My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
01-25-1989 Council Agenda
>
City Council Packets
>
1980-1989
>
1989
>
01-25-1989 Council Agenda
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/26/2013 11:42:58 AM
Creation date
6/26/2013 11:41:08 AM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
82
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
MINUTES <br />Planning Commission <br />January 12, 1989 <br />Carroway pointed out that Cellular One generally leases land rather than <br />purchases it. <br />DeLonais asked if Cellular One was a private enterprise. <br />Carroway replied that Cellular One is an essential service. However, the <br />State of Minnesota is one of two states that does not recognize Cellular <br />One as a public utility. 48 other states do. In Minnesota Cellular One <br />is recognized as a private utility providing essential service. <br />Carroway also reported that Cellular One leases similar property in <br />St. Louis Park to what it is proposing in Little Canada. The cost of <br />that lease is $575 per month. Carroway noted that the proposal for mounting <br />the equipment on the City's water tower has much less of an impact on the <br />community than the construction of an independent tower. <br />Costa asked the cost of constructing a tower. <br />Carroway estimated the cost at $100,000, but pointed out that the property <br />would be leased. Normal property leases run Cellular One $300 per month. <br />Carroway pointed out that the reason water towers are used is that they are <br />generally the tallest structures around. Cellular One does have to make <br />some engineering compromises in the use of the water towers. <br />Herkenhoff asked if the price of the lease ran its entire length. <br />Carroway replied that the lease price can be negotiated at the 5 year <br />renewal periods. <br />Gordy Swanson reported that he lives next door to the site in question, <br />and he objects to the proposal. Swanson stated that he is planning to <br />develop his property in the near future, and felt that the water tower <br />and Cellular One's proposal have a negative effect on his property values. <br />Swanson felt the lease price was too low and felt a lease of $6,000 per <br />month was more appropriate. Swanson stated that the water tower is an <br />eyesore, and objected to a building that does not meet Code requirements. <br />Swanson felt that a tower should be constructed in an industrial area <br />where it belongs. Swanson suggested that if Cellular One wants land for <br />a tower, they should purchase his property for it. <br />Carroway pointed out that Cellular One is providing a community service that <br />is a vital and valuable asset to the community. <br />Costa asked why the Little Canada tower was chosen. <br />Carroway replied that it was chose due to its location and height. Carroway <br />pointed out in response to Swanson's comments that a tower construction <br />adjacent to the City's water tower would be much more offensive than having <br />Cellular One's equipment mounted on the existing tower. <br />Herkenhoff asked if there was any health risk associated with this equipment. <br />Page -8- <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.