Item 6 - PH/Cell Towers - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

'Jerome Lidz - 5 - ~ Abgust 23, 2004 A,, ,TTVV$ Comments.. ~ The phrase "obviates the need for comPliance "is unnecessarily ambiguous, we assume the intent of this phrase is to enab/e a wireless carrier to reduce the setback where existing or proposed screening or Ca mou#aging mitigate the visual impact of the proposed wireless facility to a degree equal to or better than i£ the proposed facility C°mpiied with the standard setback requirement. We request and recommend that the City modi~ the language to make this intent c/ear.. . (~le) The city may grant a variance to the 75 foot height limitation in the R-1 zone to a maximum of 100 feet providing the. applicant demonstrates that a transmission tower taller than 75 feet will d.i~'ectly eliminate the need for 1 or more additional transmission towers in an R-1 zone. /~ TTWS Comment: See comment above re~TarM'ngproposednew section (7)(ct)(2). (ef~ If the proposed transmission tower or ancillary facility requires site review or a conditional use permit, the request for variance shall be considered as part of the site review or conditional use permit process. If the proposed transmission tower or ancillary facility is an outright permitted use, the request for a variance shall be processed pursuant to Type II application procedures beginning at EC 9.7200 General Overview of Type II Application Procedures except that the decision shall be based on the criteria in this section. /~ TTWS Comments: IVO changespropo~e~,, no comments. ('11) Fees. Notwithstanding any other provision of this code, the city manager · [m~)'] sha//require, as part of application fees for building or land use 'permits for telecommunication facilities, an amount sufficient to recover all of the city's costs in retaining consultants to verify statements made in conjunction with the permit application, to the extent that verification requires telecommunications expertise, A TTWS Comments: Ali fees charged should be reasonable and retTect Ho more than the actual cost incurred by the City in reviewing a wireless carrier's application. Consequently, rather than requi#ng the City Manager to collect fees "suft~cient to cover a/I ofthe City's costs "at the poJ'nt the wireless applicant submits an application, we request and recommend that the CiO/modify this section Y:\WP~ATT~uGEN~COM M ENT LTR 082304.DOC IV-4 9