2 TelecommunicateTowers inParksCITY OF
690 COULTER DRIVE · P.O. BOX 147 · CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317
(612) 937-1900 · FAX (612) 937-5739
MEMORANDUM
DATE:
October 17, 1996
TO:
Park and Recreation Commission
FROM:
Kate Aanenson, Planning Director
John Rask, Planner I
SUB J:
Draft Ordinance Regarding Towers and Antennas for Wireless
Telecommunications.
INTRODUCTION
On October 2, 1996, the Planning Commission approved the attached draft ordinance concerning
towers and antennas. Included in the ordinance is a provision which would permit towers and
antennas on City owned land subject to City Council approval. This provision would include
city park property. The Planning Commission recommended that the draft ordinance be brought
before the Park and Recreation Commission for your review and comment. All comments and
recommendations will be forwarded to the City Council for their consideration.
The intent of the ordinance is to allow antennas in parks if they are located on existing ball
diamond light standards or similar structures, or to allow the construction of towers that replicate
an existing structure. The ordinance is written to allow for the future consideration of this type
of use in city parks. It does not bind the Park and Recreation Commission or the City Council to
accept them at a future date. Each proposal would be reviewed by the Park and Recreation
Commission and the City Council to ensure that city needs are being met, and that the function
and aesthetics of the park are not compromised.
BACKGROUND
In developing the draft ordinance, the Planning Commission had to consider a number of
constraints imposed on them by the Federal Government through the adoption of the
Telecommunication Act of 1996. A detailed explanation of the act is included in the attached
report. In short, the Act states that cities must provide a reasonable opportunity for wireless
Draft Ordinance
October 17, 1996
Page 2
(Cellular) providers to establish services, and that cities cannot adopt regulations that have the
effect of prohibiting services. The situation is further exacerbated by the Federal Government
continuing to sell additional licenses for more providers to establish wireless services. The total
number of cellular providers has jumped from two to five, with each provider having to create
their own network of cell sites and antennas. Ultimately, you could see each provider erecting
antennas every two to three miles throughout the city, which would force the City to allow towers
and antennas in residential areas.
The Planning Commission and City Staff are of the opinion that allowing them on city property
and in city parks is a better alternative then allowing them unrestricted in residential areas.
Again, the intent would be to allow antennas only on existing structures, or towers which
replicate an existing structure, such as ball diamond lights. The Park Commission could
recommend and the City Council deny, any proposal which would have the potential of
negatively impacting a park. Parks would be the last place in which the City would encourage
towers and antennas. The City would encourage cellular providers to look for space in industrial
and business zoned districts, on existing towers and buildings, or other city property
RECOMMENDATION
Kate Aanenson will be present at the October 22, 1996 meeting to give an informal presentation
and answer any questions that the Commission may have. Please review the attached ordinance.
Your comments and recommendations will be forwarded to the City Council for their
consideration.
MEMORANDUM
CITY OF
690 COULTER DRIVE · P.O. BOX 147 · CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317
(612) 937-1900 · FAX (612) 937-5739
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUB J:
Don Ashworth, City Manager
John Rask, Planner I
September 1 I, 1996
Background Information Concerning Telecommunication Towers and Facilities
INTRODUCTION
At the October 28, 1996, meeting of the City Council, a draft ordinance pertaining to wireless
telecommunication towers and antennas will be presented to the Council. The Planning
Commission reviewed the ordinance and is recommending approval with modifications. The
purpose of this memorandum is to provide the City Council with an overview of the
Telecommunications Act of 1996, and recent technological advances in the telecommunications
industry.
BACKGROUND
In March 1995, the Federal Communication Commission (FCC) began to auction off 1,900
megahertz (MHz) band of the radio spectrum to new license holders. The country was originally
divided into 51 major trading areas with two licenses awarded in each. For this area, those
licenses were purchased by Sprint Spectrum and American Portable Telecomm (APT). In May
of this year, the FCC sold an additional license in each region and may sell even more in the
future. This additional license was purchased by OneComm, who purchased Motorola's
Specialized Mobilized Radio (SMR) licenses to attach their enhanced system (ESMR) to the land
line telephone network. These licenses have been sold to provide the next generation digital
wireless services commonly referred to as PCS (Personal Communication Services). Airtouch
(formally US West New Vector Group) and AT&T Wireless (formally Cellular One) are two
licensed providers who currently provide cellular services in the area.
Wireless Telecommunications
October 9, 1996
Page 2
Technology
PCS technology is sometimes referred to as "follow-me calling" where calls are routed to a
person rather than a specific phone number, similar to a personal pager. PCS will utilize a digital
interfacing equipment which will allow for the transmission of computer data, fax, video, etc.
using wireless technology. Traditional "cellular" providers are in the process of converting from
an analog to a digital technology, which will allow for expanded use and a higher degree of
clarity.
It should be emphasized that although the technologies discussed in this report currently function
in slightly different manners, they will offer similar services in the future. In fact, all of these
technologies are based on systems composed of interconnecting cell sites. With this common
cell site base, it is predicted that as these technologies evolve, they will become more and more
similar. For example, a transition to smaller cell sites and the use of more antennas per square
mile are expected.
Both cellular and PCS technologies rely on the use of antennas and low powered radio waves to
transmit. The use of radio waves for transmission is referred to as a "line of sight" signal, which
means that there must be a clear pathway through the air between the transmitting and receiving
antennas. The density of these antennas depends on topographic conditions and the number of
users. Each cell site can process a limited number of calls.
