Laserfiche WebLink
locators) and provide more flexibility in location and height of antennas for the co-locators. Due <br />to the nature of the AEC Energy Park to the north and the Smart Growth Grant site to the west <br />staff recommended that the applicant construct a monopole telecommunication tower for <br />aesthetic purposes. <br /> <br />Citizen Input <br /> <br />Chairperson Nixt inquired if they were indicating that there would be four co-locators in addition <br />to Verizon. <br /> <br />Jason Hall, American Tower, replied that there would be a total of four carriers. He stated that <br />the problem with the monopole tower is with the capacity load, which is the reason they are <br />proposing to construct a lattice tower. <br /> <br />Commissioner Kociscak inquired if they are less likely to have co-locators on a mono pole. <br /> <br />Mr. Hall replied that there will probably be only three carriers on a monopole in comparison to <br />four on a lattice tower because there is more range for co-location on a lattice tower. <br /> <br />Chairperson Nixt inquired as to what the cost difference was between the monopole and the <br />lattice tower. <br /> <br />Mr. Hall replied that the cost is about the same, but the lattice's up front cost is slightly higher. <br /> <br />Motion by Commissioner Wivoda, seconded by Commissioner Kociscak, to close the public <br />hearing. <br /> <br />Motion Carried. Voting Yes: Chairperson Nixt, Commissioners Wivoda, Kociscak, Griffiths, <br />and Reeve. Voting No: None. Absent: Commissioner Johnson. <br /> <br />The public hearing closed at 7:37 p.m. <br /> <br />Commission Business <br /> <br />Chairperson Nixt called the regular meeting of the Planning Commission back to order at 7:37 <br />p.m. <br /> <br />Commissioner Wivoda inquired as to the height of the similar tower that is located on Armstrong <br />Boulevard. <br /> <br />Mr. Hall replied that they did consider co-locating on the tower that is located along Armstrong <br />Boulevard becaUse the tower is 180 feet, but there are already three carriers on that tower and the <br />height that they would be able to co-locate on would be 120 feet, which is not adequate. <br /> <br />Planning Commission/December 5, 2000 <br /> Page 3 of 17 <br /> <br /> <br />