Lakewood Planning and Zoning Commission
Tuesday, June 20, 2006 at 7:00 p.m.
Lakewood Town Hall
Call to order: Commission Chair of the Planning and Zoning Commission, Bob Wolfe called the commission to order at 7:10 p.m.
Present: Chair Wolfe, Dick Bodine, Al Eastman, Chris Roningen, Phil Halverson, Recorder Shannon Ostazeski, Zoning Administrator Brennan Mears, applicant Greg Folmer and public attendant Hugo Leider.
Pledge of Allegiance: The Pledge of Allegiance to the flag of the United States of America was recited by all present.
Review of Agenda (Bob Wolfe):
Purpose of the hearing is for a request from Hwy. 61 Expressway LLC to construct a Commercial Communications Tower in the LIU-10 zone located North of Expressway 61 and West of the Sinclair gas station in Section 24 of Lakewood Township. The property owner, Greg Follmer is requesting a conditional use permit to construct a 200 ft. communications tower on the property. We left off the last meeting with a request to Mr. Follmer to bring back more information.
Follmer: Propagation studies are not that easy to come by. They are expensive and they are a proprietary issue. Saber Tower of Minnesota prepared these maps. We can’t get a company to do this for us without a permit from you guys.
Bodine: This is just coverage, this map does not show the strength of frequencies.
Eastman: I have Cell One and they are bad in that area and on the Jean Duluth Road.
Halverson: How far along the Express Way do you say is underserved?
Follmer: About 5 miles on either side of my proposed tower site.
Halverson: How is this different from a propagation map? What went into making it?
Follmer: I don’t know. The pink areas mean underserved.
Bodine: This is just coverage period. It does not show the strength of the frequencies.
Eastman: I drive that area but I have Cell One and they are all bad in that area and on the Jean Duluth Road.
Halverson: I had 6 bars from Lester River all the way up to the Homestead Road. I have Tracfone, which uses any cell signal available.
Wolfe: I use Verizon for my cell service and get great coverage in the area Mr. Folmers diagram says is not covered.
Folmer: I have Sprint and I can’t get anything at my property on the expressway.
Wolfe: Could we get as good of coverage with 100 foot tower vs. 200 ft.?
Bodine: 200 feet would be better than 100 feet.
Halverson: The area is not underserved it just may not be served by all telephone companies.
Bodine: There are areas up the shore during the marathon that we can’t get coverage.
Leider (in audience): My understanding is a local area cannot prevent a cell tower from coming in but you can control conditions.
Halverson: We can control the location of the tower. The FCC regulations says nothing shall limit or affect the authority of local or state decisions regarding placement, construction, or modification of commercial mobile services.
Bodine: The National League of Cities says we may not prohibit towers but we can place restrictions on the number of towers and placements of them just as long as we don’t restrict a companies ability to provide adequate service.
Wolfe: Our Township does not ban towers. If Mr. Folmer can show us that we need the tower he can have the permit.
Roningen: The map does show that there is inadequate service in this area.
Bodine: This location is in the LIU zone and the people of Lakewood said that is where they would want something like that to go up.
Bodine: Do you intend to have other services on this tower?
Folmer: We are going to have this as a rental property for who ever might want to use it. If there are other values in this we will rent that space out.
Wolfe: The first question we need to ask for a conditional use permit is if we feel the applicant has shown the adequate information we requested? If he has not we cannot grant the conditional use permit.
Halverson: I offer into the record of this hearing a document dated Sept. 14, 2000 from US Interior on Guidance and Decommissioning of Towers. According to this document these towers have a significant affect on migratory birds. We should have reference to this problem in our findings of fact.
Wolfe: Those issues need to be addressed if we give him the permit. We would use the Fish and Wildlife regulations.
Bodine: I think he does present proof that there is inadequate coverage. He also said he would potentially provide other venues to that system.
Eastman: We asked him to come back with the map and he has. Until the permit has been issued there are a lot of people that will not listen to him.