Wireless communications are transmitted through the air via radio waves of various frequencies.
Radio frequency radiation (RFR) is one of several types of electromagnetic radiation. Cellular
and ESMR operate at frequencies between 800 and 900 MHz, and PCS operates at both 900
MHz as well as between 1,850 and 2,200 MHz.
The technologies described in this report function similarly in that they are composed of
interconnecting "cell sites," or geographical areas that blanket a region. In this sense, all three
technologies are "cellular technologies," although mobile cellular phones are frequently referred
to as the "cellular" technology because they pioneered the concept.
As more people begin to demand wireless communications services, wireless systems will
require additional capacity to handle calls. This additional calling capacity can be acquired in
one of various ways: providers can increase the number of their cell sites, use digital versus
analog technology, or a combination of these methods. As cell sites increase, the area of each
site is reduced in order to avoid overlapping coverage.
Each cell site within the system contains both transmitting and receiving antennas. Calls placed
from a wireless phone or device are sent to a central computer switching system. The central
switch completes the call by connecting it either to a conventional telephone through a land-
Wireless Telecommunications
October 9, 1996
Page 3
based line, or to another mobile phone through the nearest antenna. As the mobile caller enters
one cell and exits another, the call is transferred between the cells.
Federal Telecommunications Act
On January 31, 1996, Congress passed the Telecommunication Reform Act of 1996 which
opened additional portions of the radio spectrum for PCS licenses. The cellular industry lobbied
hard for federal preemption of local siting powers. Language was originally included in the Act
which prohibited cities from regulating telecommunication facilities, but was removed shortly
before passage. However, the Act contains language which limits the extent in which local
governments can regulate telecommunications towers. Section 704 (Facilities Siting; Radio
Frequency Emission Standards) prevents local zoning authorities from arbitrarily banning
telecommunication towers. The Act reads as follows, "Except as provided (herein), nothing in
this act shall limit or affect the authority of a State or local government or instrumentality
thereof over decisions regarding the placement, construction, and modification of personal
wireless service facilities." The Act basically places three limitations on local zoning controls:
1) cities may not "unreasonably discriminate among providers of functionally equivalent
services," 2) cities may not "prohibit or have the effect of prohibiting the provision of personal
wireless services," and 3) cities may not regulate personal wireless services "on the basis of the
environmental effects of radio frequency emission to the extent that such facilities comply with
the (FCC's) regulations concerning such emissions."
ATTACHMENTS
Article titled, "For suburbs, antennas are hard to resist", Star Tribune, October 1, 1996
.,For suburbs,
antennaS are
'hard to resist
.-t ' h '
· eleCommunications
· avors tOWer constrUCtion
By Mike Kaszub~
~tar Tribune StaffWriter ' .' .-
[. The futuri~ was 'set to arrive in Sho'review 'and
'-plop itself down in a small city park overlooking
take Iudy. It would be 100 feet tall, 4 feet wide at its
:base, and. would usher in the next §enemtion, of
,_telecommunications technology. ...
.~ ' So far, though~ mostly what it has ushered in is a
~waveofprotest · ." - · . ' . - :,~-
--, .Three heavyweight telecommunication comna-
~nies, including Sprint PCS and U S Blest, ha'ye
: ~escended On Shoreview :- as they have on Rose-
' -~_ount, Roseville and many other Twin Cities sub-
~i~bs.~ to talk excitedly of personal cOmmuniCation
, .~enace {PCS); a new technology expected to offer
· 'advantages over cellular phone systems. ' * , ~-;" '..
: ~'" PCS is expected fO be che~per than ,cellular,
prevent eavesdropping and eventually will be able
' to fax data and combine local and long-distance
· ...~.,.~allirig. '.' ...-.~.. '.. · .... ? . .. '. ,' ,,..
·" -' .... ,. :~,.~.~,i- %: ., -, ::: .' '.; .:'.:'i.:"?.'.
'Turn to TOWERS on B7 for:.
-- New law makes it tough for a city to reject theme"
~ .... ":"*'~'"-,' '"'":',.' -,.~: ".'. '-~.: .: ' ';'..' .'-. "i .
*.'I~AY, ~ 1 o 1~
.New antenna
wers pose.
p}'°blems for
· some suburbs
'.,Ak~dy PCS is leading' to a
.surge in requests to build more
antenna towers throughout the
Twin Cities, especially in suburbs
such as Shorevie~ that straddle
major highways, where cat
phones are a part'of life.
But the new technology is
highlighting a new realRlc The
Telecommunications Acl of 1996,
signed this year by Presidem
Clinton and pushed by the telo-
communications indust~', now
makes it difficult for a city te turn
down a request to build a tower.
.,That realily was seen last week
in Shoreview, whero Sprint PCS
proposed building three 100-foot
towers in three city parks. ·
Sprint PCS plans to build as
many as 200 antenna sites in the
Twin Cities.
'The only thing we Can do,'
John O'Neil, Shoreview's plan-
ning commission chairman, told
upset residents, 'is sit hack and
l~y to minimize the impact.
'That's true fo~ everyone. It's
'Money, money, money'
That hardly satisfied Ioseph
Cozzollno. one angry Shoreview
resident who attended a public
hearing on whether to approve
~,e towe~.
~ ~ICs just mone~. We're talking
~ey. mouey, money, money,'
~The Telecommunications
Act~ who WTOte it? 1 bet there was
an~wful lot of telecommunica-
lious money that went into that
ac~. land it wasl written in favor
of aU dtese companies," he said.
