Report to the City Council
June 18, 2001
Request:
Code Amendment - Wireless Telecommunication Facilities
PROPOSAL
The proposed ordinance would amend the City Code to
establish regulations for wireless telecommunication facilities in the
public Rights-of-Way and would alter some regulations for wireless
telecommunication facilities outside the public Rights-of-Way. The
amendments are proposed:
- To comply with state Right-of-Way management laws;
- To improve wireless services within the City;
- To protect the health, safety, and welfare of residents and guests
within the City;
- To address a City Council recommendation to encourage a "microcell"
approach to regulating wireless facilities;
- To fill gaps in the existing standards; and,
- To put policies typically enforced through condition of approval
into the Code.
HISTORY
In 1996 the City of Bloomington adopted performance standards for
towers and antennas. The focus of the standards was on encouraging
colocation of wireless antennas on existing buildings or towers to avoid
the visual impacts of a proliferation of towers. Those standards did not
allow towers or antennas in the public Rights-of-Way. At that time,
wireless providers were pursuing 100 to 150 foot antenna towers in
Bloomington, heights that made use of the Rights-of-Way unfeasible. It was
clear, however that increased wireless traffic and technological
innovation would eventually yield antenna height requirements that were
low enough and equipment sizes that were small enough to make colocation
with existing poles in the Rights-of-Way feasible. After five years, that
time has arrived.
In response, a staff work group with Planning, Public
Works, and Legal representatives has met several times to propose
standards that would regulate the use of the Rights-of-Way for wireless
purposes. Industry input was gathered through three general meetings as
well as several individual meetings and significant written
correspondence. While staff and industry representatives continue to
disagree on aspects of the proposal, all would agree that the dialog was
beneficial.
ANALYSIS
The following analysis discusses and provides background information on several of the proposed regulations in the ordinance.
Fees
Fees are recommended by the Public Works Department based
on an analysis of the costs to process various Right-of-Way permit
applications.
Pole Attachments
Because of their size and the fact that they do not have associated
ground mounted equipment and do not result in an increase in pole height,
staff views the impacts of small pole attachments as minimal. Staff
considers the Right-of-Way to be an appropriate spot for pole attachments
given the abundance of poles in the Right-of-Way and the minimal impacts
presented by pole attachments. Over the long term and as technology
advances, staff anticipates that additional providers will be able to
shift towards this approach to providing wireless services.
Pole Extensions with Ground Equipment
Given the encumbrance that pole extensions with ground equipment place
on already crowded public rights of way and public utility easements,
staff feels that the Right-of-Way is not generally an acceptable location
for such facilities. These types of wireless facilities are better suited
for private property locations, especially on the roofs of existing
buildings or colocated on existing structures. Still, staff recognizes
that there may be areas of the City in which it is difficult to provide
wireless services from private property due to topography, land use, and
the lack of multi-story buildings in the vicinity. In the interest of
encouraging wireless services in these areas, staff feels that pole
extensions with ground equipment could be allowed in limited cases as long
as the size of ground equipment and the height of the pole extension is
controlled.
Pole Extension Height Limits
Staff feels the maximum height an existing pole should be extended is
15 feet. This recommendation comes after visiting and photographing
several existing sites in Eden Prairie to gain a feel for different levels
of pole extensions. The sites visited ranged from 10 to 15 feet above the
existing pole. While a 10 to 15 foot extension does present visual impacts
and proved to be controversial in Eden Prairie in one case, staff feels
after visiting several existing sites that a 15 foot extension could be
accomplished without significantly detracting from the character of a
residential neighborhood.
Providers have requested that the height limit for pole extensions be
increased. When asked why 10 to 15 foot extensions work in Eden Prairie
but would not Bloomington, the providers referenced tree cover. Staff does
not feel that the level of tree cover is substantially different in
Bloomington than it is in Eden Prairie. Both cities have areas of
significant tree cover and areas of minimal tree cover. Even in areas with
significant tree cover, there are often areas with less tree cover in
close proximity, allowing a pole extension to be moved slightly when sited
to avoid significant tree cover.
Ground Equipment Size Limitations
In proposing ground equipment size limitations, staff took into
consideration safety factors (visibility over equipment when pulling out
of a driveway, for example), encumbrance upon the Right-of-Way, visual
impacts, and property owner expectations. Public Works staff had developed
a good feel for ground equipment sizes having dealt with non wireless
equipment in the Right-of-Way over the years. Staff also visited and
photographed several wireless installations in the Right-of-Way in Eden
Prairie to get a feel for what the providers were using in other
areas.
Equipment adjacent to residential uses would be limited to three feet
in height and 27 cubic feet in size (for example, 3' by 3' by 3').
Equipment adjacent to non-residential uses would be limited to 5 feet in
height and 81 cubic feet in size (for example, a little over 5' by 4' by
4'). This two-tiered approach comes in recognition that residential
property owners are likely to have different expectations regarding what
might be placed in the Right-of-Way in front of their homes than would
non-residential property owners.
