Laserfiche WebLink
10. A description of the feasible locations of future towers or WTFs within the City based2 7 <br />upon existing physical, engineering, technological or geographical limitations in the <br />event the proposed tower is erected. <br />C. Factors Considered in Granting a Conditional Use Permit for Towers & WTFs. <br />1. Height of the proposed tower. <br />2. Proximity of the tower to residential structures and residential district boundaries. <br />3. Nature of uses on adjacent and nearby properties. <br />4. Design of the tower, with particular reference to design characteristics that have the <br />effect of reducing or eliminating visual obtrusiveness. <br />5. Proposed ingress and egress. <br />No other existing tower or structure is located within the geographic area that meets <br />the applicant's engineering requirements. <br />7. If existing towers or structures are within the geographic area but do not have <br />sufficient structural strength to support the applicant's proposed WTF and related <br />equipment. <br />8. The applicant's proposed WTF would not cause electromagnetic interference with 1 <br />or more WTFs on existing towers or structures, or a WTF on the existing towers or <br />structures would cause interference with the applicant's proposed WTF. <br />The fees, costs, or contractual provisions required by the owner in order to share an <br />existing tower or structure of to adapt an existing tower or structure for sharing are <br />unreasonable. Costs exceeding new tower development are presumed to be <br />unreasonable. <br />10. The applicant demonstrates that an alternative technology that does not require the <br />use of towers or structures is unsuitable. Costs of alternative technology that exceed <br />new tower or antenna development shall not be presumed to render the technology <br />unsuitable. <br />11. All towers for which a CUP is required shall be separated by an minimum of 750 feet <br />between the proposed tower and any pre-existing tower, unless however, that the <br />City Council, after considering any recommendations of the City Staff, may reduce <br />the standard separation requirements if the purposes of this Chapter would be better <br />served by doing so. <br />Staff received no calls or emails opposing this CUP application. <br />Attachments: <br />• Site Map <br />• Application <br />• Applicant Letter <br />07212009 CUP T -Mobile 2601 Kenzie Public Hearing.doc <br />