Loading...
PL 05/18/2011 - 30024� � PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING May 18, 2011 Chairperson Kondrick called the Planning Commission Meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. MEMBERS PRESENT: MEMBERS ABSENT: OTHERS PRESENT: Approval of Minutes: Leroy Oquist, David Kondrick, Jack Velin, Brad Dunham, Brad Sielaff, and Tim Solberg Dean Saba Stacy Stromberg, Planner Apri120, 2011 MOTION by Commissioner Oquist to approve the minutes as presented. Seconded by Commissioner Sielaf£ UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON KONDRICK DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 1. PUBLIC HEARING Consideration of a Public Hearing for a Consideration of a Special Use Permit, SP #11-01, by Sprint/Nextel, Todd Young, for Dahlke Trailer Sales, to Allow the Construction of a 125- Foot Telecommunications Tower at the Industrial Property, Owned by Greg Dahlke, of Dahlke Trailer Sales, Generally Located at 8170 Hickory Street. MOTION by Commissioner Sielaff to open the public hearing. Seconded by Commissioner Velin. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON KONDRICK DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY AND THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS OPENED AT 7:02 P.M. Stacy Stromberg, Planner, stated the petitioner, Mr. Young, with Wireless Site Services, Inc. who is an agent for Sprint/Nextel, is requesting a special use permit to allow the construction of a 125-foot telecommunications tower at the industrial property, owned by Greg Dahlke, of Dahlke Trailer Sales, which is located at 8170 Hickory Street NE. Ms. Stromberg stated the Commission may recall granting this same request in 2008. That tower was not constructed and staff revoked the 2008 special use permit last year after discussions with the Dahlke's that Sprint no longer had an interest in their site. Since those discussions interest has perked again on this site and, as a result, the City has received a new special use permit application. Ms. Stromberg stated the proposed facility will consist of a 125-foot monopole telecommunication tower, with accompanying ground eyuipment. The proposed tower and related ground equipment will be contained in a fenced-in, 20-foot by 30-foot leased space on the subject property. Sprint is designing this tower to allow for three additional wireless carries. Ms. Stromberg stated Sprint is proposing to locate the telecommunications tower at 8170 Hickory Street. The subject property is zoned M-3, Outdoor Intensive Heavy Industrial as are all surrounding properties, with the exception of the Burlington Northern Santa Fe railroad tracks to the west. The subject property was developed in 2003, with the construction of the existing 23,920 square foot building. An addition was constructed to the building in 2004, to allow a 14-foot by 70-foot paint booth. Ms. Stromberg stated in 2009 Mr. Dahlke went through the preliminary plat process to subdivide his property at 8170 Hickory Street. The reason for the subdivision was to create a separate saleable parcel. The City Council approved the final plat on April 12, 2010; however, the petitioner just recently brought the plat to Anoka County to be filed. In the meantime, the Dahlke's have had an interested buyer in the lot, which is the northerly portion of the existing property. The interested party would like to acquire additional land from the Dahlke's than what was originally platted. As a result, Dahlke's surveyor is in the process of modifying the newly created lot line by moving it south and additional 75 feet. Ms. Stromberg stated and that modification is before the County right now for their review. Once the County has reviewed it, it will come back to the City Council for another final plat review and approval, before it is filed at the County. Staff expects that all of this will take place within the next few months. Chairperson Kondrick asked regarding the new lot line, will this not affect the location of the tower they are talking about this evening? Ms. Stromberg replied, the tower has been moved to accommodate the new line. The petitioner is aware of it. Staff expects it will take another couple months to get the final plat approved. Ms. Stromberg stated the purpose of a special use permit is to provide the City with a reasonable degree of discretion in determining the suitability of certain designated uses upon the general welfare, public health and safety of the area in which it is located. The special use permit gives the City the ability to place stipulations on the proposed use to eliminate negative impacts to surrounding properties. The City also has the right to deny the special use permit request if impacts to surrounding properties cannot be eliminated through stipulations. Ms. Stromberg stated as the petitioner is reyuesting this special use permit to allow the construction of a new telecommunications tower at 8170 Hickory Street. The subject property is zoned M-3, Outdoor Intensive Heavy Industrial. Telecommunication towers and the installation, operation, and maintenance of Wireless Telecommunications Facilities are allowed in the industria) districts, but only with a special use permit. Ms. Stromberg stated regarding the site selection, Sprint's radio frequency engineers identified this site as a potential telecommunications tower site because of coverage and capacity needs within the area. The petitioner states that this location is ideal in meeting the City Code requirements and tower height requirements necessary to meet their signal improvement goals. - Ms. Stromberg stated when Sprint started their initial search for tower locations, they identified the existing T-Mobile tower, at the Park Construction property at 30 - 81S` Avenue, which is the parcel just south of the subject property. City Code requires that the petitioner prove a new site is necessary and that usable "Approved Sites" are not located within a'/z mile radius of the proposed new site. The T-Mobile tower is located approximately .25 miles from the proposed new tower site. There are two towers located beyond a'/z mile of the proposed site, one which is located at Talco Industries at 7835 Main Street, and the other is located at Northtown Mall. Ms. Stromberg stated Sprint has determined