Laserfiche WebLink
ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL—November 30, 2009 13 <br /> 7C. Planning Case 09-020 (continued) <br /> Councilmember Grant asked if the RF Engineer was employed by Clear Wireless <br /> of if it was an independent person. <br /> Mr. Trueman stated the RF Engineer is an employee of Clear Wireless. <br /> Councilmember Grant clarified that he would like to see a letter from an <br /> independent RF Engineer that outlines the loss of coverage if there is not an antenna <br /> at 2 Pine Tree Drive and why the water tower would not work for this project. At <br /> this time he is not prepared to make a decision. The application also states that <br /> antennas need to be within a half mile of each other. He asked if Clear Wireless has <br /> submitted information that outlines the half-mile radiuses that they were working with. <br /> Mr. Trueman stated that this could be provided. <br /> Councilmember Grant asked what vendor Clear Wireless had an executed lease <br /> with at this time. <br /> Mr. Trueman stated that Clearwire had a lease agreement with the Von Tower. <br /> City Planner Beekman stated that this location is currently operating under a CUP <br /> that allows for new antennas and equipment to be placed there with a maximum <br /> number of 31 antennas. <br /> Councilmember Grant stated that since there was already an approval for the one <br /> location then he would have preferred to have the other two locations up for <br /> approval at the same time. <br /> Mr. Trueman stated that the City would not have to approve the third location. If <br /> Clearwire is not able to make something work then there would simply be a gap in <br /> the coverage in that particular area. <br /> Councilmember McClung stated that he would need to see a color version of the <br /> frequency map in order to evaluate it better and the back up documentation from the <br /> RF Engineer before he would be able to make a decision regarding this request. <br /> Mayor Harpstead clarified that the deadline to make a decision was December 22 <br /> in order to meet the 60-day review deadline. After that date the Council would <br /> need to extend this an additional 60 days. <br />