couldn't be co-located with the <br />existing tower on t 67th to keep a central location for all of the towers, <br /> <br />Mr. Roark stated that the current ordinance allows for towers to be constructed at churches, on <br />existing structures, or residential backyards, but the proposed site is not a church, backyard or <br />existing structure and should not be allowed. He questioned if the residents have control over <br />their City or if any corporation who knows how to read the law book will be allowed to install <br />whatever they want. Mr. Roark also noted that he currently has PCS coverage in his <br />neighborhood. <br /> <br />Mr. Bocian replied that there are several holes in the area. He noted that U.S. West is following <br />all zoning guidelines and federal guidelines. <br /> <br />Motion by Commissioner Dempsey, seconded by Commissioner Jensen, to close the public <br />hearing. <br /> <br />Planning Commission/January 4, 2000 <br /> Page 6 of 10 <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.