05/24/2006 Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

.,• telecommunications facility. What the zoning, planning or city can do is confirm that the physical structure itself ineets the state building codes. Mr. O'Malley advised that 1151.05( fl requires an engineering report be submitted by the applicant which states that they are in compliance with FCC, and shall certify that the use of the facilities will not adversely affect or interfere with radio transmissions for public safety purposes. Mr. Lasko questioned if the applicants submitted an engineering report in accordance to 1151.05( fl. Mr. Graves advised that he did not know but would be glad to provide such a report. Mr. Lasko said that he preferred the proposal be tabled. Prior to the applicant returning the commission is to receive the opinion of the Law Department regarding the legality of the original instillation of the tower/pole and any other certified reports or documents that are required of the applicants under section 1151.05 and any other required documents. Mr. Graves suggested that the commission rather than table the proposal place conditions and or stipulations onto the approval of the project which is within the commissions rights and the proposal would not moved forward until the report is submitted to the Building Department and meet all the conditions. Mr. Lasko advised that he was not comfortable moving forward without a certified engineering report as required by code. J. Lasko moved to table the proposal for Cingular Wireless of 6881 Barton Road which consists of locating telecommunication antennas and site improvements pending the determination between the departments and applicant for clarification and documentation to allow the commission to proceed with a determinahon of a conditional accessory use. M. Yager seconded the motiono Roll call: J. Lasko, J. Cotner, G. Malone, M. Mahoney, M. Meredith, M. Yager - yes; R. Bohlmann - nom Motion passed. Mr. O'Malley reviewed that the matter of the turnaround is at the discretion of the Safety Director and not an issue that can be waived by the commission. Ms. Wenger advised that the safety director would be made aware of the evening's discussions and allowed the opportunity to submit further documentation one way or the other regarding his opinion. Mr. Graves asked as a point of clarification of the time frame as they had already been before the commission once. If it requires the applicants consent to extend the time for review then they are willing to consent to extend the time allowed. Mr. O'Malley did not believe there was a specified time constraint for reviewing under chapter 1151 as there is under chapter 1126 but the applicants' willingness to offer additional time was appreciated. Mr. Rymarczyk advised the applicant to provide everything required in accordance to chapter 1151.05. V. NEW BUSINESS: VI. CONIMUNICATIONS: The Planning Director discussed the proposed redevelopment plan for Crocker-Stearns and the potential for the Urban Design Center to provide design servicese The legislation would be considered by Council at their next meeting. VII. ADJOURNMENT: With no further business pending, Mr. Lasko adjourned the meeting at 9:45 p.m. Soll 00l0 ? Jra Chair Date: onna Rote, C erk of 6