Providers with ground equipment greater in size (some providers are
still using 12 foot by 20 foot prefabricated buildings to house their
equipment) who desire to use the Right-of-Way to serve an otherwise
difficult to serve area could lease space for their equipment outside the
public Right-of-Way subject to Code limitations.
Some providers have criticized the ground area requirements as too
restrictive and have pointed out that their current standard equipment
would not meet the requirements, forcing them to lease space outside the
Right-of-Way for ground equipment. Staff thought it was important not to
develop a standard around a particular provider's desired dimensions (the
cart before the horse), but rather to concentrate on what was and was not
appropriate in the Right-of-Way. Visiting existing sites in Eden Prairie
simply reinforced for staff that some of the equipment desired is too
large and presents impacts too great for the Right-of-Way. This scale of
equipment should be placed nearby on private property where the impacts
can be better mitigated and where there will be no encumbrance on
Right-of-Way that is in high demand for a variety of uses. In visiting
sites in Eden Prairie, staff did note that the equipment of at least one
provider (Qwest) already falls within the recommended thresholds, although
Qwest desires to use larger equipment in Bloomington than they have in
Eden Prairie (see attached letter). It should be noted that only a few
years ago, equipment sizes were no where near the thresholds proposed.
Over time equipment sizes have come down, and staff anticipates that trend
to continue.
Height Limitations Outside the Right-of-Way
The Code currently limits the height of towers outside the Right-of-Way
at 150 feet in industrial areas and at 100 feet in non-industrial areas.
Multi-user towers are allowed a 20 foot height bonus. There are also
height restrictions based on proximity to residential property.
During the review of plans for a 115 foot tower proposed at Jefferson
High School in August of 2000, the Council requested that staff reevaluate
the height limitations for towers with an eye toward encouraging more of a
microcell approach for the deployment of wireless services in Bloomington.
In response to this Council request, staff has included language in the
proposed ordinance that would reduce the height limit in industrial areas
from 150 to 100 feet and in non-industrial areas from 100 to 75 feet. It
should be noted that the 20 foot height bonus for multi-user towers would
be retained, so that multi-user towers could extend up to 120 feet in
industrial areas and 95 feet in non-industrial areas.
This proposal has been unpopular with providers who want to retain as
much height flexibility as possible. From a staff perspective this
amendment would have both pros and cons. The obvious benefit would be the
reduced visual impact of new towers. However, reducing the height of
towers could lead to a higher number of towers than would otherwise be
needed. When a provider tries to address a weakness in their system by
adding a new site, as Sprint and VoiceStream were trying to do for the
France/Old Shakopee area at Jefferson High School, lower height caps may
force a provider to add two new sites rather than one in order to provide
the desired service. In other words, the lower height caps might yield
shorter towers, but more of them. A second concern is that the lower
height caps may result in poorer wireless service for the community.
Individual sites are very expensive. One taller site is much less
expensive than two shorter sites. In some cases, lowering height caps will
increase the cost of addressing system weaknesses, which could result in
less than optimal "fixes" or delays in addressing system weakness which
could mean poorer service for Bloomington residents.
In making the decision on whether or not to lower height caps, the
visual benefit of shorter towers must be weighed against the visual
impacts of more towers and the possible result of somewhat poorer service.
Given the mixture of pros and cons, staff cannot make a strong
recommendation. Staff does feel that the issue will benefit from
discussion even if the height caps are not changed. Some factors to take
into consideration include:
- Bloomington has reduced the tower height caps once before, from a
150 foot height cap for non-industrial property to a 100 foot height
cap.
- Bloomington already has a mature wireless system in place. New sites
are considered infill sites which typically require much less height
than a first phase site.
- Staff feels the proposed caps would be more restrictive than the
average metro city, but less restrictive than some cities, such as
Edina, which has a 75 foot height cap citywide.
- From a communications perspective, one asset Bloomington has that
most suburban communities do not is a large number of mid and high rise
buildings. Antennas can be roof mounted as an alternative to tower
mounting. In fact, the City's colocation requirements dictate that
antennas be colocated on existing structures when feasible. The presence
of taller buildings is particularly helpful to types of communications,
such as paging and two way radio, that have more locational flexibility
than cellular or PCS services. Mid and high rise buildings provide an
opportunity to mount antennas at heights above the caps for new
towers.
Roof Mounted Antennas
For the last few years, the City has required by policy and through
condition of approval that antennas colocated on a building be mounted on
the facade of the building or penthouse structure rather than sled or
ballast mounted on the roof. The intention is to reduce the visual impact
of the antennas. This section of the ordinance would add the requirement
into City Code rather than being done by condition of approval.
Recommendation
In Case 10000C-01, staff and the Planning Commission recommend approval
of the proposed ordinance to amend requirements in the City Code for
wireless telecommunication facilities.
For more information, contact:
Planning Division
PH: 952-563-8920, FAX: 952-563-8949
E-mail: planning@ci.bloomington.mn.us
Tower HOME
|