Halverson: Motion that we deny the request because the application is incomplete, we do not have an interested cell phone company, we have a developer, and I do not see a need to place a tower there because my phone receives a strong signal along the Express Way from Lester River to the Homestead Road, and beyond. Motion dies from lack of second.
Roningen: Motion made to give Mr. Folmer a permit because he did demonstrate a need for a tower in this area. Seconded by Eastman. Vote 3-2. Motion passes.
Wolfe: Second question is does this conform to the use of Lakewood Township? Vote in favor 4-1.
Wolfe: Question 2b asks if the conditional use will not be injurious to the use and enjoyment of the environment, or detrimental to the rightful use and enjoyment of other property in the immediate vicinity, or neighborhood, nor substantially diminish or impair property values within the surrounding neighborhood. Vote in favor 3-1.
Discussion: Halverson: Voted against because of birds and the shore.
Roningen: As long as he follows the setbacks. Towers do not affect property values.
Wolfe: We can solve this with conditions.
Wolfe: Question 2c asks if the use will not impede the normal and orderly development and improvement in the surrounding area of uses permitted by right in the zone district. Vote in favor 5-0.
Wolfe: Question 2d asks if the location and character of the proposed use is considered to be consistent with a desirable pattern of development for the area. Vote in favor 3-1.
Discussion: Halverson: No one would say a tower is great unless there is a need for it.
Wolfe: Is the proposed development and/or land use is consistent and in keeping with the spirit and intent of this Ordinance. Vote in favor 3-1.
Discussion: Eastman: I think the spirit of our framers wanted a place in our township for things like this.
Halverson: We do owe consideration to the new and old ordinance. I don’t think it goes with the old because it does not stay out of way of the migratory bird routes. I am concerned that the lot is 75 feet by 75 feet which is too small. It also says co-location is encouraged and we are not stressing this point.
Bodine: It is in the spirit. The survey that we did a couple of years ago the people said that if we going to have cell towers, that is where they wanted it.
Eastman: True, co-location is the best thing. Unfortunately it was turned down by the commission in the Moose Mountain case.
Wolfe: When in the opinion of the Commission a conditional use permit may result in a material adverse effect on the environment, the applicant will be requested to demonstrate the nature and extent of the effect, with all expenses to be borne by the applicant. You are within a significant bird fly way and we are required to use the guidelines set up by the Fish and Wildlife Commission. Aside from this issue are there environmental concerns? No.
Wolfe: We are required to enforce the guidelines.
Halverson: Has it been demonstrated that co-location cannot happen on the Bergquist Road? Who owns that tower?
Folmer: I haven’t contacted them and why would I? I want them on my tower.
Wolfe: We also need to address guidelines for recommendations on communications towers. The first question that the F & W wants answered is if you can collocate?
Eastman: That is located in Duluth Township. His only option is Moose Mountain. That is not an option because it is only 75 feet. This would be the first tower in our township that would give the option of collocation.
Halverson: The US Fish & Wildlife regulations require that you look across political boundaries for opportunities to co-locate.
Wolfe: Issue #2, 3 are taken care of because the tower will not have lights and the applicant is only requesting one tower.
Wolfe: Issue# 4 says that if at all possible, new towers should not be sited in known migratory or daily movement flyways, or in habitat of threatened or endangered species. Towers should not be sited in areas with a high incidence of fog, mist, and low ceilings. These issues are all applicable to the North Shore. In Jan Green’s book she cites over 30 species of endangered birds that come through this area of the North Shore.
Bodine: He is mitigating those issues with the monopole style of tower. Essentially he wants to put up a tree without limbs.
Wolfe: The farther you get away from the shore the less issues you will have with conditions. According to the weather service 75 days out of the year there is fog in this area. Most of these days are during the peak migration times.
Wolfe: Issue#5,6,7,8,9 are not issues.
Wolfe: Issue# 10 has to do with lighting on ground facilities. This is usually addressed in one of our conditions.
