Laserfiche WebLink
LOCATION OF PROPOSED STATE TELECOMAINIMCATIONS TOWER <br />The Board reviewed a Memorandum of March 5, 1997: <br />TO: James E. Chandler <br />County Administrator <br />D IS ON HEAD CONCURRENCE: <br />L <br />obert . Keating-, AICP <br />Community Develop nt Di ctor <br />��l <br />FROM: Stan Boling, AICP <br />Planning Director <br />DATE: March 5, 1997 <br />SUBJECT: Request for Board Concurrence on the Location of a <br />Proposed State Telecommunications Tower <br />It is requested that the data herein presented be given formal <br />consideration by the Board of County Commissioners at_ -its regular <br />meeting of March 11, 1997. <br />BACKGROUND: <br />Several months ago, county staff became aware that the state was <br />considering the placement of a ±350' tall, multi-user <br />communications tower within the I-95/CR 512 interchange right-of- <br />way. Such a tower, constructed by the state on state lands, is not <br />subject to either the county's tower moratorium or the county's <br />tower regulations. Even so, staff and Commissioner Fran Adams <br />contacted the state, expressing county concerns about the potential <br />negative aesthetic impacts of such a proposal. On January 8, 1997, <br />county staff and Commissioner Adams met with state (FDOT) staff and <br />state consultants to get more information and discuss alternatives. <br />At that meeting, the state described the need for multiple state <br />agencies to have communications facilities along the I-95 corridor <br />in Indian River County at CR 512 (350' tower) and at SR 60 (140' <br />tower). At the meeting, county staff and state staff agreed to <br />work together to find alternative tower sites that would have fewer <br />negative impacts (see attachment #1). Since that time, staff and <br />Commissioner Adams have worked with FDOT, Department of Management <br />Services, and DEP staff to work-out alternative sites that better <br />address county concerns and meet the state's needs. <br />County staff now requests that the Board of County Commissioners <br />concur with an arrangement to "re -locate" the I-95/CR 512 tower to <br />a state-owned site north of CR 512 and east of 102nd Terrace (see <br />attachment #2). The Department of Management Services staff would <br />like to have the Board's concurrence so that they can move ahead <br />with the project without objection from the county. Staff is still <br />working with the state to find an alternative arrangement for the <br />I-95/SR 60 interchange 140' tower. <br />ANALYSIS: <br />During the last few weeks, county staff and Commissioner Adams have <br />worked with Department of Management Services and DEP staff to re- <br />locate" the proposed 350' north county tower to property located <br />37 <br />March 11, 1997 buoP, F U <br />