My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
pf_03207
Roseville
>
Planning Files
>
Old Numbering System (pre-2007)
>
PF3000 - PF3801
>
3200
>
pf_03207
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
10/26/2007 3:31:54 PM
Creation date
12/9/2004 6:52:16 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Planning Files
Planning Files - Planning File #
3207
Planning Files - Type
Conditional Use Permit
Address
2851 SNELLING AVE N
Applicant
Qwest
Status
Approved
Date Final City Council Action
5/22/2000
Planning Files - Resolution #
9773
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
42
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
<br />1 Chair Klausing opened the hearing and requested the City Planner <br />2 Thomas Paschke to provide a verbal summary of the project report dated <br />3 May 10, 2000. He explained requirements of the City Code for commercial <br />4 antennas. The site is zoned B-2. The proposed monopole replaces an <br />5 existing light pole. He displayed a photo graphic rendering of the pole. <br />6 Staff determined that the pole meets criteria in the Code and <br />7 recommended approvaL <br />8 <br />9 Chair Klausing asked for the specific height of the pole (67'-68') with the <br />10 antenna. What are the violation criteria? (blow down, accidental damage). <br />11 <br />12 Member Egli asked what the City policy is for towers. Council direction <br />13 was discussed. <br />14 <br />15 Member Mulder asked if companies have been required to post bonds. <br />16 <br />17 Member Egli asked if there are interference issues in adjacent areas. <br />18 <br />19 Ken Neilsen and Dave Mitchell, representing U.S. West, explained the u.s. <br />20 West Wireless services for mobile phones and data connections. <br />21 <br />22 Mr. Neilsen distributed illustrations of the monopole proposaL He noted <br />23 the proposed site is a "fill-in" site. He illustrated the 4' high antennae, <br />24 atop the monopole. The ground equipment was described. No utilities <br />25 other than electricity and phone lines are required. <br />26 <br />27 Mr. Neilsen stated there has been no interference from U.s. West site. <br />28 <br />29 Member Olson asked if trees would be removed. (No, trees will be added.) <br />30 <br />31 Member Olson asked if multi-users could use this pole. <br />32 <br />33 Mr. Neilsen said the pole could be removed and replaced with a multi- <br />34 user tower. What would it look like? (standard mono pole or lattice <br />35 tower). <br />36 <br />37 Member Mulder asked if the height of the pole was for reception or to get <br />38 above the trees. (Antennas must be above tree cover.) If the pole was <br />39 moved to another site, would the height be the same? (yes). <br />40 <br />41 No public comment was offered. <br />42 <br />43 Chair Klausing closed the hearing. <br /> <br />Planning Commission Minutes, May 10, 2000 <br /> <br />Page 2 of 17 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.