Minutes by Year and Month

2017 (click to show)
2016 (click to show)
2015 (click to show)
2014 (click to show)
2013 (click to show)
2012 (click to show)
2011 (click to show)
2010 (click to show)
2009 (click to show)
2008 (click to show)
2007 (click to show)
2006 (click to show)
2005 (click to show)
2004 (click to show)
2003 (click to show)
2002 (click to show)
2001 (click to show)
2000 (click to show)

MARCH 23, 2010

1. Call to Order and Roll Call: Chair Perry called the meeting to order at 2:00 p.m. Chair Perry and Commissioners Woodruff, Smolen, Maré and Russell answered the roll. Commissioner Power was excused. A quorum was present.
2. Citizen Comments and Concerns: None.
3. Commission Comments and Concerns: Commissioner Maré asked about the change to the UGB mentioned at the last meeting, and City Planner Lewis explained that the UGB outline had been changed to accommodate the desires of the Naples subdivision but the change had been conditioned on the subdivision succeeding. Since it did not, the UGB has been returned to its original outline.
4. Minutes: The Commission considered the minutes from the February 23, 2010 meeting. Commissioner Maré moved to accept the minutes as presented. Commissioner Woodruff seconded, and the motion carried unanimously on a voice vote.
5. Correspondence: None.
6. Public Hearing: Case File #1-CU-PC-10, AT & T Mobility Corporation, Application for Conditional Use.
  Chair Perry opened the public hearing, calling for abstentions, ex parte contact, bias and conflicts of interest. Commissioner Woodruff noted he knew the owner of the property, as did Chair Perry. They felt that this would not affect their ability to make unbiased decisions. Presenters: Breah Pike-Salas, John Silenzi, from Goodman Networks, Richard Busch, Atty Geri Roper from AT&T.
  Staff Report: City Planner Lewis reviewed his written report, noting that the applicant was requesting a conditional use permit to construct a 199-foot tower for wireless communications with associated ground space for equipment. There had been no written communications in regard to the application. Mr. Lewis mentioned that one question that the Commission would need to consider was whether a co-locator would have to undergo the conditional use process if they were not adding to the size of the tower.
  Applicant’s presentation: Breah Pike-Salas and John Silenzi from Goodman Networks, Attorney Richard Busch, and Geri Roper from AT&T were present to address the Commission. Commissioner Maré asked if it was their practice to allow collocation. The answer was affirmative, and the applicants pointed out that the submitted design included spaces for two collocators. This is also one reason for the additional height being requested. Secondly, regarding any interference concerns, the FCC issues licenses for the frequencies, and the company also has an RF engineer on staff. Commissioner Smolen noted that she would like to see any upgrade come back before the Commission for review, such as adding or switching out an antenna. Commissioner Russell wondered when the technology would become obsolete. Commissioner Smolen asked about previous denials and Attorney Busch address the issue, noting that AT&T had previously submitted 4 applications to cover the gap in service. They had since redesigned the proposals, to address concerns about coverage and proximity to residential areas. He also noted that replacement of antennas is considered ongoing maintenance, and unless it would be changing the configuration of the facility he would not anticipate that they would have to come back to the Commission. Discussion ensued regarding the setback of 13 feet. Mr. Lewis explained that there are no setbacks in the IP zone, the 13 feet is the center of the proposed tower facility. Commissioner Maré expressed concern about the school property, wondering if the school district had been made aware of this application. Mr. Lewis stated that they received notification of the hearing and a description of the application, and have not responded. Further discussion ensued, regarding the number of collocators that would be allowed (2) and whether microwave installations are planned (no).
  Chair Perry closed the Public Hearing and opened the Planning Commission meeting for deliberations. Commissioner Smolen proposed that the Commission consider tabling the proposal and asking the applicant to put a balloon up to 199 feet so the public could see the potential impact. She felt that the public had not been given adequate notice of the proposal, and moved to table the application for 90 days. The motion died for lack of a second. Commissioner Maré asked what kind of notice is typically given for an application. City Planner Lewis responded that notice is sent to surrounding property owners within 250' of the applicant, not less than 20 days prior to the hearing, and a notice is published in the paper not less than 10 days prior. City Recorder Quinlan added that the agendas for the public meetings are also posted on the website, and a link to the public hearing information is provided on those agendas. Commissioner Russell suggested that the Commission consider the benefits that the improved coverage will bring. Russell Dahl, who owns land in proximity to the application, stated that there is a need as far as the business community is concerned, and cited communication issues with his employees as one example. Commissioner Woodruff added to that by mentioning the difficulties that emergency services have with communication, such as dispatches or being able to transmit EKGs from the area. He also felt that the location in the Industrial Park was appropriate, and moved to approve the application as submitted with the proposed conditions. Mr. Lewis clarified that this included allowing up to two collocators as shown in the application drawing, with any future expansions coming back before the Commission for approval. Commissioner Russell seconded, and the motion carried, with Chair Perry and Commissioners Woodruff, Maré and Russell voting "Aye", Commissioner Smolen voting "Nay". The Commission also directed Mr. Lewis to prepare the findings for Chair Perry’s signature.
  A. Planning Report: Mr. Lewis reviewed his written report. A copy of the Code Enforcement Officer’s report was also provided to the Commission. A brief discussion ensued regarding some of the enforcement issues.
  B. Other Issues: Nothing further.
8. ADJOURNMENT: At 3:25 p.m., there being no further business to come before the Commission, the meeting was adjourned.
Respectfully submitted,
Reda A. Quinlan, City Recorder
APPROVED by the Planning Commission this 25th day of May, 2010.
SIGNED by the Chair this 25th day of May, 2010.
Dave Perry, Commission Chair