F_o~ now. Sprint PCS has with-
drawn its request amid the con-
tra~'ersy, and the city, unsure of
~h~ new technohigy's impact, is
coPsidering a moratorium in or-
der to study the issue.
~'We really, really pride our-
selves on being a good local citi-
zen.* said Tom Murphy, a Sprint
~CS spokesman.
;'It's really all in the interes~ of
th~ communi~,° he said. 'We
ar~ bringing the future of tele-
communications Io ~e Twin
Bm Shoroview officiais~ like
those in Bloomington. Columbia
He|ghts and Rosevllle -- are ~nd-
ing that the Telecommunicafi~n~
~cClimits their options.
The ·ct states that local zoning
'shall not prohibit pr have the
effect of prohibiting' the new
J~C~ technology and that cities
must reasonably accommodate
STAR TRIBUNE * PAGE B'
Facing the future in Shoreview
~hree teecommunicatioos companies, led by Sp~i~t PCS and U S West. have
asked to build five personal commun/cation set,ce towns in Shareview.
· suburb is now coosiOering a moratcxium in orpar to we~h the ~r~oac'L but -- I~e
mare/subuCos
I
pro~feraUon of ~ .... ~___, ...............
U~a~ U~e Tele- ] ·
· communeatens I. ~ I Tur~eLa~eRcL lib '
s~r~ PcS has :'~ : { ..... , .--.~---
S~r Trixee map
Latest advance:
Personal communication
Personal Communication Service
(PCS) is the ~at·it advance In tele-
eommunlcatlen ts~hnolo~ over cai-
lull systems. It is leading to a
den Jump in the number of requests
to bugd telecommunications towers
and antennas, mainly in the Twin
CIUe~ sabu~t~ because of ~eir prox-
knit~ to major highways. Among the
Idvants~e~:
~. t.ewer i~lcas: Rates are as much
as ~0 percent below those for
cellular and carry no sen/ice ·
~. Mere secoflty: Eavesdropping
nu transmissions is difficult, as
is 'cloning' -- which allows
thieves to make calls and trans-
fer the billing to other clients.
~ $.~dler phones: TheM offer
Caller ID, text paging, voice
mail a~d eventually the ability
to fax and deliver data. An in-
dustry spokesman calls PCS "a
cordless phone that can keep
on going.'
being one o~ the people that use
the technology when it becomes
available,' O'Nell said. 'But it's
Landing on Bloomington'
In Bloomington, which has six
cellular phone towers, represen-
tatives from U S West Wireless --
one of four new PCS companies
that city is dealing with -- have
said they're looking at 10 fires ill
Bloomington for PCS towers.
aU ~questo.. ' - The city, which ended a 90-day
I~ also stales that local govern-' moratorium on new towers Iuly
ments cannot deny a request to 1, is 'having tons of conversa-
build an antenna or tower 'on lions' with telecommunication
. the' basis of-the environmental companies over new tower sites.
effects of radio frequency amis- So far, there haven't been any
siofis' as long as the PCS systems complaints from citizens. .
comply with federal regulations. But Glen Markegard. a city
The. federal government has ap- planner, said: 'What we have
/~oved PCS technology and hard- now really pales in comparison to
re as being safe. what we may see three years from
'There isn't.., enough docu- now.' .
mehtation out there right now to Columbia Heights recently ap-
pro_ye it is Sate to be in residential proved its first PCS tower, though
areas,' said Shannon Corazzo, · Sprint PCS initially balked at us-
· ~horoview resident_ lng a League of Minnesota Cities-
. .~nvironmental reasons, she suggested lease agreement.
~vas ~uld by the planning com- 'In all honesty, their lease fa-
mission, could not be used as a vorod them and the League of
bas~sfordenlal. '. ' -Minnesota Cities lease favored
'i .~.'mprobablygaingwendup cities,' said Mark Winson, the
city's engineer.
in the end, the PCS antenna
was put atop · city water tower,
and Columbia Heights will get
$15,000 a year, plus an annual
cost-of-living increase to the
lease price.
Though it is new technology,
PCS may require more antennas
because they must be closer to-
gether.
· Industry officials say PCS
hand-held sets will be smaller
than cellular phones, will use
smaller batteries and will operate
on 0.2 watts -- cellular phones
work on about 0.6 watts ~ mak-
ing it necessary to have the PCS
towers closer together in order to
relay signals as drivers move
down a highway.
'They see it as really the suc-
cessor to land-line communica-
tions,' said Ann Higgins of the
League of Minnesota Cities,
which has advised cities and sub-
urbs on how to negotiate with the
PCS companies. "You're going to
see.., these [towersl every cou-
ple-and-a-half to three miles.
They'ro talking about a huge...
density increase.'
· PCS companies have said they
will cooperate with competitors,
jointly putting antennas on the
same towers whenever possible.
And.. they say, that only in
some cases will 'monopoles" --
such'as the tall, stand-alone tow-
er initially proposed at Lake Judy
. '[We want] something that's
both livable from your stand-
point, as well as ours,' a spokes-
man for American Portable Tele-
com, another of the PCS compa-
nies, told Shoreview officials.
· As city officials study their up-
' tions, nine Twin Cities suburbs,
including Brooklyn Park and
Brooklyn Center, have joined to-
gether to see how the PCS com-
panies should be handled.
New Hope, one of the nine
suburbs, has enacted a morato-
rium on new towers until Dec. 1.
