Loading...
4. Request for a Conditional Use Permit and Site Plan Review for the Construction of a Telecommunications Tower at 1455 Park RoadCITY OF DATE: January 15, 1997 C H A N H A S S E N DATE: February 10, 1997 SE #: 96 -5 CUP BY: Al -Jaf£ 7 1 1 STAFF REPORT PROPOSAL: Conditional Use Permit and Site Plan Review to allow a 150 foot Telecomunication Tower and an 8 Foot Chain Link Fence LOCATION: 1455 Park Road - Lot 7, Block 5, Chanhassen Lakes Business Park 5th Addition APPLICANT: SBA, Inc. Gary Goll 7625 Metro Blvd, Suite 235 1455 Park Road Edina, MN 55439 Chanhassen, MN 55317 830 1555 Ext. 222 474 -4900 PRESENT ZONING: ACREAGE: DENSITY: IOP, Industrial Office Park 1.75 acres ADJACENT ZONING AND LAND USE: N - IOP; Industrial Bldg. S - IOP; Twin Cities Western Railroad E - IOP; Industrial Bldg. W - IOP; Industrial Bldg. WATER AND SEWER: Available to the site. Dy Ciiy Adr:fintstrff+ir Fr,,'01 Rejer.'.eA y Uate Seb;u�![?d fn CormisslaR Date Submitted to Council PHYSICAL CHARACTER.: The site contains an existing office building. 2000 LAND USE PLAN: Industrial - T - 7-M c5tA�e,c 4 % , kvf-,- z;� -W U4 I ' -L UM I IN Western t- Sprint Spectrum February 10, 1997 Page 2 PROPOSAL /SUMMARY The applicant is requesting a conditional use permit and site plan approval for the construction of a 150 foot monopole communication tower. The tower is proposed to be situated south of an existing industrial building located south of Park Drive and north of Twin Cities Western Railroad. A total of six directional antennas will be mounted in a triangular configuration at the top of the tower. The number of directional antennas has the potential of increasing up to twelve (see attached Exhibit E). Two equipment cabinets measuring approximately 6' wide x 3' deep x 4' high will be located within a fenced area at the base of the tower. Landscaping sh e be added ar-ound-tht porime+cer of the !eased site to soften the leek of the base of the tower- €epee. The landscape plan is of a high quality. A mix of vines, evergreens and shrubs are proposed. These plantings are added around the perimeter of the leased site to soften the look of the base of the tower and fence. Access to the tower is provided via existing driveways. Staff is recommending approval with conditions. BACKGROUND On November 12, 1996, the City Council approved an ordinance to allow telecommunication towers within the city in all districts. GENERAL CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AND SITE PLAN The applicant is requesting a conditional use permit and a site plan review to construct a 150 foot monopole tower for wireless communication services. The City's Zoning Ordinance allows telecommunication towers and antennas in Office Industrial Districts subject to the approval of a conditional use permit by the City Council. In reviewing conditional use permit requests, the Planning Commission must consider possible adverse affects of the use. The standards are: The City of Chanhassen finds it necessary for the promotion and preservation of the public health, safety, welfare, and aesthetics of the community that the construction, location, size, and maintenance of wireless telecommunication facilities be controlled. Further, the City finds: (1) Towers and antennas have a direct impact on, and a relationship to, the image of the community; (2) The manner of installation, location, and maintenance of towers and antennas affects the public health, safety, welfare, and aesthetics of the community; Sprint Spectrum February 10, 1997 Page 3 (3) A reasonable opportunity for the establishment of wireless telecommunication must be provided to serve residential and business needs, and; (4) Uncontrolled and unlimited towers and antennas adversely impact the image and aesthetics of the community and, thereby, undermine economic value and growth. The following constitutes our findings: A 150 foot high tower at this location should not be injurious to the use and enjoyment of surrounding property or substantially diminish property values, as the proposed tower is over 500 feet from any residential neighborhood. It is separated by railroad tracks and an industrial site, as well as future Lake Drive West. Further, the proposed tower should not endanger the public health or safety if the conditions attached to the permit and building code requirements are adhered to. In locating a telecommunication antenna, the applicant must demonstrate that the antenna cannot be accommodated on an existing or approved tower or building within a one mile search radius. The applicant is requesting approval to erect a monopole tower because there are no existing structures of adequate height in this portion of the City. City Code requires new antenna support structures to be designed to accommodate additional users. Providing opportunities for co- location is important if the total number of towers in the city are to be kept to a minimum. To ensure the possibility of co- location in the future, the applicant has submitted a letter of intent committing the tower owner and his or her successors to allow the shared use of the tower if an additional user agrees in writing to meet reasonable terms and conditions for shared use, and so long as there is no negative structural impact upon the tower and there is no disruption to the service provide. The applicant shall submit documentation at the time of building permit application showing the height above grade for all potential mounting positions for co- located antennas and the minimum separation distances between antennas. A description of the tower's capacity, including the number and type of antennas that is can accommodate should also be provided. Accessory structures located with the tower include a pre - assembled base transceiver station (BTS) that would be located at the base of the tower. The BTS is a cabinet type structure that contains the radio frequency transceivers, computer and climate control equipment, and batteries for back -up power. As additional directional antennas are needed, additional BTS will be required. The applicant is showing two cabinets to accommodate future expansion of the service. The cable that connects the BTS to the antennas runs inside the monopole. Staff finds that the applicant has met the general standards for all conditional use and the design standards for towers i.vith A- c v., ~roar- exeeptions The applicant is proposing to erect an eight Sprint Spectrum February 10, 1997 Page 4 foot high chain link fence around the tower and ground equipment. An 8 foot fence inclu t e st -ands of barbe is permitted within an IOP District as a conditional use. Staff believes that this will add to the security of the tower and accessory structures. Staff is recommending approval of the 8 foot fence with conditions. The landscaping plan shows the existing vegetation, but n o and proposed vegetation on the site. Stag is of th apinien that additional landscaping shot-tld be is provide in the form of evergreens, shrubs and vines to screen the equipment. Staff r-ee amirl-ands a.b be planted on the east andwest of the feneed area to help sof4ea the look of the ar's bye :mod To reduce the visual impacts of the tower on properties farther from the site, the tower will have a galvanized finish, and will contain no artificial lighting or signage. There are existing electric poles south of the proposed telecommunication tower that have a galvanized finish. These poles are approximately 75 feet high. This will allow the tower to blend in with the existing electric poles. No trees or vegetation will be removed to accommodate the new tower. PARKING /INTERIOR CIRCULATION Parking lot circulation is straight forward. The existing parking will be used. No additional parking is proposed and non are required by ordinance. ACCESS The existing driveway will be used to access the tower and equipment. LANDSCAPING The proposed telecommunications tower is well situated among existing vegetation and avoids the need for tree and vegetation removal as much as possible. Its placement will allow the majority of vegetation to remain and thereby help to screen the ground equipment and fence. According to ordinance, screening is required for the base equipment, bti4 the applicant has i3ot provided a mix of evergreens, shrubs and bushes €er -afly l --nds�?pipgto be installed as part of the project. Screening of the base equipment will be difficult considering the fence surrounding