Laserfiche WebLink
applicants search ring, unless the Applicant can show that some other <br />( <br />distance is more reasonable and demonstrate conclusively why an <br />existing Tower or other suitable structure cannot be used. <br />4. "Provided documentation that such shared use shall consist only of the <br />rninirnunn Antenna Array technologically required to provide service <br />primarily and essentially within the City, to the extent practicable, unless <br />good cause is shown. <br />5. "Provided documentation justifying the total height of any Tower, <br />Facility and/or Antenna requested and the basis therefore. <br />Documentation in the form of propagation studies must include all <br />backup data used tn perform a1 requested height and a minimum often <br />(:Lo') feet lower height to 8!lnvv verification of this height need. Such ' <br />documentation will be analyzed in the context ofthe justification of the <br />height needed to provide service primarily and essentially within the <br />Citytoth2extentpracti[abl2,UnleS6gDod[auSeiSshOvvn. <br />6. "Provided RF information applicable to this She and expand the <br />supporting data as outlined in this report. <br />7. "Provided proper engineering analysis and certifications for the State of <br />Minnesota for structural and electrical as stated in the ordinance. <br />8. "Provided corrected letters from the landowner as addressed in this <br />report. <br />g. "Provided the correct the applicant information to either have the <br />wireless provider as the applicant or provide written authorization from <br />the provider." <br />L. On February 3, 2oog, FHMC submitted a memo in response to the Comi Report <br />(FHMC Responsive Memo), attached and incorporated as Exhibit E. <br />M. The FMH[ application was reviewed by the [hv Council on December 2, 2ooEL <br />December 4, 2oo8/ December 8, 2008, January 6, 2oo9 and February 3, 2009� <br />The City Council considered the memorandum, the comments and <br />recommendations of the City Planner; the comments and materials submitted <br />by FMHC; the comments and materials submitted by the public; and the <br />recommendations of the Planning Commission. The City Council expressed <br />concern that the tower, as proposed, would not reasonably blend into the <br />surrounding environment. <br />2.0 Reasons for Denial. Based upon its review of the FMHC application, the City's <br />regulations, the various reports submitted in connection with the application, including <br />Ii <br />