Laserfiche WebLink
f <br /> ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION—JUNE 6, 2001 12 <br /> the ramps were evaluated accordingly. The setbacks were not met when measured from the <br /> proposed street at 21 feet when 50 was required. <br /> Mr. Cronin presented the site access information stating there was currently a 66' wide utility <br /> easement that ran east to west across the middle of this property. This easement could not be <br /> built upon by a structure so a road was being proposed over it. The City would need to maintain <br /> access to this easement and it should be, therefore, a public street with a right of way of no less <br /> than 60', as required for local streets. The proposed street was a width of 24 feet. The only public <br /> street that could serve this site, Gateway Boulevard, does not connect to the west property line of <br /> this property. <br /> Mr. Cronin explained there was currently an unimproved road serving the tower site, for <br /> maintenance of the tower. Staff was unaware if the applicant had an easement agreement with <br /> other property owners to access the site as no easement was shown on the submitted plans. The <br /> improved portion of the road stops on the west side of the pond for Apache. The land between <br /> existing Gateway Boulevard and the applicant's property was previously owned by Morris <br /> Communications and just recently acquired by Chesapeake Companies. Therefore, this site did <br /> not currently have a connection to a public street, as was required for development. <br /> Mr. Cronin summarized the public safety for this Planning Case by explaining the proposal <br /> discusses the construction of a 750-foot antenna tower(although 700-feet was shown in the <br /> plans). Due to the fact that the current antenna had been found unsafe, the applicant needed to <br /> build another tower, although zoning prohibited it. The Building Official had stated that <br /> numerous additional antennas had been added to the tower without building permits or staff <br /> approval, creating this unsafe condition. <br /> Mr. Cronin stated the new proposed tower would replace the existing tower. It would be <br /> constructed along side of the existing tower, approximately 20 feet from the base. When fully <br /> constructed, the antennas would be transferred from the old tower to the new tower and the <br /> existing tower would be taken down. <br /> Mr. Cronin explained Allied Tower had provided documentation in the submitted booklet on the <br /> fall radius of guyed towers, including ice fall. The report stated that there have been a total of 14 <br /> incidents in the USA of tower collapses from weather conditions. From the information obtained <br /> by these falls, it's presumed that a tower of 750 feet in height would have a fall radius of 199 <br /> feet. Towers do not fall over but collapse on themselves. As for ice falling, the memorandum <br /> from Allied Towers stated that ice heavy enough to do damage would fall within a radius of no <br /> more than 20 feet from the tower. <br /> Mr. Cronin stated although the memorandums stated that it was safe to place office buildings and <br /> parking structures beneath a tower of this magnitude, staff was still concerned about the safety <br /> and well being of the residents and business people who would be on this property from day to <br /> day. Falling ice from not only the tower but the guyed wires was of concern, even though the <br /> area was proposed to be fenced. Additionally, long-range trail plans include a trail around Round <br /> Lake, including a portion through this property. If development occurred on the property, a <br /> pedestrian trail easement would be requested. <br /> Mr. Cronin summarized the drainage, wetlands and floodplain requirements by explaining the <br /> application proposed to enhance or restore the wetlands on the property back to their original state <br /> since they had declined as a result of unimproved roads and the pasteurization of horses on the <br />