Laserfiche WebLink
Planning & Zoning Board <br />January 14, 1998 <br />Page 12 <br />Mr. Hagen, in that operating equipment will only be housed within structures when those <br />structures exist. Otherwise, the cabinet is sufficient. <br />Mr. Dunn asked about motivation behind building new towers. Mr. Beck explained that <br />(1) new providers would be attracted to the area, (2) coverage would be improved, and (3) <br />capacity issues could be addressed. <br />Mr. Dunn asked about a switch from analog to digital service. Mr. Beck stated that the <br />trend is increasingly toward digital service. <br />Mr. Herr left the meeting at 8:12 p.m. <br />Mr. Gelbmann asked how quickly service "cell" sizes would shrink. Mr. Beck stated that <br />from 1987 to present the number within the Twin Cities has increased from 9 to 100. He <br />added that industry-wide this number will continue to increase. <br />Mr. Gelbmann clarified that the lower height limit is the tree line, and suggested that high <br />towers would eventually become obsolete. Mr. Beck agreed. Mr. Gelbmann then asked <br />if it isn't, therefore, more efficient to restrict antenna height. Mr. Beck explained that it <br />would be at least one or two years before antennas of less than 150 feet would be needed, <br />adding that NEXTEL maintains a 195 -foot design standard for its towers. <br />Mr. Beck again stated that the most important issue for Lino Lakes with respect to <br />wireless service is co- location. <br />Mr. Brixius pointed out that during the course of discussion a number of issues had been <br />raised which may require additional consideration. They are: <br />1. Performance standards for administrative permits. <br />2. Adjustment to the tower height requirement with attention to co- location. <br />3. Prohibited districts (subject to input from EDAB). <br />4. Definition of "tower" (which was resolved in discussion). <br />5. Setback for equipment buildings being in relation to "accessory" rather than <br />"principal" buildings. <br />6. Specific language with regard to storage of equipment. <br />Mr. Johnson made a MOTION to close the public hearing at 8:23 p.m., and was <br />supported by Mr. Dunn. Motion carried 6 -0. <br />Mr. Brixius suggested that he would make the agreed upon amendments to the ordinance, <br />requesting additional guidance from the Board with respect to proposed tower height, and <br />prepare an amended draft ordinance for presentation at the next regular Board meeting. <br />The Board agreed that the ordinance should be more flexible with regard to tower height. <br />Mr. Brixius recommended that, instead of a standard of 120 feet, 160 -foot towers be <br />• <br />• <br />