January 10, 2023 Agenda - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes October 11, 2022 structures or alternative technology.That has not been produced to you all. It was not in their package,and it was not intheapplication, in terms of the collocation of the SBAMetropole. So, there has not been any documentationthat has been presented to this bodythat was submitted withinthe application itself. The separation distance from the other towers pursuant to Table1,shall be shown at the site plan or map, that was also not provided. He recognizesthat Mr. Johnson has his witnesses here so he is assuming that will be provided to you todayin testimony.In terms of a description of the suitability of the use of existing towers, other structures or alternative technology not requiring the use of towers or structures to provide the services to be provide through the use of a proposed new tower. He believes that is pertinent for this body,just because there is already an existingtower. It makes nosense tobuild something when you already haveapole that is going to allow the exact same coverage. AT&T would be allowed to go higher upon that metropole and get to the same amount of coverage without building a new pole. He thinks that their application lacks meeting that particular portion of the ordinances. A description ofa feasible alternative location, afuture tower,orantennaswithin the County based upon physical engineering and technological or geographical limitationsin the event the proposed tower is erected. In terms of presented the application to the Commission,again he says that AT&T should be a co-applicant. They should be able to present to the Commission exactlywhere future towers will be and kind of what the plan and build out is.That is something that was missing from the application. Again, he recognizesthat there are folks here, maybe they will be able to testify to thoseparticularplans. The next would be a statement of compliance with the Federal Communications Act as amended and the replicable rules promulgated bythe Communications Act.That was also not received as part of the application as well. One thing also for the the particular experts that are here to push this application through, to get the FAA certification, he noticed in the application, thatgenerally some of the coordinates were off. It was off by 150-feet. With being off by that much, they had to move it. He is assuming it was amended back on rd October 3to actually comply with the FAA. However, in terms of moving those particular coordinates, the applicant would still have to complywiththe State Historic Preservation Office and whether this is close to anything historical such as Mint Hill. Which heactuallybelieves is close by thereand so they would have to get clearancein terms of that as well. Again, some of the things he did want to submit,he recognize would be hearsay, so he will not put that forth to the Commission. However, we wish that the Commission would consider at least doing a third-partyreviewunder Chapter 10 just to make sure that this does actually meet the 27