6.1, 6.2 1 & 6.2.
( � ITEM 6. .
ty of „/ MEMORANDUM
Fj1Jjç Ri
ver TO: Planning Commission
FROM: Scott Harlicker, Planning Assistant-1,
DATE: December 19, 1996 *��
SUBJECT: American Portable Telecom Request
for Rezoning and Conditional Use
Permit, Public Hearing Case No.'s
ZC 96-20 and CU 96-26
Request
American Portable Telecom is requesting a zone change to rezone certain
property to Antenna Overlay District (AT) and a conditional use permit for a
wireless communication antenna tower and equipment buildings.
Update
• At the November 26, 1996 Planning Commission meeting, the Commission
tabled these items to the December meeting to allow APT time to look at
other alternative antenna sites. It was specifically requested that they
consider collocating on the AT&T tower and on one of the towers located near
the intersection of County Road 33 and County Road 77. This request is an
attempt to satisfy the intent of the antenna overlay district of minimizing
the number of new towers.
Staff has not had an opportunity to review the requested information. The
applicant's representative, Linda Whitman, has indicated that the analysis
was completed and the results will be made available the night of the
meeting. Ms. Whitman declined to provide staff the information prior to the
meeting as it would became public information. It will be APT's position that
since they can accomplish the necessary coverage by constructing an antenna
on the Industrial Hardfacing site, they are opposed to the option of
collocating on the AT&T tower and on one of the towers located on County
Road 33. Attached for your review is a letter from Larkin, Hoffman, Daly &
Lindgren, attorneys for APT, which further explains their position regarding
collocating on the AT&T tower.
There has been communication between Ms. Whitman and Ron Mielke, Real
• Estate Acquisition Manager for AT&T Cellular, regarding the possibility of
collocating on AT&T's tower. APT has also been sent a copy of AT&T's
13065 Orono Parkway • P.O. Box 490 • Elk River, MN 55330 • (612) 441-7420 • Fax: (612) 441-7425
Memo to the Planning Commission Page 2
December 19, 1996
Ill collocation application and the process has been explained to them.
Currently, according to Mr. Mielke, it takes approximately 14 days to
process the collocation application once all the information has been received
and the $1000 application fee is low for the industry and is intended to cover
the costs of evaluating the application. The AT&T tower was designed and
constructed to accommodate collocation of other antennas; however,
engineering analysis has to be completed to ensure that the new antennas
will not interfere with AT&T's existing antennas.
Recommendation
Because the additional information requested by the Planning Commission is
unavailable for review, staff is not in a position to make a recommendation.
However, should the Commission consider approval of this request the
following conditions should be included:
Rezoning request
1. A finding that the rezoning will not adversely affect the property
under consideration for rezoning nor the adjacent properties.
II
2. A finding that the rezoning would be compatible with surrounding
land uses.
3. A finding that the applicant has shown that the proposed rezoning to
AT is necessary in order to provide effective cellular phone coverage for
this area.
Conditional Use
1. The tower be a mono pole design painted a color to blend in with the
background.
2. The tower be designed and constructed to accommodate collocation.
3. The applicant supply an agreement indicating that they will respond
to requests for collocation in a timely manner.
4. The tower shall not contain any signage, including logos, except as
may be required by state and federal regulations.
III
s:\planning\scott\cu9626b.doc
Memo to the Planning Commission Page 3
December 19, 1996
III 5. The tower and equipment building shall be removed within 6 months
of cessation of operation unless a time extension is granted by the City
Council. In cases of multiple users of this tower, this condition shall
not become effective until all users of the tower cease operations for 6
months.
•
.
s:\planning\scott\cu9626b.doc
FROM LARKIN HOFFMAN 17TH FL 12. 10. 1996 11 : 40 P. 2
3. I I
ii JM OP.IIR/ON LARKIN, HOFMAN, DALY & LIND 1 REN LTD, //J. TM
O
RI/RTILNOPPMW
�y 0414.440 N.PRII LL JOa R.NCL
+1`a JAMAS0./ OWN
/OMARD J, l/O
T T O R N E Y S A T LAW PPIMA.1.oo0011.10410041000..LWIRY 0,MARTN
OBIS N.►IALIR MI t!4!14111
r"'`wec°I wMwSLILLARi 1500 NORWEST FINANCIAL CENTER o JMIliw. uR!'�.olN
• OCNNIT MIIIi.a1.MOO®.1 Pf7WP O.NAW
.. J.OI{TUN MIbM�J./MIM
LINO%H.rlpR 1900 XERXES AVENUE SOUTH Mut I.I.
