My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
7/25/2001
CBCC
>
Meetings
>
2000's
>
2001
>
7/25/2001
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
10/23/2015 9:11:31 PM
Creation date
9/25/2015 4:25:33 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Type
Public Workshop
Document Type
Migration
Meeting Date
07/25/2001
Archived Roll/Disk#
2279
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
15
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
14 <br /> „Y- <br /> _ _ 43, <br /> Commissioner Adamsuestioned the use of existing ower lines and why providers <br /> q gp Y <br /> could not use those poles . <br /> Mr . Lepore advised there are several issues involving safety and liability and he <br /> understood that Florida Power has an exclusive agreement with one provider . <br /> Director Boling added that there are also issues involving the height of the existing <br /> power poles and available sites for providers ' equipment . <br /> Chairman Ginn quoted several excerpts from a Kreines & Kreines , Inc . Newsletter <br /> regarding the use of " SPICE" boxes , and Mr . Lepore responded that light poles are generally <br /> located on the main streets in a community but there is not usually space available for <br /> equipment shelters . It is impractical to consider burying these shelters in Florida where the <br /> water table is so high and these shelters also vary in size . He anticipated that Indian River <br /> County would require 30 additional towers within the next 5 years . <br /> Chairman Ginn continued that the Board does not want tower location to be driven <br /> by the industry but wants coverage that is as aesthetically pleasing as possible , with <br /> particular attention being paid to the boundaries between residential , rural and agricultural <br /> areas . The Board also does not want environmental lands impacted by towers . <br /> Mr . Lepore commented that there is a lot of environmental land in the western portion <br /> of the County but service is still required in that area . There are choices between fewer, <br /> taller towers or more smaller towers closer together . <br /> Discussion then ensued regarding the stealth "tree " towers , with a general consensus <br /> that these towers are usually unsightly . <br /> Discussion then turned to concerns about the RF radiation issue and health . General <br /> consensus was reached to avoid the areas of schools ; to require bi - annual inspections ; to <br /> require certified data that compliance is being met ; and to steer development with land <br /> development regulations making it easier for the providers to comply with County <br /> regulations than to go outside the development criteria . <br /> PG 917 <br /> JULY 259 2001 - 10 - <br /> 1 ' <br /> 1 <br /> a . <br /> f <br /> iY <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.