PL PACKET 08152000 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

123 Page 10 reduce the burden on the applicant of one or more of these criteria if it determines that the goals of this t ordinance are better served thereby: a. Height of the proposed tower; b. . Proximity of the tower to residential structures and residential district boundaries; c. Nature of uses on adjacent and nearby properties; d. Surrounding topography; e. Surrounding tree coverage and foliage; f. Design of the tower,with particular reference to design characteristics that have the effect of reducing eliminating visual obtrusiveness; g. Proposed ingress and egress;and h. Availability of suitable existing towers, other structures,or alternative technologies not requiring the use of towers or structures,as discussed in Section VII.B.3 of this ordinance. 3. Availability of Suitable Existing Towers,Other Structures, or Alternative Technology. New towers shall be approved only when other preferable alternatives are not available. No new tower shall be permitted unless the applicant demonstrates to the reasonable satisfaction of the Commission or Board that no existing tower, structure or alternative technology is available to fill the communication requirements. An applicant shall submit information requested by the Planning and Zoning Commission or Board,of Zoning Appeals related to the availability of suitable existing towers other structures or alternative technology. Evidence submitted to demonstrate that no existing tower, structure or alternative technology can accommodate the applicant's proposed antenna may consist of any of the following: a. No existing towers or structures are located within the specific geographic limits,which met applicants engineering requirements. b. Existing towers or structures do not have sufficient height to meet applicant's engineering requirements, and have insufficient structural strength to support applicant's proposed antenna and related equipment. c. The applicant's proposed antenna would cause frequency interference with the antenna on the existing towers or structures,or the antenna on the existing towers or structures would cause interference with the applicant's proposed antenna. d. The fee,costs,or contractual provisions required by the owner in order to share an existing tower or structure or to adapt an existing tower or structure for sharing are unreasonable. Costs exceeding new tower development are presumed to be unreasonable. e. The applicant demonstrates that there are other limiting factors that render existing towers and structures unsuitable. f. The applicant demonstrates that an alternative technology that does not require the use of towers or structures,such as a cable microcell network using multiple.low-powered transmitters/receivers attached to a wireline system, is unsuitable. Costs of alternative technology that exceed new tower or antenna development shall not be presumed to render the technology unsuitable. g. The applicant provides documentation that other tower owners were contacted in writing in pursuit of the provisions(of Section VII.B.3 a through g)above.