My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
12/19/1996
CBCC
>
Meetings
>
1990's
>
1996
>
12/19/1996
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/23/2015 12:06:11 PM
Creation date
6/17/2015 9:19:14 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Type
Special Call Meeting
Document Type
Minutes
Meeting Date
12/19/1996
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
22
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
r <br />Lengthy discussion ensued on whether to take a land use <br />approach or do a wireless master plan. <br />Directors Keating and Boling indicated their preference for <br />the land use approach with smaller structures, but they pointed out <br />that we still would need to know what the industry needs to provide <br />service throughout the county. <br />Chairman Adams liked the idea of the master plan and <br />Commissioner Ginn reiterated that she felt we could recoup the <br />costs. <br />Chairman Adams opened the meeting to input from the industry <br />representatives. <br />Attorney Bruce Barkett f irst wanted to set the record straight <br />about his coming in at the last hour before the moratorium was <br />adopted with an application for a tower on the Ansin property. He <br />explained in detail that he talked with Director Boling about the <br />site long before a moratorium was considered. With regard to <br />drafting a master plan or an ordinance, he believed the industry <br />representatives are willing to help if the Board so desires. <br />Jim Randall, AT&T Wireless, questioned Ted Kreines of <br />California being considered as a consultant. He suggested that the <br />Board use somebody with an engineering background. With regard to <br />building shorter, 50 -ft. antenna sites, construction costs could <br />run as high as $500,000 a site and it would place a very big burden <br />on the industry to construct many shorter towers versus a few <br />taller towers. The cost of the sites and placement of the antennae <br />are very expensive. Basically, they would be requested to build <br />the infrastructure all at once instead of gradually filling in. <br />Mr. Randall felt that antennae should be allowed in all zoning <br />districts, and noted that residential areas will be one of the last <br />areas to infill. <br />Commissioner Eggert inquired about the heights of the infill <br />antennae, and Mr. Randall advised that they probably would be 120 <br />feet or less for AT&T but those tower heights could be decreased as <br />demand dictates. He noted that Mr. Kreines indicated that we can <br />all build out at 50 feet, but that would be impractical because it <br />would have to be done all at once which would put a big financial <br />burden on the carriers. Mr. Randall admitted it could be done, but <br />it would be at the public's expense. <br />16 <br />DECEMBER 19, 1996 <br />M ® M <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.