the equipment runs directly along the parking lot with no room for plantings in the front. However, plantings could be done along the sides to reduce the visual impact of the equipment. Landscaping would enhance the location and offer a softer alternative to the chain link fence. LIGHTING Sprint Spectrum February 10, 1997 Page 5 Lighting is not shown on the site plan. Towers shall not be illuminated by artificial means and shall not display strobe lights unless such lighting is specifically required by the Federal Aviation Administration or other federal or state authority for a particular tower. SIGNAGE The applicant has not shown any signage plans. No signage, advertising or identification of any kind intended to be visible from the ground or other structures is permitted, except applicable warning and equipment information signage required by the manufacturer or by Federal, State, or local authorities. GRADING /DRAINAGE Minimum grading is proposed consisting of clearing some brush to locate the tower and accessory equipment. The grading is insignificant. COMPLIANCE TABLE - IOP DISTRICT PLANNING COMMISSION UPDATE On January 15, 1997, the Planning Commission met and reviewed this item. Two issues relating to the fence were raised. The first dealt with the barbed wire at the top of the fence. The Planning Commission voted to allow the 8 foot high chain link fence, however, they recommended against the use of barbed wire. The applicant explained that eliminating the barbed whire is acceptable. The second issue dealt with the top of the fence. The current design appears to be unfinished on top. The Planning Commission recommended the top of the fence be capped or finished to give it a more professional look. The last issue dealt with the landscape plan. At the Planning Commission meeting, the applicant submitted a plan that showed some evergreens placed in a row around the leased area. Staff recommended that a mixture of plantings be used rather than one species. Staff also Ordinance Proposed Tower Height 150 feet 150 feet Tower Setback N -NA' E -NA' N -NA' E -NA' S -10' W -NA' 5 -20' W -NA' Variances Required none PLANNING COMMISSION UPDATE On January 15, 1997, the Planning Commission met and reviewed this item. Two issues relating to the fence were raised. The first dealt with the barbed wire at the top of the fence. The Planning Commission voted to allow the 8 foot high chain link fence, however, they recommended against the use of barbed wire. The applicant explained that eliminating the barbed whire is acceptable. The second issue dealt with the top of the fence. The current design appears to be unfinished on top. The Planning Commission recommended the top of the fence be capped or finished to give it a more professional look. The last issue dealt with the landscape plan. At the Planning Commission meeting, the applicant submitted a plan that showed some evergreens placed in a row around the leased area. Staff recommended that a mixture of plantings be used rather than one species. Staff also Sprint Spectrum February 10, 1997 Page 6 recommended the plantings be staggered and bunched in some areas. The applicant submitted a plan that reflects the Planning Commission's and staffs request. The Planning Commission unanimously recommended approval of this application. STAFF RECOMMENDATION The Planning Commission recommended that the City Council adopt the following motion: "The City Council approves the Site Plan Review and Conditional Use Permit #96 -5 for a 150 foot telecommunication tower and an 8 foot chain link fence as shown on the site plan received December 11, 1996, subject to the following conditions: 1 The a detailed l an d se pe plan. The applicant shall enter into a site plan and conditional use permit agreement and submit financial guarantees to guarantee the improvements. 2. The tower shall comply requirements in ARTICLE XXX. TOWERS AND ANTENNAS of the Zoning Ordinance. 3. The tower shall have a galvanized finish. 4. There shall be no artificial lighting or signage. 5. The applicant shall submit documentation at the time of building permit application showing the height above grade for all potential mounting positions for co- located antennas and the minimum separation distances between antennas. A description of the tower's capacity, including the number and type of antennas that can be accommodated should also be provided. 6. The fence shall be of a chain link material only (no barbed wire), and have a finished /capped top." ATTACHMENTS 1. Letter from applicant containing Exhibits A -M. 2. Application. 3. Co- location letter from Sprint. 4. Public hearing notice. 5. Planning Commission minutes dated January 15, 1997. 6. Site Plan dated November 11, 1996. 6 a - 4 1mi SBA, Inc. • Wireless Communications Consultants 7625 Metro Boulevard • Suite 235 Edina, Minnesota 55439 FAX: (612) 830 -1924 • Phone: (612) 830 -1555 November 22, 1996 City of Chanhassen Planning Commission and City Council c/o Charmaine AI -Jaff, Planner II 690 Coulter Drive P.O. Box 147 Chanhassen, MN 55317 National & International RE: Application for Conditional Use Permit to Allow the Construction of a Sprint PCS, Personal Communication Services (PCS) Monopole. Dear Members of the Chanhassen Planning Commission and City Council: Sprint PCS is requesting that the Chanhassen Planning Commission and City Council consider the approval of a Conditional Use Permit to allow the construction of a 150 foot tall monopole on which to attach Personal Communication Service (PCS) panel antennas at "First Choice ". This property is owned by Gary Goll and is located at 1455 Park Road in Chanhassen. The Conditional Use Permit is being requested in order to complete a portion of the construction of a national PCS infrastructure network being installed by Sprint PCS. Sprint PCS is a co- applicant with property owner for the Conditional Use Permit. SBA, Inc., is a wireless communications consultant which has been hired by Sprint PCS to locate, lease, and zone the part of the national PCS network which is located in the Minneapolis Major Trade Area (MTA). The City of Chanhassen is located within this MTA and it contains a Radio Frequency (RF) search ring within which Sprint PCS is planning to locate a tower with PCS antennas in order to assist in delivering complete service coverage. This is the only search ring within the boundaries of the City of Chanhassen for this project. Therefore, a Sprint PCS search ring map has not been included with this application. A drive test was conducted within this search ring to identify any existing structures upon which to locate PCS antennas. No other structures meeting RF engineering requirements were found within a one mile radius of the site. As such, the only option available to Sprint PCS is to construct a new monopole. The property owned by Gary Goll contains a site which meets all of the RF engineering, location, and site requirements to operate the Sprint PCS network. Mr. Goll has signed a lease which will allow Sprint PCS to construct a tower on this property, contingent upon obtaining all of the required permits from the City of Chanhassen. The specific proposal is to construct a 150 foot tall monopole in the southwest corner of the site. Twelve panel antennas would be attached at the top of the tower (three sectors, with each sector containing four panels) with their centers at the 150 foot elevation. The panels measure 6' high by 6" wide by 2" deep and weigh about nine pounds each. The related ground equipment would be located in the southwest corner of the lot, and will be partially screened from Park Road by the existing building. The site would be enclosed by a six foot tall chain link fence for security and safety purposes, and would be screened using vegetative materials, as per City Code Section 20.25. The proposed location of the monopole and the related equipment are provided on the enclosed site plan (page Al of the construction drawings). The proposed antennas and related equipment will comply with the regulations of the Federal Communications Commission. There will be no lights or signage (except small warning and information signs) on the panels or on the related equipment. Attached for your review is the following information: 1. A completed Application for the Conditional Use Permit signed by Gary Goll, the property owner; 2. A check for the $450.00 application fee; 3. A list of property owners within 500 feet of