Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES <br />PLANNING COMMISSION <br />APRIL 10, 2014 <br />location is not an option as this tower already has four providers on it. He <br />noted that the tower proposed is a 140 foot monopole tower with an <br />equipment shelter, and would be directly north of the existing tower on the <br />property. There would he a driveway installed to access the equipment. <br />Duray asked the height of the existing tower. Wegman was not sure, but <br />stated that it is close to the 140 feet that is proposed for the new tower. <br />Duray asked about the fall zone. Wegman reported that a monopole tower <br />is designed to break apart and fall straight down. Therefore, the fall zone <br />would be within 10 to 20 feet of the pole location. The only exception to <br />this would be if there was a tornado that would carry debris further. <br />Maleitzke asked about State regulatory processes for towers and whether <br />or not neighboring properties were informed about the proposal. Wegman <br />indicated that the FCC does permitting for these towers and that towers <br />must comply with local regulations. There is not permitting process at the <br />State level. The Planner reported that property owners within 350 feet of <br />this property received notice of the proposal. <br />Duray asked if Wegman was in agreement with the recommendations <br />outlined in the City Planner's report. He responded that he was. <br />Maleitzke asked if there was a financial benefit to the City in permitting <br />this tower. The City Planner replied that while there would be no <br />additional tax revenue, there would be lease revenue to the City from the <br />tower. <br />Barraclough indicated that his experience is that there is additional cell <br />antenna service needed along Rice Street. <br />Duray asked if the City is obligated to work with cell tower providers or if <br />the City could limit the number of towers. The City Planner reported that <br />the FCC requires cities to make reasonable accommodations for cellular <br />providers. The City can require co- locations, and if a co- location is not <br />possible, the City cannot prohibit additional towers. <br />Wegner again noted that the current tower if full. <br />Fischer asked if the firm that would he constructing the tower was <br />experienced in this work. Wegner replied that they were very <br />experienced. The City Planner noted that given the tower would be <br />constructed on City property, there will be an extra level of enforcement <br />during construction. <br />-7- <br />