Laserfiche WebLink
Mr. Beason added that their outdoor equipment shelter calls for a smaller footprint and as it does <br />not need AC equipment it will be less noisy. <br />Mr. Beason then requested proposed Condition 6 regarding consultation with the US Fish and <br />Wildlife be deleted as he felt the condition requiring the applicant to comply with all applicable <br />County, State, and Federal laws, rule, regulations and requirements, including Federal Aviation <br />Administration and Federal Communications Commission, was sufficient to address that <br />agency’s concern, noting that the Federal Communications Commission is the agency working <br />with US Fish and Wildlife. He added he has not seen this specific condition for a Section 7 <br />consultation in any of the previous applications. <br />Mr. Beason said Bureau Veritas, expert in the field and hired to do the environmental work, did <br />two radar surveys (at nesting and fledging stages), and they did not see a significant impact. He <br />added that Fish and Wildlife is seemingly taking an approach that all towers are a problem, and <br />in cases where there have been no birds flying within the range of a tower they still are <br />requesting a consultation, questioning the necessity of an additional consulting requirement. <br />Commissioner Iwashita said his understanding is that contrary to Bureau Veritas’s conclusion, <br />Fish and Wildlife Service does not concur with the actual data collected in November of 2008 <br />and May of 2008 and find that this project will have a significant impact, and, therefore, is <br />requesting a formal consultation under Section 7 of the ESA. He added that as a member of the <br />County Planning Commission he was not in a position to argue with the Fish and Wildlife <br />Service and felt this proposed Condition 6 should be retained. <br />Mr. Shaffer explained that they currently have about an 8- or 9- mile coverage gap between <br />Ookala and Honokaa and basically the radius of their cell sites on the Hamakua coast to the other <br />sites dictate that they are going to need two cell sites to cover this gap. He said there is another <br />cell tower two miles to the southeast of the proposed location but they are unable to make the <br />handoff because of the limited terrain, clarifying they would not be able to have continuous <br />service on the highway for public safety needs, etc. at that site. He said even a 300- or 400-foot <br />tower would not make the connection to Honokaa. <br />There was no one from the public wishing to testify on the application. <br />It was moved by Commissioner Iwashita and seconded by Commissioner Domingo that the <br />application be approved as recommended by the Planning Director, with the following added <br />Condition 6 and renumbering of the remaining conditions accordingly: “The applicant shall seek <br />a formal consultation under Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act (ESA) from the U.S. <br />Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) to define measures to minimize and <br />mitigate any adverse affects the telecommunication facility may have on endangered species in <br />the area. Consultation with the FWS shall be completed prior to the initiation of construction of <br />the telecommunication facility.” Commissioner Domingo commented that this is the most <br />simple application he has come across as it is not surrounded by nearby residents, there is a vast <br />area of open space, and although there was the letter by Ms. Oshiro he thought her concern of a <br />stealth design is addressed in the proposed conditions. Mr. Darrow agreed with Commissioner <br />Domingo that actual project site is located near the gulch which has poor soils and rough broken <br />land and the remainder of the property actually has pretty good soil and is used for pasture at this <br />3 <br /> <br />