Laserfiche WebLink
everyone in the neighborhood is concerned because it is not a single family home and they are <br />concerned over the long term implications. <br /> <br />Motion by Commissioner Kociscak to adopt Findings of Fact #10, #12, and #16 in the negative <br />to the applicant. There was no second to the motion. <br /> <br />Motion failed. <br /> <br />Motion by Commissioner Dempsey, seconded by Commissioner Reeve, to return the issue to <br />staff to work with the applicant on drafting a conditional use permit versus an interim use permit, <br />which would include inspection of the tunnel, and having staff work with the applicant on a <br />landscaping plan. <br /> <br />Further Discussion: Chairperson Nixt stated that staff would be moving forward with a <br />conditional use permit and would need authorization from the applicant to waive the 60 day <br />decision rule. Ms. Smith replied that she would be willing to waive the 60 day decision rule. <br /> <br />Motion Carried. Voting Yes: Chairperson Nixt, Commissioners Dempsey, Reeve, Griffiths, and <br />Wivoda. Voting No: Commissioner Kociscak. <br /> <br />Case #4: <br /> <br />Review Cell Tower Ordinance Report from McCombs, Frank, Roos, and <br />Associates <br /> <br />Meg McMonigal, McCombs, Frank, Roos, and Associates addressed the following areas of <br />discussion on the regulation of Communication Towers. One issue pertained to height of towers <br />versus coverage. She explained that she has checked with Radio Frequency (RF) Engineers to <br />gain some insight into the height versus coverage issues related to towers. It appears there is no <br />simple mathematical equation of height related to distance covered, however they have gained <br />the following information: height needed depends on topography, vegetation, capability of <br />power; co-location requires 10-15 feet of separation; and the suggested tower height is 125-150 <br />feet. Ms. McMonigal also reviewed suggestions for towers in residential areas. <br /> <br />Chairperson Nixt inquired as to what height tower would be required to give reasonable <br />coverage. <br /> <br />Commissioner Reeve replied that a 75 foot tower could work in certain areas, but there is a lot of <br />different equipment and different power. He also noted that a 10 acre parcel would not be <br />needed for a 75 foot tower. <br /> <br />Ms. McMonigal stated that the problem with a 75 foot tower is that co-location becomes <br />difficult. <br /> <br />Commissioner Reeve noted that if a tower is below the tree level the signal will get lost. <br /> <br />Planning Commission/September 5, 2000 <br /> Page 10 of 13 <br /> <br /> <br />