the site from Independent Abstracting Services, Inc.; 4. Site data information and responses to the twelve criteria required for the granting of a Conditional Use Permit (Exhibit A); 5. A brief narrative providing information about Sprint PCS and general PCS services (Exhibit B); 6. A copy of the portion of the Chanhassen Zoning Map which shows the location of the site (Exhibit C); 7. Photographs of the site (Exhibit D); 8. A photo simulation indicating the anticipated appearance of the site upon completion (Exhibit E); 9. A drawing of a completed site showing the location of the equipment (Exhibit F); 10. A "Proposed Equipment Location Plan" (Exhibit G); 11. A copy of a photograph of one of the panel antennas (Exhibit H); 12. A photograph of a monopole site under construction (Exhibit 1); 13. A photograph of a Base Transceiver Station (BTS) (Exhibit J); 14. A letter from Valmont discussing the structural aspects of the monopoles they install (Exhibit K); 15. A letter from Valmont discussing the number of antennas each monopole is capable of holding (Exhibit L); 16. A copy of a letter from the Airspace Safety Analysis Corporation (ASAC) which states that a Notice of Proposed Construction to the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) is not required for this proposal (Exhibit M); 17. One 8 -1/2" x 11" copy of the construction drawings and survey; 18. One 8 -1/2" x 11" set of transparencies of the construction drawings and survey; 19. One 11" x 17" copy of the construction drawings and survey; and 20. Twenty -six full size copies of the construction drawings. Sprint PCS and the staff of SBA, Inc., look forward to working with the City of Chanhassen to deliver PCS services to your community. If you have any questions regarding this application or general PCS technology, please contact me directly at 612.830.1555, extension 222, and I will promptly forward any information to you. Thank you in advance for your consideration. Sincerely, , 6 V, / / /W Terrie A. Thurmer SBA Inc. Zoning Specialist c: Tom Hallett, SBA - Minneapolis, Project Director Dale Runkle, SBA - Minneapolis, Zoning Manager EXHIBIT A Sprint PCS CUP Application SBm S PAI'7T $ P- CTRUNI ANNEAPOLIS Site Information: Applicant Sprint PCS Contact Terrie A. Thurmer, Zoning Specialist, SBA, Inc. Site Location 1455 Park Road, Chanhassen, MN 55378 Current Zoning Industrial Office Park District (IOP) Comp. Plan Designation Industrial Municipal Utilities The site is served by municipal utilities. I Adjacent Zoning Direction Zone North Industrial Office Park District (IOP) South Industrial Office Park District (IOP) East Industrial Office Park District (IOP) West Industrial Office Park District (IOP) I Case History The subject site is located on Lot 7, Block 5, Chanhassen Lakes Business Park, on the south side of Park Road. The surrounding area is rolling hills and has been developed for industrial uses. The "First Choice' building is located on the northern portion of the lot. A railroad track is located south of the southern property line. I Introduction Sprint PCS Minneapolis is requesting a Conditional Use Permit in order to construct a 150 foot tall monopole on a 50 foot by 50 foot area of the southern portion of the site, approximately 55 feet north of the railroad tracks. The tower is proposed to be constructed on the grassy, wooded area to the south of the parking lot. Therefore, the proposal would not eliminate any existing parking stalls. This Conditional Use Permit is being requested as per the following section of the City of Chanhassen City Code: Section Subd. Subject Section 28 814, Item 15 Uses by Conditional Use Permit within the Industrial Office Park District: Item 15: Commercial Towers. I Findings The criteria required for the granting of Conditional Use Permits are listed below with findings: Criteria #1 Will not be detrimental to or endanger the public health, safety, comfort, convenience or general welfare of the neighborhood or the city. Finding #1 There is no evidence that the use as conditioned will be detrimental to or endanger the public health, safety, comfort, convenience, or general welfare. The site and the surrounding area are both zoned and planned for industrial development. For safety purposes, the site will be surrounded by a six foot tall fence to discourage entry into the area and the climbing of the monopole. As for health concerns, Sprint PCS PCS transmissions will operate at very low power levels. There is no evidence that PCS transmissions are harmful to the health or safety of persons living or working nearby. Sprint PCS engineers have calculated that the worst case scenario would actually be eight times below the limit set by the American National Standards Institute (ANSI). The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) has adopted the standards set by the ANSI. According to the FCC, measurements that have been made around typical cellular base stations have shown that ground level power densities are well below the limits recommended by the currently accepted radio frequency and microwave safety standards. Each Sprint PCS site is registered with and approved by the Federal Aviation Administration. Therefore, they will pose no threat to air navigation. In addition, the tower will be designed and constructed to withstand the highest wind speeds and snow and ice loads of the area. Criteria #2 Will be consistent with the objectives of the city's comprehensive plan and this chapter. Finding #2 The site is designated for industrial development in the City of Chanhassen's Comprehensive Plan. The area is both zoned and planned for industrial development and commercial towers are listed as a Conditional Use in the Industrial Office Park Zoning District. Criteria #3 Will be designed, constructed, operated and maintained so to be compatible in appearance with the existing or intended character of the general vicinity and will not change the essential character of that area. Finding #3 The monopole would not change the existing industrial character of the area. The use as conditioned will be compatible with both the existing and planned development of the property surrounding the site. Criteria #4 Will not be hazardous or disturbing to existing or planned neighboring uses. Finding #4 There is no evidence that the use as conditioned would be hazardous or disturb the use of the site or other property in the immediate vicinity. The surrounding area is zoned and planned for industrial development and the monopole would not disturb the existing or planned land uses within the area. Criteria #5 Will be served adequately by essential public facilities and services, including streets, police and fire protection, drainage structures, refuse disposal, water and sewer systems and schools; or will be served adequately by such facilities and services provided by the persons or agencies responsible for the establishment of the proposed use. Finding #5 The only utilities required for this proposal are electricity and telephone, and these are already being provided to the site for the operation of First Choice. Access is already provided to the site. Criteria #6 Will not create excessive requirements for public facilities and services and will not be detrimental to the economic welfare of the community. Finding #6 The proposal would use minimal utilities, and would not be detrimental to the economic welfare of the community. in fact, the tower will enhance the area's communications abilities by providing PCS services to the City of Chanhassen and the surrounding area. Criteria #7 Will not involve uses, activities, processes, materials, equipment and conditions of operation that will be detrimental to the economic welfare of the community. Finding #7 The construction of the monopole at the site will not involve any activities or operational conditions that will be detrimental to the economic welfare of the community. Criteria #8 Will have vehicular approaches to the property which do not create traffic congestion or interfere with traffic of surrounding public thoroughfares. Finding #8 The site already contains two vehicular approaches for the "First Choice" structure. Once the site is operational, the equipment will be maintained by a single maintenance person on a monthly basis. Therefore, the construction of the tower will not create additional traffic congestion, nor interfere with the normal traffic flow of the surrounding public streets. Criteria #9 Will not result in the destruction, loss or damage of solar access, natural, scenic, or historic features of major significance. Finding #9 The tower would have a very minimal effect upon the solar access of the neighboring properties, and would not have a detrimental affect upon the natural, scenic, or historic features of the surrounding area. Criteria #10 Will be aesthetically compatible with the area. Finding #10 The site, as well as the surrounding area, is zoned for industrial uses. The use as conditioned will be compatible with the existing and future development of the area. Criteria #11 . Will not depreciate surrounding property values. Finding #11 There is no evidence that the use as conditioned would have a negative impact upon the property values within the immediate vicinity. Sprint PCS has conducted a number of appraisals in other areas of the country to determine if there was a basis for this type of claim. These appraisals were performed on properties located near both communication towers and water towers. The conclusions are that property values in the immediate area of a tower are not adversely affected by the presence of the tower. If City Staff or the Board would like to see a copy of these appraisals, Sprint PCS will gladly provide the documentation to support this conclusion. Criteria #12 Will meet standards prescribed for certain uses as provided in this article. Finding #12 The intent of the /OP District is to provide an area for large scale light industrial and commercial development. The proposed use is consistent with the purpose and intent of the Industrial Office Park District, and it complies with the Criteria for Granting Conditional Use Permits. The use as conditioned will meet the Design Standards of the Industrial Office Park District, as well as the screening requirements required for this type of use. EXHIBIT B Sprint PCS CUP Application Introduction Sprint PCS is a participant in the Personal Communications Services (PCS) market. It is an alliance which consists of the following four major corporations: 1) Sprint Corporation; 2) Tele- Communications Incorporated (TCI); 3) Cox Communications; and 4) Comcast Corporation. The purpose of this alliance is to provide consumers with a variety of telecommunication services, including local telephone service, long distance telephone service, wireless communications, and cable services. SBA, Inc. (Steven Bernstein & Associates, Incorporated) is a telecommunications consulting firm which specializes in wireless site development consulting to the cellular, paging, and PCS industry. In order to provide PCS within the metro area, SBA has been hired by Sprint PCS to lease, zone, and construct antenna sites within 11 counties in the Twin Cities metro area and a small portion of Wisconsin. PCS is a new set of wireless telecommunications services personalized to the individual. There is a growing demand for improved wireless services, and a new infrastructure is needed to meet this growing demand. Background In early 1995, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) auctioned licenses for the 1850 -1990 MHz band of the radio spectrum within the 51 Major Trading Areas (MTAs) of the United States for use by Personal Communications Services. Sprint PCS purchased licenses within 29 of these 51 MTAs. These licenses, in combination with the licenses awarded to its affiliates and other providers, will enable Sprint PCS to offer seamless Personal Communications Services virtually anywhere in the country. What is PCS? Telephone numbers used in PCS handsets will become tied specifically to an individual, and the types and features of services that each subscriber desires will be customized to his or her unique needs. A PCS telephone number will belong to a person for as long as he or she wants it, and the chosen services (for example stock quotes on selected companies, voice mail, and caller identification) will become specific to the individual holding that telephone number. PCS technology will allow a variety of telecommunication services, including: • Local and long distance telephone services and cable services; • All -in -one Wireless Communication Services: • Portable phones, pagers, and fax transmission; • Numeric paging on the phone's screen; • Interactive paging (2 -way paging which allows the sender to track where the message is sent, and when it has been received.) • Voice mail service; • Caller ID; • International roaming capability; • Reduced power needs (allows smaller units and longer battery life); and • In the future, PCS will allow computer use and video images over the PCS network. Assigning a unique PCS telephone number to a customer will allow the individual to place a call and / or send information across regional, national, and international borders. The network will do all the work of tracking the customer, knowing where he or she is at all times. Benefits of PCS over Cellular PCS has several advantages over existing cellular telephone service, including better service quality through the use of digital technology, more compact radio equipment, increased mobility, enhanced service features, and price. Benefits include the following: Digital Technology. PCS utilizes the latest digital technology. This will facilitate cleaner voice quality, but more importantly, clean data communication. A PCS customer will be able to communicate through voice and data simultaneously using the same handset without interference to either activity. In addition, computer users will be able to run applications and retrieve data faster from remote locations using their handset. PCS technology also provides less static and fading, and there are fewer dropped calls. Improved Security. Digital technology provides more security than analog, the technology traditionally used by the cellular industry. Calls in digital format cannot be overheard with the kind of simple scanners currently used to eavesdrop on cellular calls. Although it is technically possible to overhear a call, it requires special gear and technical skill which most eavesdroppers lack. Improved Equipment. PCS will utilize smaller antennae and more advanced telecommunication technology that will result in less expensive rates to the consumer. In addition, equipment will be more compact both at the handset and at the antenna site. Handsets will be lighter than today's cellular flip phones, and the handsets will utilize longer lasting batteries. Because of the PCS' assigned radio spectrum, there will be more antennas, but they will likely be less noticeable than those used by the cellular industry. SBA, Inc. and Sprint PCS has been working diligently to lease antenna sites on City water towers, existing communication towers, and existing buildings prior to attempting to lease any sites for new ground built towers. Increased Mobility. With PCS, mobility means seamless roaming across existing cellular and landline service areas. A PCS handset can be taken anywhere and be expected to function the same as in the coverage area of the original service provider. One Telephone Number. With PCS, one Personal Communications Number (PCN) will be assigned to each individual user. Today, when a person changes their residence, the old landline telephone number is frequently lost because these numbers are assigned and based on geographic area. Cellular telephone numbers are also lost when carriers are switched because cellular service companies are provided a limited range of numbers, and the numbers have to be recycled or reused. A PCN associates a telephone number with a person, regardless of where he or she is located, and regardless of who is the service provider. Lower Cost for Service: PCS will be cheaper in the long term because it will utilize digital technology. Initially, the cost for the service and handsets will be similar to that of cellular. However, with increased demand, both carriers and manufacturers will be able to lower their price significantly. Eventually PCS service will be less than cellular and will be close to the cost of wired telephone service. Increasing Demand Today, cellular telephone systems in the US are expanding at the rate of over 28,000 new subscriptions a day, far beyond the growth rate of new subscriptions for wireline telephone service. The popularity of cellular telephone service is due to the freedom, mobility, and enhanced productivity that it provides. No longer are people tied to fixed telephones or pay phones. Yet cellular telephone services is just one step toward another type of service, one expected to revolutionize telecommunications. The next rung on the evolutionary ladder is PCS. I :u C 0 Site �qmm , LO I �©. tom. ffiIBIT D First Choice 1455 Park Road Chanhassen I•' N N H m ** SO mud - lUiol ** Co IMud `� C7 F �0 Lz, F U 0 0 0 V I A4 a Q a� z Q W Q cy 1 --- I � • � I t W a > 0 R O Z .