My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
PL PACKET 09182001
StAnthony
>
Parks & Planning Commission
>
Planning Commission Packets
>
2001
>
PL PACKET 09182001
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
12/30/2015 7:39:20 PM
Creation date
12/30/2015 7:39:09 PM
Metadata
Fields
SP Box #
27
SP Folder Name
PL PACKETS 2000-2004
SP Name
PL PACKET 09182001
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
108
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
related to the availability of suitable existing towers, other structures or <br /> alternative technology. Evidence submitted to demonstrate that no existing <br /> tower, structure or alternative technology can accommodate the applicant's <br /> proposed antenna may consist of any of the following: <br /> a. No existing towers or structures are located within the geographic area which <br /> meet applicant's engineering requirements. <br /> b. Existing towers or structures are not of sufficient height to meet applicant's <br /> engineering requirements. <br /> c. Existing towers or structures do not have sufficient structural strength to <br /> support applicant's proposed antenna and related equipment. <br /> d. The applicant's proposed antenna would cause electromagnetic interference <br /> with the antenna on the existing towers or structures, or the antenna on the <br /> existing towers or structures would cause interference with the applicant's <br /> proposed antenna. <br /> e. The fees, costs, or contractual provisions required by the owner in order to <br /> share an existing tower or structure or to adapt an existing tower or structure <br /> for sharing are unreasonable. Costs exceeding new tower development are <br /> presumed to be unreasonable. <br /> f. The applicant demonstrates that there are other limiting factors that render <br /> existing towers and structures unsuitable. <br /> g. The applicant demonstrates that an alternative technology that does not <br /> • require the use of towers or structures, such as a cable microcell network <br /> using multiple low-powered transmitters/receivers attached to a wireline <br /> system, is unsuitable. Costs of alternative technology that exceed new tower <br /> or antenna development shall not be presumed to render the technology <br /> unsuitable. <br /> (4) Separation. The following separation requirements shall apply to all towers and <br /> antennas for which a conditional use permit is required; provided, however,that <br /> the city council, after considering the recommendations of City staff, may reduce <br /> the standard separation requirements if the goals of this ordinance would be <br /> better served thereby. <br /> [insert provisions] <br /> (5) Security fencing. Towers shall be enclosed by security fencing not less than six <br /> feet in height and shall also be equipped with an appropriate anti-climbing <br /> device; provided however, that the city council, after considering the <br /> recommendations of city staff, may waive such requirements, as it deems <br /> appropriate. <br /> 7 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.