Laserfiche WebLink
<br />ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL WORKSESSION - SEPTEMBER 17,2001 2 <br /> <br />Mike Cronin, City Planning Consultant was also present for consultation. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />Mr. Vaughan provided a brief history of the tower, stating that it was originally <br />constructed and leased to Motorola in 1981 under a nine- (9) year lease. Mr. Vaughan <br />assumed control of the tower in 1990, at which time twenty-five (25) antennae were <br />loaded on the tower, even though the original SUP showed fifteen (15) permitted - three <br />(3) antenna groups of five (5) each. Following his assumption of the lease, Mr. Vaughan <br />removed three (3) antennae. Mr. Vaughan stated that he was not aware of any code <br />issues being violated at that time. <br /> <br />Building Official Scherbel displayed a map provided as part of the original SUP with <br />three (3) antenna groupings of five (5) antennae each approved. Mr. Scherbel explained <br />that he had alerted Mr. Vaughan to potential loading and 1/2" radial ice safety concerns <br />in 1998 when an engineering report had been brought to Mr. Scherbel's attention prior to <br />another lessee looking at the tower. Mr. Scherbel further stated that, since the tower does <br />not meet the W' radial ice or loading requirements as specified and required by State <br />Building Code, he is obligated to deem the tower an unsafe structure. <br /> <br />Mayor Probst reiterated Mr. Scherbel's position, that in considering wind load as an <br />additional issue, as well as dead load, the tower was a safety concern, and the City had an <br />obligation to deal with the safety of the tower, since we have been made aware of it over <br />the last three years. Mayor Probst further stated that between the City and Mr. Vaughan, <br />immediate resolution was needed. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />Mr. Vaughan assured staff and Councilmembers that safety factors were built into <br />engineering standards at double the anticipated load, and further reiterated that he was <br />willing to do whatever was necessary to meet code requirements. Mr. Vaughan presented <br />a bench handout from Ehresmann Engineering dated August 15,2001, which provided <br />summary information regarding the tower. Mr. Vaughan was suggesting removal of <br />approximately eighty feet (80') from the seven hundred-foot (700') tower for safety <br />purposes. <br /> <br />Mr. Scherbel, upon his initial review of the summary report, requested additional <br />information, provided by an on-site examination. <br /> <br />City Attorney Filla stated that the engineer's summary report addressed stress ratios for a <br />modified tower with an overall height of six hundred-twenty feet (620'). <br /> <br />Further discussion items included procedural and safety issues; reference to mutual <br />agreement of an independent consultant to review safety issues with costs covered by Mr. <br />Vaughan; possible monetary recourse for Mr. Vaughan with Motorola; revocation of the <br />existing SUP; denial of the proposed Concept Planned Unit Development (PUD); , <br />redesign of the existing tower to prove that safety factors can be met; and lease <br />termination notice requirements of Mr. Vaughan to his antennae lessees. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />Mr. Vaughan stated that, at a previous Council meeting, he didn't get feeling that the City <br />