� _ o p fir. w y r� o f , p 0 N o� t z o N w� W n; LL 1:41 <,o, ca Lz N a, 5 0 U W .a 19 W � Lz. W 0 62:PT 96 OT Jr1r 0 1 m H r m p � r� 0 0 N 1 / G / i t>7 z cn C7 O 6 Q a a a G w a 0 Q U Lv 0 z hiC'J o „•�.� I -nIH7A n �P•,H19 WARP:P 9FAT'ATI S0iS0'd 82,S6757 O1 £7TL ZS7 ZT9 U1W dNW - 1318ON 81 7T:ST 96. 01 nnr n J> � 1 `1 �. r Irr. Sri''; ♦ t✓ a�.f il�YilSV a !.1 � / f r' y .1 ' 'F � J . �ti`_S' 1 j �! ` 5 • ;. tI 1 1• 1 •' • a VALE". July 25, 1996 Black & Veatch 1750 Yankee Doodle Road Suite 200 Eagan, MN 55121 Attention: Mr. Rick Foster Subject: Failure Modes for Poles and a Description of the Design Criteria Black & Veatch Sites Dear Mr. Foster: I have been asked to write to you about the mode of failure for pole type structures used to support cellular antennas and equipment, and give some information to allow you to judge how remote the chances of failure occurring would be. I think it would be appropriate to start off by a brief description of the design criteria that is typically used. The poles Valmont supplies are designed in accordance with E.I.A. /T.I.A. 222 Revision E Standard entitled "Structural Standards for Steel Antenna Towers and Antenna Supporting Structures." This is an approved A.N.S.I. standard that has dealt with the design of lattice type structures for a number of years. Revision E is the first version that goes into extensive detail provisions of other nationally known specifications and standards that have a long history of reliability. This history should be of interest to you considering the hundreds of thousands (if not millions) of sites throughout the United States which have structures designed with concepts spelled out in publications like "The Design of Steel Transmission Pole Structures" (published by A.S.C.E.), and "Standard Specifications for Structural Supports for Highway Signs, Luminaries and Traffic Signals" (published by A.A.S.H.T.O.). Many of the concepts used to design poles in these two publications are included in the E.I.A./T.I.A. 222 Revision E Standard. The E.I.A. /T.I.A. 222 Revision E requirements dictate a maximum basic design wind speed. The wind speed to be used depends on the location of the site within the state. Valmont's policy is to use the wind loading in E.I.A/T.I.A. 222 as a minimum loading. Statistically, the wind speed listed in E.I.A./T.I.A. 222 has been determined to be that wind which has an average reoccurrence of 50 years. This wind is also a "fastest mile" wind which means that it is the average velocity of a mile wind passing a point. For example, a 70 mph average fastest mile wind would take 51 seconds to pass a point. This standard "fastest mile" wind is customized with factors that apply to the particular installation. There is a 1.69 gust response factor imposed in order to account for sudden changes in wind speed, a height coefficient to account for increasing wind speed with height, and an exposure coefficient to account (to some degree) the terrain effects. The loads generated by this wind and the weight of the members (along with any ice considered) are then used to size members of the pole. There is at least a 25% factor of safety required under these conditions. This assumes that the wind blowing from the worst possible direction. Some directions are worse than others, depending on the equipment attached to the pole, the arrangement, and the orientation. The wind N VDIrnon! Indust•ies Inc. _3C of o- :366 U SA must exceed all our estimates for magnitude, duration, be at the worst orientation and overcome the factor of safety. Let us assume that a pole becomes overloaded. The typical consequence of this overloading is "local buckling" where a relatively small portion of the shaft distorts and "kinks" the steel. This does not cause a free falling pole. After the buckle, the cross section of the pole is capable of carrying the entire vertical (weight) load and a substantial portion of the load that caused the buckling. The pole is likely, however, to be out of plumb. This may be somewhat dramatic and the buckled section should be replaced. There are 3 mechanisms which prevent the pole from a free fall type failure. First, as the pole distorts this distortion may relieve the load from the pole either by orienting the pole more favorably in the wind or, if buckling has occurred, by reducing the moment arm of the wind force. The second mechanism involves a redistribution of the stress in the pole after buckling toward the remaining portion or the cross section that has unused capacity. The third phenomenon and more important, is the nature of the force being applied. We expect the wind to produce this force. A wind that would cause a buckle would be larger than the basic wind speed, the gust factor, and the factor of safety combined. A gust would soon dissipate and, after this peak wind is gone, the stress in the pole would be reduced. Poles are flexible, forgiving structures which are not generally susceptible to damage by impact loads such as a wind gust or earthquake shocks. It takes some time for the entire structure to "see" the impact loading. Even after a local buckle, the pole has significant capacity. It is this capacity along with the transitory nature of the loading that prevents a pole from "falling over ". Pole design and testing have provided the public with a very reliable product. Poles have gone through extensive full scale testing, resulting in a history of being extremely reliable. The public I think, has been served well. Valmont has provided structures that have performed well during the earthquakes in California, the hurricanes in the South, and a number of tornadoes. To my knowledge, Valmont has never experienced an in service failure of a communication pole due to weather induced overloading, even though, as in the cases of Hurricane Hugo and Hurricane Andrew, the wind speeds may have exceeded the design wind speed. I hope this has helped. Please feel free to call with any comments you may have. I can be reached at 1- 800- 345 -6825 extension 3727 and will be glad to discuss any concerns you may have. Sincerely, Steven ! . I P.E. Project Engineer ~ Communication Structures Industrial Products Division Valmont Industries, Inc. NOV 20 '96 13:18 FR NORTEL MPLS -MTA 612 405 2187 TO 96862700 P.02 ffiIBIT L Valmont IndusbW3, Inc. - West Kgtrmiy 275 • P.O. Sox 358 Valley, Nebraska 6606 "358 U.S.A. - (402) 359-2201 November 19, 1996 Black & Veatch Construction, Inc. 1750 Yankee Doodle Road Saite2W Eagan, bud 55121 Aneation Mr, Rick Foster RE: Confirmation of Load Change tar Sprint Spectrum Monopoles Dear blr. Foster. This letter is to confirm that the standard Sprint Spectrum monopoles as supplied by Valmont Industries will be able to accommodate a top platform with twelve (12) panel antennas (ie.ALM 12-M a second carrier located at twenty (20) feet below the top of the pole utilizing three (3) `°r' -Arms with four-(4) p= t a =as located on each "T"-Arm (124otal panel antennas), and a, third earrier located at Softy (44foct below the top ofthe pole with three-(3) "T" -Arms with four {4}panei located-on each "T" -Arm (12 total panel antennas). Originally the monoples were designed for two (2) carriers with a top platform and anolha.platform located at twenty (20) fret below the top of the pole. Both platforms m ,� -. would carry twelve (12) panel type a. Due to the decrease of wind loading — beAveen -a platform and three (3) "r' -Arms, the Valmont monopoles will be able to accommodate the three(3) �, r „ ofmonopole. If there are any questions, please feel free to give me a call at (402) 359- 2201 x3727. Sincerely, �r $teVe3l�s .