My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
12/3/1996
CBCC
>
Meetings
>
1990's
>
1996
>
12/3/1996
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/23/2015 12:06:10 PM
Creation date
6/17/2015 9:12:08 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Type
Regular Meeting
Document Type
Minutes
Meeting Date
12/03/1996
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
81
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
M M <br />Note: The applicant, American Tower Systems (ATS), <br />provides tower infrastructure, but is not itself a <br />wireless communications company. ATS has <br />commitments and/or is negotiating with wireless <br />communication service companies to locate <br />facilities on the tower. For the proposed tower, <br />ATS has indicated that its clients include PrimeCo, <br />Sprint, General Wireless, and several paging and <br />radio users. Two users (PrimeCo and Sprint) are <br />committed to use the proposed tower. <br />The applicant has provided correspondence from AT&T <br />Wireless that the Berry Groves AT&T tower (approved <br />by the Board on September 3, 1996) is unable to <br />support ATS's clients. (see attachment #6). <br />Additional correspondence has been provided which <br />indicates that AT&T's Berry Groves Tower is not <br />structurally capable of supporting the number of <br />microwave antennae to be accommodated by the ATS <br />tower. Even though ATS is not a communications <br />provider, ATS has indicated that the tower space <br />needed by its clients is not currently available in <br />the north county. It is staff's position that, <br />pursuant to current LDR criteria, the applicant has <br />demonstrated a need for the proposed tower. The <br />applicant has submitted justification for the <br />proposed tower location (see attachment #6). <br />6. Towers shall be designed to accommodate multiple <br />users; <br />7. A condition of approval for any tower application <br />shall be that the tower shall be available for <br />other parties and interests. This shall be <br />acknowledged in a written agreement between the <br />applicant and the county, on a form acceptable to <br />the county, that will run with the land. <br />Note: The applicant is currently finalizing the <br />language of this agreement with the county <br />attorney's office. The agreement must be finalized <br />prior to release of the approved site plan. <br />Each of these 15 criteria has been addressed by the applicant, <br />subject to conditions referenced in the analysis. <br />16. Dedications and Improvements: The LDRs do not require any <br />dedications or improvements connected with the proposed <br />development of this site. <br />RECOMMENDATION: <br />Based on the analysis performed, staff recommends that the Board of <br />County Commissioners grant special exception use approval for the <br />requested tower with the following conditions: <br />1. That prior to site plan release, the applicant shall obtain <br />either a county "airport construction permit" or "airport <br />construction variance". <br />2. That prior to site plan release, the applicant shall provide <br />the following: <br />a. An executed agreement acceptable to the County Attorney <br />that acknowledges that the tower shall be available for <br />other parties and interests. <br />23 <br />DECEMBER 3, 1996 BOOK 9,F <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.