Laserfiche WebLink
<br />Associate Planner DaInes stated after reviewing the request for the telecommunications tower to <br />be located in the southernmost portion of the park, just south of the soccer fields, staff requested <br />that the applicant re-locate the tower farther east. The primary reasoning for this request is: <br />1) The tower construction will be more compatible with the future improvements planned <br />for the park. Locating the tower on the southwest corner of the future parking lot will <br />allow the City to benefit from its presence by the installation of Class Five surfacing near <br />the future building/parking construction site. Also, there is a possibility to utilize the <br />telecommunications structure as a light pole, although the likelihood is unclear. <br />2) The tower will not need a variance to the rear yard setback, which concerns the MPCA. <br />3) The tower will not be directly visible from the center of the park and from Alpine Drive. <br />The future park improvements will buffer the base of the tower from park users. <br /> <br />Associate Planner DaInes advised the Planning Commission to recommend approval of the <br />telecommunications tower at the location proposed by City Staff, contingent upon the following <br />items: <br />1) The site plan being revised to indicate the preferred location directly south of the future <br />parking lot; <br />2) A sufficient landscaping/screening plan being submitted, indicating the construction of an <br />opaque, board fencing that adequately screens the compound from view. <br />3) The City entering into an acceptable lease agreement with T-Mobile. <br /> <br />Citizen Input <br /> <br />Mr. Douglas Fountain, 15255 Garnett Street NW, stated his property is at the very northwest <br />corner of the park. He has three very important positions. He questioned why the tower is <br />required at this location. He stated he is a T-Mobile customer and has been for three or four <br />years. The only time they have experienced service difficulties have been on their journeys to <br />visit their son through Kentucky and Tennessee. Second, at the City Council meeting last month <br />it was mentioned, and it has been eluded to in this case study tonight, that the request was <br />withdrawn because of an elevation request. He questioned if there has not been a study of a <br />higher elevation on the south side of the park in the industrial area where it will be less obtrusive. <br />Mr. Fountain stated he is aware of the park development plans drawn up years ago on the west <br />end of the park. Two hockey rinks are planned, as well as a skating sheet. He thinks this <br />location will probably impact that development. He would like to have a response from T- <br />Mobile as to why this location is required. <br /> <br />Mr. Steven Edwards, T -Mobile, stated he has been working in the telecommunications industry <br />for about eight years, and on this specific site for about the last 1 Y2 years. T-Mobile is trying to <br />cover the area between Sunfish Lake Boulevard on the east and Ramsey Boulevard on the <br />northwest, and further north. Mr. Edwards explained one reason they are pushing this site in <br />Alpine Park is because the City of Ramsey's code is very restrictive. For a site to be eligible it <br />has to be on ten acres of property, and owned by a church, school, or the municipality. In this <br />area, other than Alpine Park, there is no other area that has ten acres that T-Mobile can pursue. <br />Alpine Park is the southern part of the search ring T-Mobile is trying to cover that will allow <br />coverage in the area to the north. With this site, T-Mobile will be able to provide coverage to <br /> <br />Planning Commission/ June 7, 2007 <br />Page 3 of 31 <br />