�. Project Engineer Communicatbrr Structures Industrial Products Division Valmom Industries, Inc. ** TOTAL PAGE.02 ** ffiIBIT M September 26, 1996 Site ID# MS03XC686V2 To Whom It May Concern: Airspace Safety Analysis Corporation (ASAC) has conducted an aeronautical study on September 26, 1996 for Sprint PCS. The study was to determine a proposed structure's effect, if any, on navigable airspace. ASAC's study is conducted in accordance with the Federal Aviation Regulations (FAR) Part 77 and the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) Part 17. The proposed construction site is located near Chanhassen, Minnesota. The NAD 83 site coordinates are Latitude 44' 51' 25.20" North, Longitude 093° 33' 26.80" West. The site has a surface elevation of 938 feet above mean sea level (MSL), the structure has a proposed height of 160 feet above ground level (AGL), which includes the additional height of any antennas, etc. This gives an overall structure height above mean sea level of 1,098 feet AMSL. The nearest airport from the proposed construction site is FLYING CLOUD. The airport reference point at this public use, instrumented airport is located 28,190 feet or 4.64 nautical miles on a True Bearing of 112.60 degrees from the proposed site. The nearest landing surface, the approach end of Runway 09R at FLYING CLOUD is located 25,879 feet or 4.26 nautical miles on a True Bearing of 113.72 degrees from the proposed site. The runway elevation at this point is 905 feet MSL. Federal Aviation Regulations (FAR) Part 77 proscribes various airspace surfaces and slopes which, if exceeded, require the sponsor of the structure to provide the Federal Aviation Administration with Notice of Proposed Construction. FCC Part 17 also specifies this requirement. Additionally FAR 77 Subpart C proscribes various airspace surfaces and slopes Two crown Center 1745 Phoenix Boulevard STV 10874 96A Suite 120 Page 1 Atlanta, Georgia 30349 770/994-1557 • FAX 770/"4.1637 8ecouse %u ftnt It Right On The First Approach." which, if exceeded, require the FAA to provide public notice inviting comments prior to issuing a determination. Subpart C also proscribes surfaces and slopes which, if exceeded, would identify the proposed structure as a Hazard to navigable airspace. ASAC has determined that a structure height of 160 feet AGL (1,098 feet AMSL) at this site would not exceed any FAR Part 77 or FCC Rules Part 17 notice requirement surface. Therefore, FAA Notice of Proposed Construction is not required for this structure. Should you have any questions regarding this letter or the study conducted by ASAC, please feel free to contact my office anytime at (770) 994 -1557. Sincerely, AIRSPACE SAFETY ANALYSIS CORPORATION 4".4 2P�w�, Kenneth R. Patterson STV 10874 96A Page 2 ASAC 'Heaause You lhl�nt I Right On The PrV Approach' i s that a fact? This month's facts come from Will the Mass Market Go Wireless ?, a study published by the Boston -based con- sulting firm, the Yankee Group. • By the end of the decade, there will be 62 million cellu- lar/PCS subscribers and 55 million paging subscribers. Between 2001 and 2005, cellular/PCS will pull ahead of paging, pushing 40 penetration or greater, as wireless voice becomes a viable alternative to fixed telephony ser- vices. • Cellular, pager and portable computer users spend a greater percentage of their time, on average, at a secondary work- place than their non -high -tech counterparts. • Cellular phones suffer from the "VCR complex" they are equipped with all sorts of features that most people don't use. • Paging is blueing the distinctions between work and leisure time. A Yankee Group study found that 40% of respondents wear their pagers all the time on weekends, and 19% carry their pagers all the time on vacation. • Carrier subsidization of phones has created an "almost free" mentality in terms of cellular phone purchase: 60% of respondents to a Yankee Group study said they paid less than $100 for a cellular phone. This mentality will place new wireless licensees under enormous pressure to subsi- dize the cost of phones. • Although average cellular airtime prices today remain at about 40 cents per minute, by the end of the decade, cellu- • By the end of the decade, both cellular and b lar prices will be less than half that paging will reach the mass market thresh- �� �� old with a population penetration of just 1 more than 20% for paging and more than r ;'� • By the year 2000, nearly 10% of cellular users will use the network for data at least some of 25% for cellular/PCS. J 1 �, the time. • Annual cellular/PCS revenues will be more ` , • Portable phone users report using their than $60 billion by the year 2004, which is phone 60% of the time on battery; 20% say only slightly less than the size of today's ® they "often" run out of talktime. long - distance market l `, • More than 80% of the U S ulation • There will be continued high demand for wire- less. Among those who don't have a cellular phone, 16% are definitely planning or seriously considering a purchase of one - the same number as a year ago, even though the market has grown more than 30% since. • 59% of cellular users say security is the most important rea- son they acquired cellular. • The average household income of cellular users was $56,000 in 1995, $60,000 in 1993 and $66,000 in 1991. 1 • 46% of cellular users buy service for mostly per ` © 1 sonal reasons. • • The average monthly cellular bill is $55, down from $95 in 1990. • The top 20% of cellular users represent 80% of the network traffic. .. pop currently has cellular service available - a high- er percentage than even cable television service. • 10% of all pager users list their paging number on their business cards. • Being "out of coverage range" is the most frequently cited problem of cellular users. While only 2% say it occurs often, 39% claim it occurs at least occasionally. • Paging will continue to grow 22% to 25% annually in the next five years, with a total of 57 million users by the year 2000. Growth will peak at a penetration rate of close to 25 %. At that point, growth will slow down and the market will begin to level off. Article originally appeared in newaves in Persona! Communications. Reprinted with permission. CITY OF CHANHASSEN 690 COULTER DRIVE CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 (612) 937 -1900 ( DEVELOPMENT REVIEW APPLICATION APPLICANT: SBA, Inc. ADDRESS: 7625 Metro Blvd, Suite 235 Edina, MN 55439 TELEPHONE (Daytime) (612) 830 -1555 (Ext.222) _ Comprehensive Plan Amendment I X Conditional Use Permit _ Interim Use Permit Non - conforming Use Permit Planned Unit Development' — Rezoning Sign Permits Sign Plan Review _ Site Plan Review' _ Subdivision' OWNER: Gary Goll ADDRESS: 1455 Park Road Chanhassen, MN 55317 TELEPHONE: (612) 474 -4900 FAX: (612) 474 -4975 Temporary Sales Permit _ Vacation of ROW /Easements _ Variance Wetland Alteration Permit Zoning Appeal Zoning Ordinance Amendment Notification Sign X Escrow for Filing Fees /Attorney Cost" ($50 CUR /SP4./VAC /VAR.M/AP /Metes and Bounds, $400 Minor SUB) TOTAL FEE $ A list of all property owners within 500 feet of the boundaries of the property must be included with the application. Building material samples must be submitted with site plan reviews. "Twenty -six full size folded copies of the plans must be submitted, including an 8 1 /2" X 11" reduced copy of transparency for each plan sheet. Escrow will be required for other applications through the development contract NOTE - When multiple applications are processed, the appropriate fee shall be charged for each application. PROJECT NAME First Choice - Tenant Improvement (686V2) LOCATION 1455 Park Road, Chanhassen, MN 55317 LEGAL DESCRIPTION Lot 7, Block 5, Chanhassen Lakes Business Park TOTAL ACREAGE 1.1 5 Acr es WETLANDS PRESENT YES C NO PRESENTZONING Industrial Office Park (IOP) REQUESTED ZONING N/A PRESENT LAND USE DESIGNATION N/A REQUESTED LAND USE DESIGNATION N/A REASON FOR THIS REQUEST The construction of a 60 foot tall telecommunications tower upon which to locate Personal Communications antennas. This application must be completed in full and be typewritten or clearly printed and must be accompanied by all information and plans required by applicable City Ordinance provisions. Before filing this application, you should confer with the Planning Department to determine the specific ordinance and procedural requirements applicable to your application. A determination of completeness of the application shall be made within ten business days of application submittal. A written notice of application deficiencies shall be mailed to the applicant within ten business days of application. This is to certify that I am making application for the described action by the City and that I am responsible for complying with all City requirements with regard to this