Laserfiche WebLink
<br />which is the maximum amount allowed. He stated that City Code also requires that there be co- <br />locaters on the tower, so there will be three additional spots available for other service providers. <br />He noted that the map included in the packet on page 210 was the previous version and he <br />presented the updated map. He stated that there is a proposed path of class 5 material that will be <br />used to service the tower now, but noted that the plan is to later pave this path and create a <br />parking lot and driveway that. can be used by park goers. He stated that the location of the tower <br />takes advantage of future park improvements, and yet keeps it out of the way. <br /> <br />Public Works Director Olson stated that there is no funding source for the park improvements, so <br />the location of the tower capitalizes on some improvements, which will help write down the cost <br />of some future improvements. He stated that he feels the location in Alpine Park makes a lot of <br />sense. <br /> <br />Mayor Gamec confirmed that the tower is !he type that will collapse on itself and not tip over if <br />it is ever damaged. . <br /> <br />Citizen InDut <br /> <br />Roger Hermanson, 15115 Garnet Street NW, stated that he had also sent a letter outlining his <br />feelings about the placement of this tower. He stated that he had contacted the Anoka Utilities <br />and spoke with Dati Voss, because there is a high voltage power line that he believes is less than <br />80 feet from the tower. He stated that Mr. Voss has said that they would like to have the tower <br />placed the full height distance away from the tower. He stated that he feels the first location <br />considered on the other side of the pond up against the landfill would be a better location <br />because there are no homes or p()wer lines to consider. He stated that he does not like the idea of <br />the combination of the proximity of the power lines and the tower to his property. He stated that <br />if the City Council does not think things can fall, just remember the 35W bridge collapse. <br /> <br />Douglas Fountain, 15255 Garnet Street NW, stated that he also objects to the placement of the <br />tower and does not think that all possible locations have been studied. He asked if the towers are <br />required to be placed on industrial or City owned land. <br /> <br />Community Development Director Trudgeon stated that current City Code states that towers will <br />be placed on commercial or industrial land, or land owned by the City, such as a park or school <br />to minimize the impact on residential neighborhoods. <br /> <br />Mr. Fountain stated that he is a T-Mobile customer and has not had any difficulties with his <br />coverage. He stated that the only times he has had problems was when he visited Kentucky and <br />Tennessee. He stated that at a previous meeting, T-Mobile had stated that they had reception <br />problems to the northeast of Ramsey. He stated that his daughter lives in Oak Grove, which is <br />northeast of Ramsey and he has had no problems reaching her using his cell phone. He <br />suggested that the City consider the southeast comer of the park near the landfill. He stated that <br />there is elevation available and does not feel the landfill will block reception. He stated that he <br />would like the City Council to deny this location and look at the southeast comer of the property <br />near the landfill, which would also locate the tower away from homes; <br /> <br />City Council / September 25, 2007 <br />Page 12 of 27 <br />