that if they located their antennas on the T-Mobile tower, which is located on the Park Construction property, it would not provide the adequate coverage needed in the areas they are looking to serve. T-Mobile's equipment is already at the top of the 125-foot tower and, 2 if Sprint were to locate on this tower, it would have to be at a lower height. According to Sprint this tower is unable to achieve the signal coverage goals because of the antenna mounting height not being available on this tower. Other transmission line structures were also considered but were also unable to provide the minimum height required to achieve the coverage goals. Ms. Stromberg stated while the subject property is not on the approved site list with the City for telecommunication towers, it is located in an industrial district, which is allowed through a special use permit. The telecommunications ordinance states that in order to minimize adverse visual impacts of the tower and related ground equipment the petitioner shall carefully consider the design, placement, landscaping and innovative camouflaging techniques. It also states that the tower and equipment shall be designed to blend into the surrounding environment. The petitioner is proposing to construct the tower and related equipment on the northwest side of the property, just east of the existing pond area. This is the approximate location the City stipulated the tower be placed last time the special use permit was approved. It will be placed in the rear yard and will blend in with the existing Xcel transmission poles, so would comply with minimizing any adverse visual impacts. The ground equipment is proposed to be contained with a chain link fence. Ms. Stromberg stated City staff recommends approval of this special use permit request as telecommunication towers are a permitted special use in the M-3, Outdoor Intensive Heavy Industrial zoning district, subject to stipulations. Ms. Stromberg stated staff recommends that if the special use permit is granted, the following stipulations be attached: 1. A building permit shall be obtained prior to commencement of installation of any facility equipment on this site. 2. As an alternative to landscaping and screening the telecommunications equipment, the property owner shall submit a landscape plan ensuring that the property meets code requirements for the amount of trees required. If deficient, the property owner shall plant the necessary trees to be in compliance within 6 months of issuance of this special use permit. 3. No signs other than warning or equipment information signs are permitted as part of this application. Commissioner Dunham asked is it staff evaluation to determine whether there is a need for another tower. To determine whether there is a need within a half-mile? Ms. Stromberg replied, they do the analysis to see where it is located in relation to the other towers. They do leave it up to the petitioner to tell them whether their system needs it or not. Commissioner Dunham asked if there is some criteria staff follows? What is that? Ms. Stromberg replied, it is all listed in their packet. The petitioner actually did a very good job of highlighting each requirement the City has. It all relates to where the tower can be located (of course, only in industrial districts); and we have them in our parks as well and on water towers. Building heights, reyuiring building permits, there is a whole list of different things staff looks at when analyzing whether to allow a cell tower through a special use permit. Commissioner Dunham stated if the T-Mobile tower does not work for Sprint because it doesn't have the required height. It seems to him they are building these towers and these towers are all built to accommodate multiple antennas, but we are not using them that way. Each user wants to build their own tower. Does that mean Verizon is going to build another one around the corner? 3 Mr. Young, petitioner replied what they do is provide the City Planner with information on the reasoning and rationale behind why the towers are necessary is through a couple of inethods. Primarily with a propagation map actually showing where the signal will be covering in one location vs., another location. He asked them to look at the page that has the drawings showing a comparison between where the T-Mobile tower is and using the T-Mobile tower at the lower radiation height vs. using the one at Dahlke Trailer. They can see by the white representations those are the areas that would be lacking coverage by being on that tower. The T-Mobile tower cunently has three other carriers on it, so the existing towers are accommodating other users. T-Mobile is on top and there are two additional users on it. He would say whoever may not have been located on that tower may end up going on this Sprint tower. The primary area they are trying to cover is the residential area to the west, the Nature Center to the north, and also the business area along University area. They have a computer-generated coverage map using longitude, latitude, height, type of antenna output power to assimilate the actual coverage. The goal is to provide in-home, in-buiiding coverage so folks can use their high-speed data, minimize drop calls, and create a cell site that is creating a hand-off canvass for seamless coverage. Commissioner Dunham asked but they are using those other spaces on the other tower then? Mr. Young replied, absolutely. There are three carriers on the other tower right now. Chairperson Kondrick asked if there is technology today that is able to increase the power? In other words, is it possible to have an 80-foot tower with more power? Are we high for a reason because we only have the power, the technology is not there. If we had more power, could we lower the height of the facility? Mr. Young replied, that is a very good question; and it deals with the advances of technology and actually contains the type of signal that is being broadcast. There are multiple cell sites across the City not only for coverage but also for capacity. When cell phone calls/daily connections are made, a cell site can oniy handle so many phones calls and then the other calls get put to the next closest cell site. When that gets full, it then cascades around to other