request. This application should be processed in my name and I am the party whom the City should contact regarding any matter pertaining to this application. I have attached a copy of proof of ownership (either copy of Owner's Duplicate Certificate of Title, Abstract of Title or purchase agreement), or I am the authorized person to make this application and the fee owner has also signed this application. I will keep myself informed of the deadlines for submission of material and the progress of this application. I further understand that additional fees may be charged for consulting fees, feasibility studies, etc. with an estimate prior to any authorization to proceed with the study. The documents and information I have submitted are true and correct to the best of my knowledge. The city hereby notifies the applicant that development review cannot be completed within 0 00 days due to public hearing requirements and agency review. Therefore, the city is notifying the applicant that the city requires an automatic 60 day extension for development review. Development review shall be completed within 120 days unless additional review extensions are approved by the applicant. Signa e o AppT nt �DaT Signa ut re of Fee Owner Dat6 Application Received on Fee Paid s� �� Receipt No. The applicant should contact staff for a copy of the staff report which will be available on Friday prior to the meeting. If not contacted, a copy of the report will be mailed to the applicant's address. Sprint° Sprint Spectrum L.P. 2S05 Lone Oak Parkway Telephone 612 686 2600 '. ite 140 Fax 612 454 0518 F�q m, Minnesota 55121 November 21, 1996 City of Chanhassen Planning Commission and City Council c/o Mr. Geoff Olson, Planner Director 690 Coulter Drive Chanhassen, MN 55317 Dear Members of the Chanhassen Planning Commission and City Council: The intent of this letter is to meet the requirement of Chanhassen City Code Section 20 -1521 (2), which states the following: "For all commercial wireless telecommunication service towers, a letter of intent committing the tower owner and his or her successors to allow the shared use of the tower if an additional user agrees in writing to meet reasonable terms and conditions for shared use and so long as there is no negative structural impact upon the tower, and there is no disruption to the service provided." This letter serves as notice to the City of Chanhassen that Sprint Spectrum L.P., as owner of the proposed monopole, agrees to comply with the requirements of City Code Section 20 -1521 (2), and is committed to allow the shared use of the proposed monopole if an additional user agrees in writing to meet reasonable terms and conditions for its shared use. In addition, Sprint Spectrum L.P. will ensure that future successors, if any , will comply with the requirements of City Code Section 20 -1521 (2), and will also allow its shared use. If you have any questions, or require any additional information regarding this commitment, please feel free to contact me at 612.686.2650. Sincerely, M r. Terry Hanna Property Manager Sprint Spectrum L.P. NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING PLANNING COMMISSION Wednesday, January 15, 1997 at 7:00 p.m. City Hall Council Chambers 690 Coulter Drive SUBJECT: Conditional Use Permit to Allow a 150' Tower APPLICANT: SBA, Inc. LOCATION: 1455 Park Road F) NOTICE: You are invited to attend a public hearing about a proposal in your area. The applicant, SBA, Inc., is requesting a conditional use permit to allow a 150' telecommunications tower on property zoned IOP, Industrial Office Park District and located at 1455 Park Road. What Happens at the Meeting: The purpose of this public hearing is to inform you about the developer's request and to obtain input from the neighborhood about this project. During the meeting, the Commission Chair will lead the public hearing through the following steps: 1. Staff will give an overview of the proposed project. 2. The Developer will present plans on the project. 3. Comments are received from the public. 4. Public hearing is closed and the Commission discusses project. The commission will then make a recommendation to the City Council. Questions and Comments: If you want to see the plans before the meeting, please stop by City Hall during office hours, 8:00 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday. If you wish to talk to someone about this project, please contact Sharmin AI -Jaff at 937 -1900 ext. 120. If you choose to submit written comments, it is helpful to have one copy to the department in advance of the meeting. Staff will provide copies to the Commission. Notice of this public hearing has been published in the Chanhassen Villager on January 2, 1997. MIW -GL Partners Ray E. Johnson c/o Heitman Prop /Control Chanhassen 11001 Hampshire Ave. S. 180 No. LaSalle, Suite 3200 Bloomington, MN 55438 Chicago, IL 60601 -2886 Redmond Products 1893078 Ih Street W. Chanhassen, MN 55317 Thomas Zwickel 17420 Cherry Drive Eden Prairie, MN 55344 PMT Corporation 1500 Park Road Chanhassen, MN 55317 Flenlange Partnership c/o Lars E. Akerberg 121 3` Street W., P. O. Box 158 Chaska, MN 55318 Raymond A. Collings 305 Lakeview Avenue Tonka Bay, MN 55331 Planning Commission Meeting - January 15, 1997 Joyce: So how's this going to City Council? Conrad: The way you see it. The staff will work on it. They'll probably, I would assume the developer will have one firm plan presented. I would assume the developer and the staff will incorporate many, well I hope they'd incorporate some of the things that we've been talking about. You know I've got some issues on Bluff Creek and issues on gathering spots and what have you and Kevin you've got issues on, you've got a lot of issues. They probably can't incorporate those but views and vistas and design. You know my assumption would be that there's going to be some work done by the developer and staff to make the presentation a little bit more solid to the City Council. My hope would be that the City Council expresses some kind of opinion about whether a PUD is appropriate here, and the densities. That's my, because there's no use in us screwing around with it if the City Council is not prone to doing this. And a lot goes back to communication that's had in the past and expectations and see how sensitive they are. They are the elected body and I guess I, normally I'd want to send up something a little bit better and I'd want to see what it is but right now I think there's some overriding issues that no matter what we do in terms of sending them a prettier piece of paper, the overriding issues may be more important than the specific detail that we have. Joyce: I agreed with your position on not tabling it. I think bringing people back in every Wednesday night to try and figure this thing out is not right. I feel that what you're saying though is a neutral stance and I can't vote for that so I have to take a negative stance to that. That's my reason. Peterson: My primary reason for voting nay is simply I would rather send a cleaner plan to, and ensure that the clean plan is going to Council prior to that and I can empathize with your position. I'm almost on the fence but I'm more biased towards sending Council a cleaner plans for them to review prior to. Thank you all for coming. Appreciate the comments. PUBLIC HEARING: SBA. INC. REOUEST FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AND SITE PLAN REVIEW, FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF A 150' TELECOMMUNICATION TOWER TO BE LOCATED AT 1455 PARK ROAD., Public Present: Name Gary Goll Jason Funk Terrie Thurmer Doug Cowan Michelle Johnson, APT Address 1455 Park Road 2900 Lone Oak Parkway, Eagan 7625 Metro Blvd., Edina 1701 East 79 Street, Bloomington 1701 East 79` Street, Bloomington 27 Planning Commission Meeting - January 15, 1997 Sharmin AI -Jaff presented the staff report on this item. Farmakes: These power lines that come out here... Al -Jaff: It would blend in with existing electric poles that are behind that building. There's a row of electric poles back there. It doesn't have the reflection. When the sun shines on it, it won't be that bright reflection that you would see. Aanenson: Similar to what we did on the pedestrian bridge. We explored painting that. We actually looked at the two and there's actually less reflection when we left it. If you look at it, that actually kind of blends into the sky. Al -Jaff: That's all I had, thank