Wolfe: Issue#11 states that researchers from the Communication Tower Working Group would be allowed access to conduct tower effects on birds.
Folmer: We would not have a problem with this.
Wolfe: Issue#12 says towers no longer in use or determined to be obsolete should be removed within 12 months of cessation of use. Our county does require this also.
Wolfe: The Fish and Wildlife also request that you send them the specifics of your tower.
Roningen: Make this a requirement of the applicant.
Folmer: We will send them a letter of invitation to come and study the area.
Conditions:
Eastman: Motion to adhere strictly to the guidelines that it be no more than 199 feet and there be no lights on the tower. Seconded by Roningen. Vote: In favor of 3-2. Motion passes.
Eastman: The 99 foot tower may cover that area but it would not encourage collocation in the future.
Eastman: Motion that he make his site available for any communication tower working groups to evaluate bird effects from the tower. Seconded by Bodine. Motion passes. 5-0
Eastman: Motion that the tower is constructed in such a way that it would accommedate collocation. Seconded by Roningen. 5-0
Halverson: Motion that the color be defined as earth tones (page 11) as consistent with our zoning ordinance. Seconded by Bodine. Motion Passes 5-0
Eastman: Motion to provide fencing and screening is as proposed by the applicant with the fencing being at least 6 feet tall. Seconded by Bodine. Motion passes. 5-0
Bodine: Motion by Bodine that there be downward lighting on the accessory structure. Seconded by Eastman. Motion passes. 5-0
Halverson: Motion that before any construction is commenced the applicant for this permit must demonstrate to the Zoning Administrator that a performance bond is in place with a bonding company possessing an investment grade rating, with terms acceptable to an attorney retained by Lakewood Township (whose fees shall be paid by the permit applicant), which terms shall, at a minimum, obligate the bonding company to 1) promptly remove the tower authorized by this conditional use permit if removal is required by the Lakewood Zoning Ordinance or the tower is determined to be unsafe by an engineering company retained by Lakewood; 2) maintain its investment grade rating ; 3) notify Lakewood Township immediately if any of its ratings drop below investment grade, any bond premium payment is not made when due, , or any notice of cancellation of the bond is given; 4) remain obligated to perform under the terms of the performance bond, regardless of any default or other act or failure to act by an entity procuring the bond or benefiting from it, until such time as the tower is removed or another investment grade bonding company acceptable to Lakewood Township issues a performance bond, in a form acceptable to legal counsel retained by Lakewood, with at a minimum, all the same terms and obligations as the bond it replaces; provided that, if any rating of any bonding company obligated under a bond issued per the terms of this permit drops below investment grade Lakewood may require the applicant for this permit and any entity using the tower and the owner of the tower and the owner of the land upon which the tower is built to procure a new bond with terms and obligations acceptable to legal counsel retained by Lakewood and with, at a minimum, the terms of the previous bond; and provided further, that the afore mentioned parties shall reimburse Lakewood for legal fees incurred for this purpose. Seconded by Bodine.
Eastman: I would like to look at other townships performance bonds.
Roningen: I don’t support the language here. Our intentions are good.
Halverson: The purpose of the bond is to make sure the town of Lakewood does not have to take it down.
Vote passes 3-2 with the intention that the final wording of the resolution will be reviewed at the next meeting.
Bodine: Motion to provide access to the Lakewood fired Dept., rescue service. Seconded by Eastman. Motion passes.
Halverson: Motion that before issuance of the building permit the applicant needs to provide all the information required in Section 4.01 D of the Lakewood Telecommunication Ordinance must be provided and in completeness to the zoning administrator for the review and approval. Second by Bodine. Motion passes. 5-0
Bodine: Motion that the applicant will provide the Zoning
Administrator with final specifications and location of the proposed tower.
Seconded by Roningen. Motion passes 5-0.
Motion to adjourn by Bodine. Seconded by Eastman at 11:10.
Meeting adjourned.
Shannon Ostazeski
Planning & Zoning Recorder