cell sites until they all become full. What they do is engineer in another cell site that has the capacity ability to relieve some of the other phone calls and the daily connections. Regarding the power and the antennas, it becomes more of not necessarily putting out additional power, but controlling where the signal is going so it does not ovenide and cause interference at other cell sites. That is a largely contained signal that allows the calls to come into it from another cell, hand out of it if you are mobile but also provide service and capacity for the area it is trying to cover specifically. Chairperson Kondrick asked, it is the ability to absorb the calls that are taken but also to be able to transfer to other stations, correct? Mr. Young replied, correct. That is why you never get dropped calls. Commissioner Sielaff stated, this about coverage. Adding more cell phone usage, plus going to a higher level of like 4G? Mr. Young replied, exactly. Just four years ago wireless use was around 50-60 percent. Wireless user cell phones are at 90 percent now. Commissioner Sielaff asked if they go to 4G, are they looking at more towers then? 4 Mr. Young replied, what they did is the capability of handling more calls because it compresses it down even further and further. Higher speed there means more calls on the individual cell. Commissioner Sielaff asked, they do not need more towers then? Mr. Young replied, not necessarily. They always need to have the signal coverage which may necessitate a tower being built. You have more capacity, now you have to get the signal. They are just trying to make sure you have in-home, in-building coverage and when you walk in your back room from your front room, you are not dropping the signal because of wall penetration, etc. MOTION by Commissioner Oquist to close the public hearing. Seconded by Commissioner Dunham. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON KONDRICK DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY AND THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED AT 7:20 P.M. Chairperson Kondrick asked Ms. Stromberg if anyone has complained about this idea? Ms. Stromberg rep(ied, no. Chairperson Kondrick stated they have seen this a couple of years ago and did not see any problem with it then. He does not have any problem with it now. It is in a new location and seems like .it is even more functional now than it was a couple of years ago. He has driven by there. It is not in the way of anything. You cannot see it from anything except maybe the residential towards East River Road. Commissioner Oquist stated he agrees. Commissioner Solberg stated the petitioner states we need it. Commissioner Velin stated he had no problem with it. MOTION by Commissioner Oquist approving Consideration of a Public Hearing for a Consideration of a Special Use Permit, SP #I 1-01, by Sprint/Nextel, Todd Young, for Dahlke Trailer Sales, to Allow the Construction of a 125-Foot Telecommunications Tower at the Industrial Property, Owned by Greg Dahlke, of Dahlke Trailer Sales, Generally Located at 8170 Hickory Street with the following stipulations: 1. A building permit shall be obtained prior to commencement of installation of any facility equipment on this site. 2. As an alternative to landscaping and screening the telecommunications equipment, the property owner shall submit a landscape plan ensuring that the property meets code requirements for the amount of trees required. If deficient, the property owner shall plant the necessary trees to be in compliance within 6 months of issuance of this special use permit. 3. No signs other than warning or equipment information signs are permitted as part of this application. Seconded by Commissioner Sielaff. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIIZPERSON KONDRICK DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 5 2. Receive the Minutes of the March 3, 2011, Housing and Redevelopment Authority Commission Meeting. MOTION by Commissioner Oquist to receive the Minutes. Seconded by Commissioner Dunham. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON KONDRICK DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 3. Receive the Minutes of the January 11, 2011 Environmental Quality and Energy Commission Meeting. MOTION by Commissioner Velin to receive the Minutes. Seconded by Commissioner Saba. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIItPERSON KONDRICK DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 4. Receive the Minutes of the December 6, 2010, Parks & Recreation Commission Meeting. MOTION by Commissioner Sibel to receive the Minutes. Seconded by Commissioner Solberg. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON KONDRICK DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 5. Receive the Minutes of the February 7, 2011, Parks & Recreation Commission Meeting. MOTION by Commissioner Velin to receive the Minutes. Seconded by Commissioner Solberg. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON KONDRICK DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 6. Receive the Minutes of the Marc6 7, 2011, Parks & Recreation Commissioa Meeting. MOTION by Commissioner Saba to receive the Minutes. Seconded by Commissioner Sielaff. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON KONDRICK DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Ms. Stromberg stated the street vacation they had before them on April 20, 2011 for Mr. Dahlberg was approved by the City CounciL Ms. Stromberg stated Scott Hickok wanted to provide them with an update on the East River Road corridor project, but said he would do that at the next meeting as they are in the process of trying to organize a neighborhood meeting. Ms. Stromberg stated that June 15, 2011 meeting has been cancelled. ADJOURN MOTION by Commissioner Oquist adjourning the meeting. Seconded by Commissioner Dunham. G� UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON KONDRICK DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY AND THE MEETING ADJOURNED AT 7:27 P.M. Respectfully submitted, �—.�,�.e.��� Denise M. Johnson Recording Secretary 7 CITY OF FRIDLEY SIGN-IN SHEET PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING � / I • �i Name a� Address/Business � S s-�-- � L/o I 22 0-�i-(�. �'crqe.��,r��(� �� ��1 S