My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
2011-01-06 TCORAL
PublicDocuments
>
Planning Department
>
Leeward/Windward Planning Commission
>
Minutes & Exhibits Transcripts
>
2003-2022 Exhibits Transcripts
>
2011
>
2011-01-06 TCORAL
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/13/2011 8:51:03 AM
Creation date
6/13/2011 8:51:02 AM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
6
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).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
KERN: And are you okay with those? <br />YOUNG: Yes. <br />KERN: Okay. Any other questions? I have a question. Can you explain again why you <br />couldn’t locate on that existing pole? <br />YOUNG: The existing pole was designed for two carriers; and so currently the second carrier <br />that is referred to is Verizon. So they’ve occupied it, and it basically can’t take any more. So if <br />we were to go add on to that pole they’re at about 40 feet, we’d have to get 20, which doesn’t <br />accomplish anything. <br />KERN: Understood. Thank you very much. All right. You have anything else to add? <br />YOUNG: No. <br />KERN: All right, thank you very much. <br />YOUNG: Thank you. <br />KERN: And have a seat.And there are no people from the public signed up to testify, so at this <br />timeI’d entertain a motion. <br />DOMINGO: Mr. Chairman? <br />KERN: Commissioner Domingo. <br />DOMINGO: Regarding the applicant Coral Wireless LLC doing business as MOBI PCS, its Use <br />Permit No. 10-024, I move for its approval. <br />KERN: Is there a second? <br />ONO: Second. <br />KERN: Motion has been made and seconded. Discussion? Commissioner Woodward. <br />WOODWARD: Yeah, I’d like to just mention one thing. The last two applications that we’ve <br />dealt with have been to replace an existing tower with the tower of the same or less height in the <br />same spot, and there was no objection. It was really a business decision more than it was a land <br />use commission, or land use decision. It seems ridiculous that this is even being brought to us. <br />You know, there ought to be a provision, I would think -. And I’ll leave this at the Planning <br />Director’s discretion whether she has any say in the matter. But if we’re given a situation in the <br />future, which likely will happen, that somebody wants to just replace equipment of the same size <br />or smaller size on the same site, carte blanche. I don’t see why we’re wasting our time on it, to <br />be honest with you. <br />DARROW: If I could address that. <br />KERN: Yes, Mr. Darrow. <br />DARROW: Thank you, Mr. Woodward, for that comment. The first application was for a tower <br />that was actually not permitted originally; and that’s why we had to require them to come in to <br />get permitted. If that tower was permitted and they were going to build a tower the same height <br />5 <br />EXHIBIT C <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.