'Everyone wants this stuff,
ieally,' said Grog Moore, execu-
tive director of the Northwest
Suburbs Cable Communications
Commission, which is helping the
nine suburbs with the study.
'Who wants to have a com-
munity without wireless phone
service?' he said.
Write on.
Rewrite the life of E Scott F'd2geral
'A t~-author a short story with Garrison Kei[lor. l~
· ~conjunction with the E Scott Fit:gerald lOOth
~ birthday celebration, Garrison Keillor has writ-
ten-a short bio of the famous St. Paul author. It's appear-
I Z &T P!a preemPtive Strike'
battle for wireless market
-:- , ~win Cities PCS companies
won't lalk about what their prices
will be, but if they follow the
pricing model of Sprint's first -in-
the-nation PCS system in Wash-
ington, D.C., and Baltimore,
AT&T and the rest of the cellular
indusc,7 could be under pressure
.locutpficesevenmore.. . :
Making a choice -:. :'
For example, the ~ system
in Washington doesn't require
consumers to sign year-long con-
tracts for service. AT&T will elimi-
nate those contracts with its new
service, but they will continue
with its conventional cellular ser-
vice.) And the PCS system in
Washington doesn't charge an
activation fee. while AT&T's new
digital service charges a $25 fee,
down from $40 for conventional
cellular service.
rowing, and the advantages of
one over the other are open to
dispute. But in its announcement
today, AT&T is expected to offer
new PCS-like featUres in hopes of
blunting its competitors' market-
lng strategies. ·
Clearly the stage is set fo'r a What's . more, AT&T's ' an-
battle among six Twin Cities nouncement tries to steal some
competitors. They are cellular thunder from the the PCS compa-
firms AT&T Wireless (formerly nibs by using PCS in the name.
Cellular One) and AkTouch Com- . ............. ; ............... ;..i ....... ; ......
munications (formerly U S West
Cellular) and PCS companies "It's a clear exarnp~ that
Sprint PCS of Kansas City, Mo.; companies likeAT&T
'A~nerican Portable Telecom of Wireless are not taking
Chicago, and Next Wave of San
Diego. The name of' the fourth companies like our~ .
PCS player has not been dis- lightlyZ.
'The safest thing for US to --Don Sclmm, AmericanPortabte
claim Iabout pricing] at this point
is that we got into this business
knowing it would be fiereely
competitive. We've got to be
competitive on rates, and we will
be,' said Don Schena, Minneapo-
lis regional vice president for
American Portable Telecom.
The technical differences be-
tween cellular and PCS are .nar-
The new service is called 'AT&T
Digital PCS' -- even though it is
by det'mition cellular and not PCS.
For its new service, AT&T has
expanded the digital capabilities it
introduced to its conventional,
nondigital cellular phone system
ONUNEfrom lYi ' ~
U S West will offer online
Service toUting local content
'There is a need for th'e sim.
plicily and the packaging to make
ihings more efficienL"
The proiect will be supported
by advertising, Cullen said.
,1.. U S West enters a field already
'ked out by both companies
~h extensive experience in de-
veloping lnternet content, such
as America Online and Microsoft
Corp., and those without, such as
Yahoo! Denver-based U S West is
also not the first local telephone
company to get into the business,
with Pacific Be//having launched
its own online service in Cali-
fornia.
Local media companies that
traditionally provide this type of
information, including newspa-
pers and TV stations, already
have strong presences, on the
Intemet. L1 S West hopes to lever-
age its name recognition and
technology in developing its
project
'They've got the money and
the ability to bring in talented
people, but it's an execution type
of thing," said Afien Wether, prin-
cipal analyst at Dataquest, a tech-
nology research company.
Part of successful execution for
U S West will be to understand
that its strength is in technology,
Wether said, but that it needs to
develop and rely on ~artners to
shore up its weakness in creating
content.
'Access 'plus content equals
success, and U S West has access
and the money to get the con-
tent," Wether said.
Cullen said the crowded field
of online services will serve to
IRELAND GRAND
OPENING SALE!
R SALE
td BUSINESS
~enter including building, equipment,
development land. Choice location.
~tial. For details send i~quifies to Mr.
om~e [~ices, 105 S. 5th St, Suite 714.
Bring A Guestl I'
· Kierans Pub 0
~a0 s. a~ Av., ~ts. I
FREE Pa~ing 4t~ and Marquette I
I aaFREE~~U~i
I
draw attention to the growing
amount of local information on
the Internet, attracting those
overwhelmed by the vastness of
cyberspace.
'The key is definitely who pro-
vides the most utility and most
efficiency,' said Cullen, who
promised a gervice that will allow
a visitor to personalize the site.
While Cullen declined to say
which local companies it has
reached content agreements
with, he said the service is open
to partnerships with a wide vari-
ety ofoudets.
Cullen also Would not say
Which cities the service would be
rolled out for, although a news
release said DiveIn would be
closely integrated with the U S
West Yellow Pages already on the
Internet serving the 14 states
served by U S West Communica-
tions. Minnesota is one of those
states.
twp years ago. That aii;WS'lAT&T
to offer key new services similar to
tho'se PCS is expected to offer with
ease because PCS is entirely digi-.
The new AT&T featUres in-
clude text messaging, in which
the phone acts like a ~alphanu-
meric pager' that can receive an
80-character message on a tiny
computer screen. They also in-
clude a phone indicator that tells
you when you have a voice mall ly,' Schenasald.
message waiting, and longer bat-
terylife because of reduced drain ..... ',... ' ;i i "'..
on the battery. Another feature · '..- · ' .
being added, but not linked to
the new digital capabilities, i.s
caller ID, which identifies the
number of the person calling you.