WOWWWI r,lraTwLN BLOOMINGTON,MINNESOTA 55431-1194 N�ID4Iw P.MAW
WWI.O.HLORMNw ,,NN M.MITR
JOIM/.oIIHL CAI IItCMiR G JOWJION
JON I,1YeIL1IIVMNI TELEPHONE(512)E35.3500NOV a111DR/IMLAY RYIIJ[
L otoulaM
JaJ u PI P 01444 6VIHN FAX(512)5954333 C II1 AIRR R.UAW
TOGO I.FREMMI ! MMCY R.PR01T
044.111D L.I/Ot DC WWI M.MUM
AM I.LLIrDOUI/t MUMtIIL A.PILAU
ataPO.M• MMII*Tinier aIa
�o�w A Oona• 1NOM..P.N.R.N0111
IPATLcS.14437 tIA WAIL T.Malo
PPM.J.PL1J4I AU 1146R014 A~JOIN
ALAN L RILDOY! RNtINY.MUM14014.11/4M.PIOOTTI Wm-um O.WI II441
Mtd+A/l/.Ll1.ICON MPI MICl4LLI IMAM
OWYOOIlY1.ROAM° C.IAffi4SCUMS
WY A YIN CL/w• ARIItIN I.R.RWMARD•
WE/ILL./OM-0/ I J0.[1.PR101RRX/ON
• TIMOTITJ.MOWJR><
nAIOMT J.MOWS O/OOLNIIL
NNl Al.INOIRION JAOR F.OALY
DOWN L 1310Im011 D.RWIIM UNDOWN
MIb44 W.ICISJY ALLAN L MW.riA
ROW I.1 01 1wNDItI I..fCIRION
MAIMS II./IIbbP • JW4.P11 OITII
LIMA OMT
WAY A.RWNIW • ALIO ADMITTID IN Y.40G4IIN
ONRITO►MR J.MAMMAL
December 6, 1996
Planning Commission Members !
City of Elk River
13065 Orono Parkway
P.O. Box 490
Elk River, MN 55330
• Re: American Portable Telecotn/Telecommunications Tower A 1 plication
18489 Twin Lakes Road
Dear Planning Commission Members:
On November 26, 1996.American Portable Telecom(APT), by its r-presentatives, appeared before the
Elk River Planning Commission tb seek a recommendation of ap r1 val for the rezoning for an industrial
site to establish an Antenna Overlay District. In particular, APT ke/uested 4ezoning for 18489 Twin
Lakes Road within the City (the Site). APT also requested a recd endation of approval for a
Conditional Use Permit (CUP)to erect a telecommunications tower on the Site. The Site was selected by
APT's radio frequency engineer's based on a radio frequency anely is becaise it would provide superior
RF coverage both to the City, and.'to adjacent highways.
During the course of the November 26th meeting,members of the 'lanning Commission requested that •
APT consider co-locating on a recently-approved AT&T tower. A'T's RF,engineers had previously
analyzed the AT&T tower and determined that co.location would c eate a gap in coverage north of the
AT&T tower. It was then suggested that PPT correct for the lack o coverage north of the AT&T tower
by erecting a second tower on a ridge near some other existing tow.rs. APT agreed to evaluate this
scenario in advance of your regularly scheduled December 19, 199. meeting.
APT has now carefully analyzed the feasibility of co-locating on'th AT&T tower, in conjunction with
• constructing a second tower on the ridge, as requested. While this -cenario does provide coverage along
US Highway 169, the cost of complying with the wishes of the P1: ing Commission are prohibitive. In
FROM LARKIN HOFFMAN 17TH FL 12. 10. 1996 11 : 40 P. 3
LARKIN, HOFFMAN, DALY& UNDO'. N, LTO.
Planning Commission Members
•
December 6, 1996
Page 2
fact, APT would incur substantial duplicative expenses caused by e use and approval of two tower
locations, rather than a single location, including:
• Site acquisition and evaluation;
• Leasehold negotiations and monthly rents;
• Regulatory review and compliance;
• Transmission equipment; and
• Antennas.
Section 704(a) of the recently enacted Telecommunications Act o'1:96 prohibits regulation of the
placement of personal wireless service facilities by a municipality) :t has the effect of discriminating
against a tower applicant or otherwise impedes the delivery of wi el;ss services. In this case,the City's
requirements would cause APT to incur substantial duplicative exe ses by Iforcing it to acquire, erect,
install and operate two (2)telecomrnunicatipns locations, when the 'ngle location proposed by APT will
accomplish the same result. This result is not acceptable. The P1: ing Commission's request not only
• would impose an excessive burden on APT,but would discriminate :gainst APT in violation of the
Telecommunications Act.
Given the foregoing, APT respectfully requests that its applicatio 's to build a telecommunications tower
at 18489 Twin Lakes Road be recommended for approval to the application'
Counc 1 without any further delay.
ely,
Peter J. Coyle, for
LARKIN, HOFFMAN, DALY & LINDGREN, Ltd.
cc: David Sellergren, Esq.
Linda Whitman
Brian O'Connor, Esq.
Mike O'Rourke
•