you. Peterson: Are there questions for staff? Conrad: Is there barbed wire on this fence? AI -Jaff: On? Conrad: On the fence. AI -Jaff: On the fence. The last of the fence, it is barbed wire. There are three strands of that. Conrad: And that's legal? AI -Jaff: Under a conditional use permit. It has to be 8 feet, yes. Actually I had to look that one up because I was under the impression that we couldn't do that either and I discovered that yes, they are permitted to do so as long as they apply for a conditional use pen And as long as it doesn't, the overall height does not exceed 8 feet. Peterson: Meaning we don't have to approve the conditional use permit for the barbed wire. Aanenson: And findings why you don't want it, sure. Conrad: I guess I'd have to defer to staff's judgment on this. On barbed wire but I've never seen barbed wire on anything in Chan in the last 12 years so. Aanenson: We had one and we went to litigation on it. A residential area. Conrad: Really? It just, somebody could make a case I guess but, and actually this was not the one. The next one coming up with barbed wire is more of a concern to me but again I guess that one sort of bothers me. Peterson: Other questions? Planning Commission Meeting - January 15, 1997 Joyce: I'll just, for what it's worth, as far as the landscaping. Al -Jaffa Pardon? Joyce: I said for what it's worth as far as the landscaping and the arborvitae. I went away for Thanksgiving and came home and I had six beautiful arborvitaes in my back yard completely stripped by deer. Not a leaf on it. So I wished they develop my area behind my house so no deer come running through. I'm just throwing that out. Peterson: No more questions? Does the applicant or their designee wish to address the Planning Commission? Terrie Thurmer: Hi. My name's Terrie Thurmer and I'm with Steven Bernstein and Associates. Their address is 7625 Metro Boulevard, Suite 235 in Edina. I'm here tonight on behalf of Sprint PCS and I worked with your former planner, John Rask on the draft of your recently adopted ordinance from November. I just wanted to let you know that our proposal does meet all these requirements and it will be in compliance with all of the performance standards of the city, including the landscaping plan. As for the barbed wire, we don't care. If you want to not approve the barbed wire, it's not a big deal at all. My preference personally is it's ugly but you do what you want to do. With me tonight is Jason Funk. He's the sight selection specialist with Sprint PCS and if you have questions related to this specific site, he'll be glad to try to answer those. And I just wanted to add that the presentation in the staff memo by Sharmin was very thorough and I'm not going to be redundant. I just wanted to like to add that both SBA and Sprint PCS are in agreement with all the conditions, modified, being recommended by staff and ask if you have any questions for me or Mr. Funk. Peterson: Questions. Terrie Thurmer: Thank you. Peterson: May I have a motion to open this for public hearing. Conrad moved, Farmakes seconded to open the public hearing. Peterson: Anyone wishing to address the Planning Commission, please do so now. Seeing none, is there a motion to close the public hearing. Farmakes moved, Conrad seconded to close the public hearing. Peterson: Comments from commissioners. Jeff. Farmakes: I don't have any questions. Peterson: Kevin. 29 Planning Commission Meeting - January 15, 1997 Joyce: No, l don't have any questions. Peterson: Bob. Skubic: The fence and the barbed wire are a little different than what I expected for these sites. I was expecting nice concrete buildings like we have for the lift stations. However in this location here where it's between the railroad grade and the loading dock, I'm not so concerned about that but I would like to remove the barbed wire. Peterson: Ladd. Conrad: Yeah the same. Barbed wire I'd just rather not have there. The only other thing, and this seems funny that I'm concentrating on it. On the fence itself. When it's a chain link fence and there's not a top rail to it, that seems strange to me. So again there's some minor stuff but it doesn't look finished. It doesn't look you know, we've got a major facility here and we, I don't know. My recommendation is no barbed wire and then to finish the top of the fence off somehow. So it can feel more professionally looking, if that makes sense. Peterson: One more question came to me. What I asked of staff earlier today, is there a potential, even though this plan is not requesting it, but is there the potential for a building to be needed on this site? The future potential. Did you hear the question? Terrie Thurmer: Is the question is do we need a building? Peterson: Potentially. Is there the potential to need a building in the future? Terrie Thurmer: No. The equipment that we're using... it's all the quality control inside the building. There is no need for a building. With cellular towers they had to have the air conditioning and all of that. These are self contained. We don't ever need a building with what we're proposing tonight. Peterson: Okay. My only comments would be that the detailed landscape plan be completed and agreed to by staff before it goes to Council. With that, is there a motion? Conrad: Sure. I'll make a motion the Planning Commission approves Site Plan Review and Conditional Use Permit #96 -5 for the 150 telecommunication tower and an 8 foot chain link fence as shown on the site plan received December 11, 1996, subject to the conditions of the staff report with the following changes. Number 1, you're to add on the words before it goes to the City Council and then I'd add, I guess point number 6. That there is no, that the fence does not have barbed wire and that the fence has a better finishing top to it. Boy, isn't that well worded? Peterson: Very well. Conrad: Yeah thanks. 30 Planning Commission Meeting - January 15, 1997 Peterson: Is there a second to that? Joyce: I'll second that. Conrad moved, Joyce seconded that the Planning Commission recommends approval of Site Plan Review and Conditional Use Permit #96 -5 for a 150 foot telecommunications tower and an 8 foot chain link fence as shown on the site plan received December 11, 1996, subject to the following conditions: The applicant shall submit a detailed landscape plan before it goes to the City Council. 2. The tower shall comply with requirements in ARTICLE XXX. TOWERS AND ANTENNAS of the Zoning Ordinance. 3. The tower shall have a galvanized finish. 4. There shall be no artificial lighting or signage. 5. The applicant shall submit documentation at the time of building permit application showing the height above grade for all potential mounting positions for co- located antennas and the minimum separation distances between antennas. A description of the tower's capacity, including the number and type of antennas that can be accommodated should also be provided. 6. There shall be no barbed wire on the fence and the top of the fence shall be changed to look finished. All voted in favor and the motion carried. PUBLIC HEARING: AMERICAN PORTABLE TELECOM FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AND SITE, PLAN REVIEW FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF A 135' TELECOMMUNICATION, TOWER TO BE LOCATED AT 80 WEST 78 STREET., Public Present: Name Address Gary Goll 1455 Park Road Jason Funk 2900 Lone Oak Parkway, Eagan 31 � Sprint PCS \ Landscape Plan First Choice 4 1455 Park Road, Chanhassen, MN 1 Location T ype - - - _ acing No. _ _ Size at Plantin f / North: Inside Virginia Creeper - 1' intervals I 25 1 gallon \ ` / Lease Area Woodbine (Pathenccissus qutnquefolia) E XI STIN West: Outside Austrian Pine (Pmus 10' intervals (staggered) 5 6-1/2'm height Lease Area and nigra) Fence I West: Outside Gold Drop Potentilla 10' intervals 7 5 gallon ♦ 1 Lease Area and I (Potentilla fm (2' in height) I Fence East: Outside Austrian Pine (Pinus 10' intervals (staggered) 5 6-1/2' in height \ I Lease Area and nigra) f Fence A East: Outside Gold Drop Potentilla 10' intervals 7 5 gallon f , I Lease Area and (Potentilla iticosa (2' in height) Fence South I N/A I N/A I 0 N/A - t l ?O \ SvgrACI I 7L4—r` i ! /�LW£ .doorab• sf Y rc- 1a _X for WorAVI amr 1 i1 \ ttojm Teca to STRVCnAAL t u WAer .: 3o• rHautrO st`WtacS ALI "a 04 A► � � R w 3785.08 < /• // QAr 02.70 ! \\ FQ f Ajt 7 J-1 o(CADVCX4 TAUS Y ae CH /CA CO s/ /L K'.� UXEE ST. PAUL PAC /f /C RRt /LROAL7 I