· Dee Austin, an AT&T Wireless
spokeswoman, said the new ser-
vice offers customers PCS-like
services months before the PCS
companies open for business.
Not so, say Sprint PCS and
American Portable Telecom, both
of which say they'll be in opera-
tion in the Twin Cities by early
next year.
Tom Murphy,, a spokesman for
Sprint PCS, said his firm will offer
additional features that AT&T ser-
vice doesn't, including call block-
ing, which prevents certain
phone numbers from calling your
wireless phone. In addition, he
said that because AT&T's cellular
system isn't completely digital, it
can't rival fully digital PCS when
it comes to radio signal reliability
and voice clarity.
~I think what the AT&T an-
nouncement says is that the con-
sumers are ready for the next
generation of wireless communi-
cations, and I think what we have
is much superior to what's out
there," Murphy said. ·
' Schena of American Portable
Telecom said his service also will
offer features AT&T's new service
d~esn't,-such 'as ~he ability~i~
. read [nternet e-mail on a PCS
phone screen and better fraq~l
protection -- the owner must
sert a credit-card like device into
the phone for it to work. · . '~.
l ' But Schena considers AT&~'S
· preemptive attack on PCS to I~e
compliment ...... ;
'It's a clear example that co.m?
panies like AT&T Wireless are
taking companies like ours light;
;'
framed/ate Ddi~ery! '
'The Dealen&ip TAat'* Oiffe~tW l
612/92~
0 ffi c ¢ H ¢ : '97 SUBARU LEGACY OUTBACK
~ Wo~d'l F3twt Spot1 ~ll~y Wa~o~'
'97 LEGACY GT SEDANS '97 IMPREZA SPORT WAGON
30,000 sq ffi :~"~
10,000 sq ft per floor
$13.00 per USEABLE sq ftl '~
(~o. ~) ; ._s23,496 .~' s16,500
Cave & A. odMes i~
CITY OF CHANHASSEN
CARVER AND HENNEPIN COUNTIES, MINNESOTA
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPER 20 OF THE
CHANHASSEN CITY CODE PERTAINING TO TOWERS AND ANTENNAS
The City Council of the City of Chanhassen ordains:
Purpose and Intent. The purpose of this ordinance is to accommodate and provide a reasonable
opportunity for the establishment of wireless telecommunications in the City. The City finds it
necessary to adopt standards and regulations that promote the public health, safety, and general
welfare, while minimizing the possible adverse effects of towers and antennas on nearby
property. The Council finds that these regulations are necessary to:
1. Establish standards which permit a reasonable and equitable opportunity for the
establishment of wireless telecommunication services in the City;
2. Ensure that towers and antennas are designed, constructed, installed, and maintained in a
manner that does not adversely impact public safety;
Maximize the use of existing and approved towers and buildings to accommodate new
wireless telecommunication antennas in order to reduce the number of towers needed to serve
the community, and;
o
Minimize adverse visual effects of towers through careful design and siting standards which
attempt to screen and/or camouflage towers and antennas from adjacent public and private
property.
Findings. 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;
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.
Section 1, Section 20-1, Definitions, is amended to add the following definitions:
Antenna is defined as, "Any structure of device used for the purpose of collecting or transmitting
electromagnetic waves, including but not limited to directional antennas, such as panels,
microwave dishes, and satellite dishes, and omni-directional antennas, such as whip antennas."
Commercial wireless telecommunication service is defined as, "Licensed commercial wireless
telecommunication services including cellular, personal communication services (PCS),
specialized mobilized radio (SMR), enhanced specialized mobilized radio (ESMR), paging, and
similar services that are marketed to the general public."
Public Utility is defined as, "Persons, corporations, or governments supplying gas, electric,
transportation, water, sewer, or land line telephone service to the general public. For the purpose
of this ordinance, personal wireless service shall not be considered public utility uses, and are
defined separately."
Tower is defined as, "Any ground mounted pole, spire, structure, or combination thereof,
including supporting lines cables, wires, braces, masts, intended primarily for the purpose of
mounting an antenna, meteorological device, or similar apparatus above grade."
Tower, Multi-User is defined as, "A tower to which is attached the antennas of more than one
commercial wireless telecommunication service provider or governmental agency."
Tower, Single-User, is defines as, "A tower to which is attached only the antennas of a single
user, although the tower may be designed to accommodate the antennas of multiple users as
required in this Code."
ARTICLE IV. CONDITIONAL USES
DIVISION 5. STANDARDS FOR TOWERS AND ANTENNAS
PERMITS:
It shall be unlawful for any person, firm, or corporation to erect, construct, replace, re-
erect, or repair any tower without first making application for and securing a building
permit as provided in this Title.
The applicant shall provide at the time of application sufficient information to indicate
that construction, installation, and maintenance of the antenna and tower will not create a
safety hazard or damage to the property of other persons.
3. Permits are not required for:
2
a)
Adjustment or replacement of the elements of an antenna array affixed to a tower
or antenna, provided that replacement does not reduce the safety factor.
b)
Antennas and/or towers erected temporarily for test purposes, for emergency
communication, or for broadcast remote pick-up operations, provided that all
requirements contained in CONSTRUCTION REQUIREMENTS, with the
exception of subparagraph 7 (regarding corrosive material) which is waived.
