2009-07-01 TANTHEM - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Mamalahoa Highway; and the location of the property is outlined in black. It’s the larger property outlined in black on the slide; and the proposed location of the telecommunication tower is shown by a red dot here close to the highway. As I mentioned it’s about 1300 feet mauka of the highway. The State Land Use designation as you know is Agricultural and the town of Paauilo is designated Urban by the State Land Use Commission. This is an aerial photograph of the site and, again, the proposed tower site is outlined in red. It’s just on the Hilo side of Paauilo Mill Road. The applicant has submitted an elevation showing what the tower would look like once it’s constructed from ground view. And originally the Department sent a recommendation to the Commission for denial. But since that time the Department has met with the applicant again and clarified the signal coverage for the proposed tower as well as the signal coverage for the tower that the Commission approved in June that Cellco had applied for, which is located at about two miles on the Honokaa side of the proposed request. So now we’ve changed our recommendation to an approval. WOODWARD: Well, then that’s special. COTTLE: Yes. You should also have received three letters this morning from Alii Wireless Specialists and, I’m sorry, two letters, and AT&T. Are there any questions? WOODWARD: All right. Any questions for staff? DOMINGO: Mr. Chairman? WOODWARD: Yes, Commissioner Domingo. DOMINGO: I see the signal aspect has been settled by meeting with the applicant. And one of the reasons for the recommendation for denial was that they had not explored the possibility of co-location, another reason is that the land was also identified as Prime Agricultural land. And having settled the issue about the signal, then my question is what about the other issues given that prompted the denial action? COTTLE: Are you referring to the -? DOMINGO: You folks are withdrawing all those comments in total or you’re just saying that you approve it because you’ve met with the applicant and determined that everything is settled by your meeting? But, you know, I’m just wondering, the other reasons for denial as specified in the recommendation, you know, are they still valid, or would that need to be put aside? COTTLE: Well, the primary reason for the denial originally was the co-location issue. Since that time Anthem has brought to our attention that they provided information that they provide telecommunication infrastructure. They build the towers, and they are not actually a wireless service provider, which is why they aren’t going to co-locate, because they aren’t a service provider, they just provide towers. So that issue was resolved. The signal issue was 2 EXHIBIT B