pf_02887 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

U S WEST Communications 426 North Fairview Room 101 St. Paul MN 55104 Wireless LI~-WES1 Minnesota DOT gives the traffic volume as approximately 74,000 automobiles per day, on average. With other secondary roads included, the volume is approximately 80,000 automobiles per day, on average. A reasonable estimate of initial customer penetration puts the traffic carrying requirements for a particular US WEST site in this vicinity at approximately 800 mobiles during busy hour which equates to at least one loaded PCS cell site. Similar arguments relating to capacity and coverage as presented for cell site MIN102 can be applied to our cell site MINI0410cated at 2582 Long Lake Road, Roseville, to show the requirements for a cell site at the proposed location. The attached coverage map will show the necessity of MINI 04 from a coverage perspective. For capacity, we need to look into the traffic carried on 1-35 W flowing into the intersection ofl-35W and Rte. 36. For the intersection around Rte. 36 and 1-35W the Minnesota DOT gives the traffic volume as approximately 90,000 automobiles per day, . on average. With other secondary roads including Rte. 88 and Rte. 23 the volume is approximately 100,000 automobiles per day, on average. A reasonable estimate puts the traffic carrying requirements for a US WEST site in this vicinity at approximately 1000 mobiles during busy hour which equates to at least one loaded PCS cell site. The lattice tower adjacent to the Roseville water tower is midway between our two sites (MIN 1 02, MIN 104). There are two to three different providers already on the tower. The associated antennas belonging to the specific providers are mounted at approximately 120 ft, 130 ft, 150 ft, 160 ft and 180 ft. Also, the water tower itself is approximately 65 ft to the stem and 115 ft to the top. First, since our overall system requirements require us not to be higher than 90 ft on cell sites in the vicinity, it is technically not feasible to locate our antennas at that height on the lattice tower because of associated interference from the nearby water tank. Placement of antennas on the water tower at a similar height is not feasible either because of shadowing effects and interference from the adjacent lattice tower. Moreover, one cell site at this location cannot carry the traffic along Rte. 36 from Lexington Avenue on the East to well West of the intersection of Rte. 36 and 1-35 W, nor can it cover the area which we propose to cover with MIN102 and MINI04. Consequently it will not be technically feasible to locate either MIN102 or MINI 04 on the Roseville water tower (or adjacent lattice tower). Please do not hesitate to contact me directly at (612)642-6039 should you have any further questions regarding the analysis. Sincerely, ~~~ Khursheed Khan RF Design Engineer