Temporary antennas shall be removed within 72 hours following installation.
HEIGHT RESTRICTIONS:
Height Determination. The height of towers shall be determined by measuring the
vertical distance from the tower's point of contact with the ground or rooftop to the
highest point of the tower, including all antennas or other attachments. When t,v, wer~ ar~
Except as provided in the following paragraph of this Section, maximum heights for
towers are as follows:
a)
In all residential zoned property the maximum height of any tower, including all
antennas and other attachments, shall be eighty (80).
b)
In all non-residential zoning districts, the maximum height of any tower, including
all antennas and other attachments, shall not exceed a height of 150 feet. The City
Council may allow towers up to 200 feet high if the applicant can demonstrate
that based upon the topography of the site and surrounding areas, antenna design,
surrounding tree cover and structures and/or through the use of screening, that off-
site views of the tower will be minimized.
Exceptions. The following are exceptions to the maximum height restrictions for towers:
Multi-Use Towers. Multi-use towers may exceed the height limitations of this Section by
up to twenty-five (25) feet.
Antenna devices over 70 feet in height which are attached to a structure and not
freestanding may be located in residential zoned districts under the following conditions:
a)
antennas are located upon existing or proposed structures allowed as principal or
conditional uses in the underlying zoning district and/or upon public structures;
b)
antennas are limited to a height of 15' projecting above the structure. The City
Council may permit antenna heights of up to 25' above the structure if the
applicant can demonstrate that by a combination of antenna design, positioning of
the structure and/or by screening erected or already in place on the property, that
off-site views of the antenna are minimized to accepted levels.
SETBACKS: Towers shall conform with each of the minimum setback requirements:
Towers shall meet the setbacks of the underlying zoning district with the exception of
industrial and business zoned districts, where the tower may encroach into the rear setback
area, provided that the rear property line abuts another industrial or business zoned districts
and the tower does not encroach upon any easements.
2. Towers shall maintain a minimum setback of 10 feet from all property lines
3. For sites that are adjacent to parcels developed, guided, or zoned for residential use, setbacks
shall be equal to the height of the tower.
4. Towers shall be set back from all planned public rights of way by a minimum distance equal
to one half of the height of the tower including all antennas and attachments.
5. Towers shall not be located between a principal structure and a public street.
o
A tower's setback may be reduced or its location in relation to a public street varied, at the
sole discretion of the City Council, to allow the integration of a tower into an existing or
proposed structure, such as a church steeple, light pole, power line support device, or similar
structure.
7. No tower, antenna, or accessory structure shall be located in a wetland or within the wetland
setback.
In a residential district, the required setback from a property line for antennas and towers
not rigidly attached to a building or structure, shall be equal to the height of the antenna and
tower. Those antennas and towers rigidly attached to a building or structure, and whose base
is on the ground, may reduce the required setback by the amount equal to the distance from
the point of attachment to the ground.
TOWERS IN RESIDENTIALLY ZONED DISTRICTS. Towers to be located in
residentially zoned areas are subject to the following restrictions:
Towers supporting amateur radio antennas and conforming to all applicable provisions of
Section 20-915 of the City Code.
Towers supporting commercial antennas and conforming to all applicable provisions of
this Code shall be allowed in residential zoned districts in the following locations:
4
a)
b)
c)
Church sites, when camouflaged as an architectural feature such as
steeples or bell towers.
Park sites, when compatible with the nature of the park; and,
Government, school, utility, and institutional sites.
o
Only one tower shall exist at any one time on any one residential parcel with the
exception of towers designed to replicate an existing structure.
MULTIPLE PRINCIPAL USES AND STRUCTURES ON A SINGLE LOT. For the
purposes of this Division, one tower and multiple antennas shall be permitted on the same lot as
another principal use or structure subject to the requirements of this Chapter.
CONSTRUCTION REQUIREMENTS. All antennas and towers erected, constructed, or
located within the City shall comply with the following requirements:
1. All applicable provisions of this Code.
Towers and their antennas shall be certified by a qualified and licensed professional engineer
to conform to the latest structural standards and wind loading requirements of the Uniform
Building Code and the Electronics Industry Association and all other applicable reviewing
agencies.
o
With the exception of necessary electric and telephone service and connection lines approved
by the City, no part of any antenna or tower nor any lines, cable, equipment or wires or braces
in connection with either shall at any time extend across or over any part of the right-of-way,
public street, highway, sidewalk, or property line.
4. Towers and their antennas shall be designed to conform with accepted electrical engineering
methods and practices and to comply with the provisions of the National Electrical Code.
5. All towers shall be constructed to conform with the requirements of the Occupational Safety
and Health Administration.
6. All towers shall be protected against unauthorized climbing.
7. Metal towers shall be constructed of, or treated with, corrosive resistant material
The applicant is responsible for receiving '-'";**~",, ~...~.. o.~.~...~..~o~*~* .... *~ v.Ac ~u.--v----,~: .... approvals from
the Federal Aviation Administration, Federal Communications Commission, and any
appropriate state review authority stating that the proposed tower complies with regulations
administered by that agency or that the tower is exempt from those regulations.
TOWER AND ANTENNA DESIGN. Proposed or modified towers and antennas shall meet
the following design requirements.
Towers and antennas (including supporting cables and structures) shall be designed to blend
into the surrounding environment through the use of color, camouflaging, and architectural
treatments. Communication towers not requiring FAA or FCC painting/marking shall have
either a galvanized finish or be painted a non-contrasting color consistent with the
surrounding area, such as, blue, gray, brown, or black finish.
