AG 2007 09 17 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

CURRENT LANGUAGE AA)The applicant will provide a written copy of an analysis, completed by a qualified individual or organization, to determine if the Tower or existing structure intended to support wireless facilities requires lighting under Federal Aviation Administration Regulation Part 77. This requirement shall be for any new tower or for an existing structure or building where the application increases the height of the structure or building. If this analysis determines, that the FAA must be contacted, then all filings with the FAA, all responses from the FAA and any related correspondence shall be provided in a timely manner. Section 7. Location of Wireless Telecommunications Facilities. A) Applicants for Wireless Telecommunications Facilities shall locate, site and erect said Wireless Telecommunications Facilities in accordance with the following priorities, one (1) being the highest priority and seven (7) being the lowest priority. 1) On existing Towers or other structures without increasing the height of the tower or structure; 2) On County-owned properties; 3) On other publicly owned property; 4) On properties in areas zoned for Heavy Industrial use; 5) On properties in areas zoned for Commercial use; 6) On properties in areas zoned for Agricultural use; 7) On properties in areas zoned for Residential use; and 8) On properties in areas zoned for Office/Institutional use. B) If the proposed site is not proposed for the highest priority listed above, then a detailed explanation must be provided as to why a site of a higher priority was not selected. The person seeking such an exception must satisfactorily demonstrate the reason or reasons why such a permit should be granted for the proposed site, and the hardship that would be incurred by the Applicant if the permit were not granted for the proposed site. C) An Applicant may not by-pass sites of higher priority by stating the site proposed is the only site leased or selected. An Application shall address co-location a5 an option. If such option is not proposed, the applicant must explain to the reasonable satisfaction of the County why co-location is Commercially or otherwise Impracticable. Agreements between providers limiting or prohibiting co-location shall not be a valid basis for any claim of Commercial Impracticability or hardship. D) Notwithstanding the above, the County may approve any site located within an area in the above list of priorities, provided that the County finds