My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
09/09/1997 Minutes
Document-Host
>
City North Olmsted
>
Boards and Commissions
>
1997
>
1997 Planning Commission
>
09/09/1997 Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/4/2019 12:33:38 PM
Creation date
1/29/2019 9:35:18 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
N Olmsted Boards & Commissions
Year
1997
Board Name
Planning Commission
Document Name
Minutes
Date
9/9/1997
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
8
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).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
<br />six miles. Mr. Tallon could not u.nderstand how a 150 foot tower would be necessary as opposed to 120 <br />feet since they would be above the tree lines and the curvature of the earth. Ms. Delvalle stated that the <br />RF propagation showed that the saturation of the signal is not great enough to be received within the <br />buildings in the Great Northern area, including the two high rise apartment build.ings. Mr. Tallon still <br />doubted that 150 feet would be necessary when the buildings were less than 5,000 feet away. Mr. <br />Diaconu, also representing Nextel, advised that the height was necessary to allow this tower to <br />communicate with the other towers around it. He maintained that all their towers are between 150 to <br />180 feet high and if the commission allowed only a 100 foot tower, he was not sure if they would install <br />it. Mr. Tallon was still not convinced. Mr. Diaconu clarified that if a person were talking on the phone <br />and moving from one range to the ?other, tlie signal would drop. Mr. Herbster questioned how fast a <br />person have to go in the mall and Mr. Diaconu responded that the speed did not matter. Mr. Brennan <br />asked if the antenna could not be put on a 19 story apartment building. Mr. Kruchten, who represented <br />Nextel and just came into the room, stated that since the residents had been concerned about the height, <br />they tested it at 130 feet and it did not work. The RF Engineers worked it out on the computer and with <br />the antenna in the air, the system has to maintain a certain level while it travels from tower to tower. If <br />that level get below a certain nu.mber, the conversation will drop, so 150 feet is the absolute miuimum <br />height for the tower to work. Mr. Tallon questioned how this system differed from other systems. Mr. <br />Kruchten advised that each system is unique based on the technology that they are using, for example <br />the AT&T facility at Clague Park is a P.C.S. system and operates 1.8 gigahertz, and they are at about <br />820 to 860. The propagation of the energy that AT&T transmits out is completely different than what <br />Nextel transmits, the FCC tells them where they have to trausmit and assigns a power level to them. <br />Their levels are lower than those of radios, television, etc. By having more than one tower covering the <br />whole area they re-use the frequencies thus add.ing capacity to the system. He clarified that if they had <br />40 frequencies and one tower, they could have 40 conversations going at one time, if they had 10 <br />towers, they could reuse those frequencies over again. He maintained that they did try to locate on the <br />apartment buildings, but they were in the wrong location and were too high; they have to be within a <br />half of mile of the recreation center property. If this location is not approved, they would have to find a <br />commercial parcel within this half mile area, but the recreation center was the bu11's eye and the only <br />city properiy that worked. They tried the eity first so that the community would get the rent. The city <br />had requested that it be placed in the back, but the residents at the community meeting wanted it moved <br />forward, and they can locate the tower anywhere on this property. The revised drawings show the new <br />location. He presented a drawing of the antenna which are 1 by 4 panels placed on the top of the tower. <br />They are in negotiations with the city who is requ.iring that they provide room for three other carriers. <br />Mr. Brennan questioned if other carriers might not have a problem locating on this pole since they <br />could not locate on the AT&T pole. Mr. Kruchten stated that the next camers to come are using a <br />P.C.S. system who have frequencies that do not interfere with them, so the standard 20 foot separation <br />would not be warranted. They have located with AT&T with less than 5 foot separation elsewhere <br />because they are at Lwo different frequency ranges. Mr. Brennan was concerned that even though the <br />FCC required cities to make provisions for tower locations, carriers were trying to put towers all over, <br />without trying to combine them. Mr. Krutchen stated that they do try to combine them, one proposal <br />was for them to bu.ild it at 200 feet but that would require lighting it under FAA rules; another was to <br />build it as high as possible based. on the FAA regulations so as many carriers as possible could use it. <br />Nextel is vvilliug to do whatever the city wants to allow for the co-locations. They could not use the <br />Clague tower because the location would not work, not because they had to locate their antenna 20 feet <br />away from AT&T's. They presented a diagram outlining where the towers were located in reference to <br />this one. It was clarified that the Westlake tower was at the substation at Clague Road, but it was not <br />shown on the map. The color chart showed the areas that were best in green, blue was next best, and <br />red would not work. Chairman Tallon asked if they had considered using bark like material to cover the <br />4
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.