Commercial wireless telecommunication service towers shall be of a monopole design unless
the City Council determines that an alternative design would better blend in to the
surrounding environment.
CO-LOCATION REQUIREMENT: All personal wireless communication towers erected,
constructed, or located within the City shall comply with the following requirements:
A proposal for a new commercial wireless telecommunication service tower shall not be
approved unless the City Council finds that the telecommunications equipment planned
for the proposed tower cannot be accommodated on an existing or approved tower or
building within a one mile search radius (one-half mile search radius for towers under
120 feet in height, towers under eighty (80) feet are exempt from this requirement of the
proposed tower due to one or more of the following reasons:
a)
The planned equipment would exceed the structural capacity of the existing or
approved tower or building as documented by a qualified and licensed
professional engineer, and the existing or approved tower cannot be reinforced,
modified, or replaced to accommodate planned or equivalent equipment at a
reasonable cost.
b)
The planned equipment would cause interference materially impacting the
usability of other existing or planned equipment at the tower or building as
documented by a qualified and licensed professional engineer and interference
cannot be prevented at a reasonable cost.
c)
Existing or approved towers and buildings within the search radius cannot
accommodate the planned equipment at a height necessary to function reasonably
as documented by a qualified and licensed professional engineer.
d)
Other unforeseen reasons that make it unfeasible to locate the planned
telecommunications equipment upon an existing or approved tower or building.
e)
Existing or approved towers or buildings are not in the service area, or do not
meet the needs of the user. Documentation shall be provided at the time of
application clearly demonstrating why existing structures do not meet the needs of
the user.
The applicant must demonstrate that a good faith effort to co-locate on existing towers
and structures was made, but an agreement could not be reached.
o
Any proposed commercial wireless telecommunication service tower shall be designed,
structurally, electrically, and in all respects, to accommodate both the applicant's
antennas and comparable antennas for at least one additional user. Towers must be
designed to allow for future rearrangement of antennas upon the tower and to accept
antennas mounted at varying heights.
LIGHTING: 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. When incorporated into the approved
design of the tower for camouflage purposes, light fixtures used to illuminate ball fields, parking
lots, or similar area may be attached to the tower.
SIGNS AND ADVERTISING: 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.
ACCESSORY UTILITY BUILDINGS: All utility buildings and structures accessory to a
tower may not exceed one story in height and four hundred (400) square feet in size and shall
be architecturally designed to blend in with the surrounding environment and meet the minimum
setback requirements of the underlying zoning district. The use of compatible materials such as
wood, brick, or stucco is required for associated support buildings. Equipment located on the
roof of an existing building shall be screened from the public view with building materials
identical to or compatible to existing materials. In no case shall wooden fencing be used as a
rooftop equipment screen.
LANDSCAPING: Ground mounted equipment shall be screened from view by suitable
vegetation, except where a design of non-vegetative screening better reflects and compliments
the architectural character of the surrounding area. Removal of existing shrubs and trees shall be
minimized through careful site selection and design. Landscaping shall comply with the
standards provided in Chapter 20, Article XXV of the City Code.
ANTENNAS MOUNTED ON ROOFS, WALLS, AND EXISTING TOWERS: The
placement of wireless communication antennas on roofs, walls, and existing towers may be
administratively approved by the City, provided that the antenna meets the requirements of this
Code and the following:
1. The maximum height of an antenna shall not exceed fifteen (15) feet above the roof, and
shall be setback at least ten (10) feet from the roof edge.
Wall or facade mounted antennas may not extend five (5) feet above the cornice line and
must be constructed of a material or color which matches the exterior of the building or
structure.
7
In addition to the submittal requirements required elsewhere in this Code, an application for a
Building Permit for antennas to be mounted on an existing structure shall be accompanied by the
following information:
1. A site plan showing the location of the proposed antennas on the structure and documenting
that the request meets the requirement of this Code;
o
A building plan showing the construction of the antennas, the proposed method of attaching
them to the existing structure, and documenting that the request meets the requirements of
this Code;
3. A report prepared by a qualified and licensed professional engineer indicating the existing
structure or tower's ability to support the antennas; and
4. Compliance with FCC regualtions is required to ensure there will be no interference with
existing tenants or public safety telecommunication providers.
An applicant may appeal an administrative decision under this Section to the City Council.
Following review and recommendation by the Planning Commission, the City Council shall
make a final determination on the application.
EXISTING ANTENNAS AND TOWERS: Antennas and towers in residential districts and in
existence as of the effective date of this Ordinance which do not conform to or comply with this
Section are subject to the following provisions:
1. Towers may continue in use for the purpose now used and as now existing but may not be
replaced or structurally altered without complying in all respects with this Division.
If such towers are hereafter damaged or destroyed due to any reason or cause whatsoever, the
tower may be repaired and restored to its former use, location and physical dimensions upon
obtaining a building permit therefore, but without otherwise complying with this Chapter,
provided, however, that if the cost of repairing the tower to the former use, physical
dimensions, and location would be fifty percent or more of the cost of a new tower of like
kind and quality, then the tower may not be repaired or restored except in full compliance
with this chapter.
TIME LIMIT ON TOWER COMPLETION: Once a tower is approved by the City, the tower
must be substantially completed within one (1) year, including any structures accompanying
the tower, following the date of permit.
