2023-12-04 ACK LTR TO COLLEEN CONIFER (PL-CCH-2023-000018, PL-USE-2023-000020)

Home

Though we have not seen the applicant's response, we know from living here that agriculture on the site will not be feasible after construction of the tower due to the absence of people living, working on and caring for the land. 4. Notification of Property Owners by the applicant missed several properties according to the Planning Dept. as compared to the Real Property Tax Office list. We still have no way of determining whether all property owners were notified though in our informal survey, we found that at least one owner did not receive the notice, and was given a copy by us. 5. Structural Engineer's Letter was initially rejected by the Planning Dept. Such a significant supporting document was in error describing a 100' tower and incorrect building dept codes. The corrected letter is not referenced,but we assume that the Planning Dept. has done their due diligence in pursuing this important document, and whether the tower is built to code 6. Lack of Confidence in company applying for permit. So many errors in the application lead to a lack of confidence in the company's competency to build and maintain the complex infrastructure of the proposed tower. We also found the company's lack of transparency disturbing in notifying residents of their application. No company letterhead was used nor a return address on the envelope. The packet obscured the origin of the letter to the degree that the signer Danette Martin did not disclose her connection or position with Renegade Towers though she provided her phone contact for questions. She was subsequently contacted about the error in the 2nd notice dated Nov. 10. 7. Inadequate Time for Residents to Respond We see that the company has been working on their application for several months before we were notified of what was being planned. The Cultural Resources Review and Field Inspection report was completed in June of