McKinney council discusses proactive options to expand cell coverage citywide

City staff and council members discussed options to increase cellular coverage across McKinney on June 3, reviewing existing tower locations, city property that could host equipment and legal limits on using parkland for wireless facilities.

The discussion matters because the City of McKinney does not provide cellular service directly yet can influence where carriers place antennas by offering city property and streamlining permit review, which could affect coverage for residents who report poor in-home signal in parts of the city.

Michael Quint, director of development services for the City of McKinney, told the council the city has two primary roles in telecommunications: a regulatory role that reviews permits and special-use requests, and a property-owner role in which the city can lease space on its elevated storage tanks, parkland and other assets. "Telecommunication services are a private utility. They're not owned and operated by the city of McKinney," Quint said, noting the city only sees service improvements when carriers mount antennas on structures.

Quint said the city compiled a map of telecommunication structures using public sources including cellmapper.net and that cell structures in McKinney take many forms: traditional 3G/4G-style towers and lower 20–30-foot small-cell nodes often placed in the public right of way. He said the unified development code the council adopted in November 2022 created categories (low-rise, high-rise and stealth) that made installation easier when structures meet height and zoning requirements.

Councilmembers said they want the city to be more proactive rather than reactive. One councilmember (unnamed) who introduced the item argued the city could follow its broadband outreach model and invite the private marketplace to partner, offering a list of prioritized public sites and issuing requests for qualifications or proposals. The councilmember said McKinney should concentrate siting on areas with known gaps such as parts of Central McKinney and Craig Ranch.

Members noted tradeoffs between traditional towers, which provide broader in-home range, and 5G small-cell deployments that require denser placement. Quint said the near-term landscape will likely remain a mixture of both technologies and that carrier strategy and market decisions will determine whether more small-cell nodes are built.

Council discussion also flagged legal constraints on siting equipment on parkland. Quint said if the city purchased parkland with park-dedicated funds it must analyze alternatives and minimize negative impacts before placing infrastructure there; park property acquired with grant funds may impose additional restrictions requiring case-by-case review.

Councilmembers raised the prospect that upcoming services such as T-Mobile’s announced use of Starlink could alter demand for physical towers, but they said the effect is uncertain. Quint told the council the city currently hosts cell equipment on many of its elevated storage tanks—seven of nine tanks have equipment—and receives lease fees for those sites.

No formal motion or vote was taken. Councilmembers asked staff to return with options, including a more proactive program to identify and market city-owned sites and potential draft language for any request for proposals or qualifications.

Details and clarifications recorded in the meeting: - City population and area (as cited by staff): about 225,000 residents across roughly 70 square miles. - Map source for existing cell structures: cellmapper.net (staff-cited). - Types of facilities discussed: traditional macro towers (3G/4G), small-cell nodes (~20–30 feet) frequently sited in rights-of-way, and antennas mounted on elevated storage tanks (ESTs). - Unified Development Code adoption: November 2022; created low-rise, high-rise and stealth communication categories. - City-owned ESTs: seven of nine currently host carrier equipment (staff statement). - Lease practice: the city leases space on ESTs and some parkland for carrier equipment for a fee (staff statement). - Parkland constraints: installations on park property purchased with park funds require an alternatives/minimization analysis; grant-funded parkland may have additional limits (staff statement).

Speakers quoted or listed in this article are those identified in the meeting record. No formal policy or ordinance change was adopted at the June 3 work session.