ABANDONED OR UNUSED TOWERS OR PORTIONS OF TOWERS: Abandoned or
unused towers or portions of towers and accompanying accessory facilities shall be removed as
follows:
8
All abandoned or unused towers and associate facilities shall be removed within twelve (12)
months of the cessation of operations at the site unless a time extension is approved by the
City Council. In the event that a tower is not removed within 12 months of the cessation of
operations at a site, the tower and associated facilities may be removed by the City and the
costs of removal assessed against the property.
o
Unused portions of towers above a manufactured connection shall be removed within two
years six months of the time of antenna reallocation, if the unused portion exceeds twenty-
five (25) percent of the height of the tower or thirty (30) feet, whichever is greater. The
replacement of portions of a tower previously removed requires the issuance of a new
conditional use permit.
3. After the facilities are removed, the site shall be restored to its original or an improved
condition.
INTERFERENCE WITH PUBLIC SAFETY TELECOMMUNICATIONS: No new or
existing telecommunications service shall interfere with public safety telecommunications. All
applications for new service shall be in compliance with FCC regulations Before the
introduction of new service or changes in existing service, receive FCC approval.
telecommunication providers shall notify the City at least ten calendar days in advance of such
changes and allow the City to monitor interference levels during the testing process.
ADDITONAL SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS: In addition to the information required
elsewhere in this code in an application for a Building Permit for towers and their antennas,
applications for towers shall include the following supplemental information:
1. A report from a qualified and licensed professional engineer that provides the following:
a) describes the tower height and design including a cross section and elevation;
b)
documents the height above grade for all potential mounting positions for co-
located antennas and the minimum separation distances between antennas;
c)
describes the tower's capacity, including the number and type of antennas that it
can accommodate;
d)
documents what steps the applicant will take to avoid interference with
established public safety telecommunications; and
e)
demonstrates the tower's compliance with all applicable structural and electrical
standards and includes an engineer's stamp and registration number;
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
9
use and so long as there is no negative structural impact upon the tower, and there is no
disruption to the service provided;
ARTICLE IV. CONDITIONAL USES
DIVISION 3. STANDARDS FOR AGRICULTURAL AND RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS
Sec. 20-256. Commercial communication transmission towers is deleted in its
en re .............................................. e, ...........vo.. v.~o ........v
Sec. 20-287. Communication transmission towers is deleted in its entirety.
.................................................. ~, ........... ~,o~ progress::'e ' ska be o,,t
Sec. 20-574(7). Commercial communication transmission towers is deleted in its
entirety.
Sec. 20-814(2). Commercial communication transmission towers is deleted in its
entirety.
ARTICLE X. "A-2" AGRICULTURAL ESTATE DISTRICT
Sec. 20-574. Conditional uses. is amended to read:
(15) Commercial Towers and Antennas as regulated by Article IV Division 5 of
this Chapter
ARTICLE XI. RURAL RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT
Sec. 20-594. Conditional uses. is amended to read:
(5) Commercial Towers and Antennas as regulated by Article IV. Division 5 of
this Chapter
ARTICLE XII. "RSF" SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT
Sec. 20-614. Conditional uses. is amended to read:
(4) Commercial Towers and Antennas as regulated by Article IV. Division 5 of
this Chapter
ARTICLE XlII "R-4" MIXED LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT
Sec. 20-634. Conditional uses. is amended to read:
(5) Commercial Towers and Antennas as regulated by Article IV. Division 5 of
this Chapter
ARTICLE XlV. "R-8" MIXED MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT
10
Sec. 20-654. Conditional uses. is amended to read:
(6) Commercial Towers and Antennas as regulated by Article IV. Division 5 of
this Chapter
ARTICLE XV. HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT
DIVISION 1. "R-12" DISTRICT
Sec. 20-674. Conditional uses. is amended to read:
(8) Commercial Towers and Antennas as regulated by Article IV Division 5. of
this Chapter.
DIVISION 2. "R-16" DISTRICT
Sec. 20-683. Conditional uses. is amended to read:
(7) Commercial Towers and Antennas as regulated by Article IV Division 5. of
this Chapter.
ARTICLE XVII. "BH" HIGHWAY AND BUSINESS SERVICES DISTRICT
Sec. 20-712. Permitted uses. is amended to read:
(21) Commercial Antennas as regulated by Article IV Division 5. of this Chapter.
Sec. 20-714. Conditional uses. is amended to read:
(10) Commercial Towers as regulated by Article IV Division 5. of this Chapter.
ARTICLE XX. "BF" FRINGE BUSINESS DISTRICT
Sec. 20-771.1. Permitted uses. is amended to read:
(5) Commercial Antennas as regulated by Article IV Division 5 of this Chapter
Sec. 20-773. Conditional uses. Is amended to read:
(6) Commercial Towers as regulated by Article IV Division 5 of this Chapter
ARTICLE XXI. "OI" OFFICE AND 1NSTITIUTIONAL DISTRICT
Sec. 20-792° Permitted uses. is amended to read:
(15) Commercial Antennas as regulated by Article IV Division 5 of this Chapter
Sec. 20-794. Conditional uses. is amended to read:
(2) Commercial towers as regulated by Article IV Division 5 of this Chapter
ARTICLE XXII. "IOP" INDUSTRIAL OFFICE PARK DISTRICT
Sec. 20-812. Permitted uses. is amended to read:
11
(13) Commercial Antennas as regulated by Article IV Division 5 of this Chapter
Sec. 20-814. Conditional uses. is amended to read:
(15) Commercial Towers as regulated by Article IV Division 5 of this Chapter
12