Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES <br />CITY COUNCIL <br />APRIL 23, 2014 <br />AS A DUPLEX BASED ON THE RECOMMENDATION OF THE <br />PLANNING COMMISSION AND OF THE CITY PLANNER AS <br />OUTLINED IN HIS APRIL 7, 2014 REPORT <br />The foregoing resolution was duly seconded by McGraw. <br />Ayes (3). <br />Nays (0). Resolution declared adopted. <br />CUP- Blesener opened the Public Hearing to consider the request for a <br />53 SOUTH Conditional Use Permit allowing the construction and operation of a cell <br />OWASSO tower at 53 South Owasso Blvd. as requested by Verizon Wireless. The <br />BLVD.- Planning Commission recommended approval of the Conditional Use <br />VERIZON Permit subject to compliance with the recommendations of the City <br />WIRELESS Planner as outlined in his April 4, 2014 report. <br />The City Planner reviewed his April 4, 2014 report noting that Verizon <br />Wireless has requested a Conditional Use Permit to construct a 140 foot <br />tall monopole communications tower and cellular antenna upon the City - <br />owned site at 53 South Owasso Blvd West. In conjunction with the tower <br />construction, a 360 square foot equipment building is proposed at the base <br />of the tower. The Planner noted that cellular antenna co- locations are <br />allowed through an administrative permit process. However, when new <br />towers are proposed, the Conditional Use Permit process is required. <br />The Planner indicated that in reviewing the application materials, it <br />appears that Code requirements will be met. He noted the series of <br />evaluation criteria outlined in his report, one of which is that a co- location <br />is not possible. The Planner pointed out that there is a cell tower <br />immediately adjacent to the location proposed. This tower has a total of <br />four providers on it, and there is no room for another provider. The <br />Planner also pointed out that while the City can regulate towers of this <br />nature, it must make reasonable accommodations for them. The Planner <br />recommended approval of the CUP subject to compliance with the <br />conditions outlined in his report. <br />Blesener asked about the existing tower. The City Administrator noted <br />that Verizon provided engineering analysis that the current tower is not <br />capable of another co- location. Blesener asked if the proposed tower <br />would have room for co- locations. The City Administrator indicated that <br />the Code requires room for at least two additional providers for towers <br />over 110 feet in height. Blesener asked the height of the existing tower. <br />The Planner indicated that it is very close to the 140 foot height proposed <br />for the new tower. <br />4 <br />