2020-09-21 Leeward Exh B (USE 20-000083)

Home

KAY: There, the two service providers right now are Verizon and T-Mobile. What was submitted with the application showing a comparison between the two was just for Verizon. So I didn't see a comparison of the T-Mobile existing versus proposed, but I just brought the Verizon one up as, as an example. YATES: So, the lady who testified, her concern is, was about what? I'm not understanding. KAY: I, 1- GREENE: May I please speak to that? I'm the testifier. YATES: Okay. GREENE: Do I have permission? CARR SMITH: Sure. I didn't know you were still there, Debra. GREENE: I'm here. CARR SMITH: Yeah, if you could briefly respond. GREENE: Yes. Could we please stop the screen share? KAY: Sure, hold on one moment. GREENE: So, what, what I'm saying is that, what is existing there right now is a cell tower, and the proposal, as I understand it, is not for a cell tower; it is for a steel lattice cell, cellular telecommunications facility. And there is a difference between the two. Cell towers are much more slender, and they are pretty much singular poles, whereas this facility takes up way much more space, 2,000 square feet of agricultural lands to be exact, and is designed, by design, the steel lattice structure is designed to continue to have multiple antennas and multiple microwave dishes added to it over time. So you guys will lose control over what happens here, if you approve this. And it is not true, what Mr. Myrick said, that they will have to come back to apply to upgrade to 5G, that is absolutely not true. CARR SMITH: Okay, thank you, Debra. GREENE: I hope that answers the question. CARR SMITH: Go ahead, Christian. KAY: Thank you, Madam Chair. I believe there might be a semantic issue going on here. The existing tower, as I understand it is a 326-foot tall steel lattice tower. So, the new tower is, from a structural standpoint, will be the same type of structure,just a shorter height. GREENE: But it will have a bigger footprint. Why the bigger footprint? 13 EXHIBIT B