Loading...
§ 156.017 LOCATION.
   (A)   Applicants for a special use or zoning compliance permit for wireless telecommunications facilities are encouraged to locate, site, and erect such facilities in accordance with the following priorities, division (A)(1) below being the highest priority and division (A)(4) being the lowest priority:
      (1)   On existing structures without increasing the height of the tower or structure;
      (2)   On county-owned properties or facilities;
      (3)   On properties zoned commercial (H-B or C-S) or industrial (I-1, I-2, I-3, or I-4); and
      (4)   On properties zoned Residential-Agricultural (R-A).
   (B)   (1)   If the proposed site is not the highest priority listed above, then a detailed explanation must be provided as to why such a site was not selected.
       (2)   The person seeking such an exception must satisfactorily demonstrate the reason or reasons why such a permit should be granted for the proposed site, and the hardship that would be incurred by the applicant if the permit were not granted for the proposed site.
   (C)   An application shall address co-location as the preference of the county. If such option is not proposed, the applicant must explain to the reasonable satisfaction of the county why co-location is commercially or otherwise impracticable.
   (D)   Notwithstanding the above, the county may approve any site located within an area in the above list of priorities, provided that the county finds that the proposed site is in the best interest of the health, safety and welfare of the county and its inhabitants, and will not have a deleterious effect on the nature and character of the community and neighborhood, or the site is a public necessity.
   (E)   (1)   The applicant shall submit a written report demonstrating the applicant’s review of the above locations in order of priority, demonstrating the technological reason for the site selection.
      (2)   If appropriate, based on selecting a site of lower priority, a detailed written explanation as to why sites of a higher priority were not selected shall be included with the application.
   (F)   Notwithstanding that a potential site may be situated in an area of highest priority or highest available priority, the county may disapprove an application for any of the following reasons:
      (1)   Conflict with safety and safety-related codes and requirements;
      (2)   Conflict with the historic nature or character of a neighborhood or historical district;
      (3)   The use or construction of wireless telecommunications facilities that are contrary to an already stated purpose of a specific zoning or land use designation;
      (4)   The placement and location of wireless telecommunications facilities that would create an unacceptable risk, or the reasonable probability of such, to residents, the public, employees, and agents of the county, or employees of the service provider or other service providers; and/or
      (5)   Conflicts with the provisions of this chapter.
(1996 Code, § 156.12) (Ord. passed 10-7-2002; Ord. passed 12-3-2007)
§ 156.018 SHARED USE.
   (A)   (1)   Locating on existing towers or other structures without increasing the height, as opposed to the construction of a new tower, shall always be preferred by the county.
      (2)   The applicant shall submit a comprehensive report inventorying all existing towers and all other suitable structures within four miles of the location of any proposed new tower, unless the applicant can show that some other distance is more reasonable, and can demonstrate conclusively why an existing tower or other suitable structure cannot be used.
   (B)   In order to permit its use by an applicant, the applicant intending to locate on an existing tower or other suitable structure shall be required to document the intent of its existing owner.
    (C)   Such shared use shall consist only of the minimum antenna array technologically required to provide service primarily and essentially within the county, to the extent practicable, unless good cause is shown.
(1996 Code, § 156.13) (Ord. passed 10-7-2002; Ord. passed 12-3-2007)
§ 156.019 HEIGHT OF TELECOMMUNICATIONS TOWER(S).
   (A)   (1)   The applicant shall submit documentation justifying the total height of any tower, facility, and/or antenna, and the basis therefor.
      (2)   Such documentation will be analyzed in the context of the justification of the minimum height needed to provide service to an area that is without service, and is primarily and essentially within the county, to the extent practicable, unless good cause is shown.
   (B)   If the need for a new tower can be proven, the maximum permitted height of a new tower shall be the minimum needed to accommodate six carriers, taking into account the neighboring tree height or the height of any nearby obstruction that would effectively block the signal in that direction.
      (1)   No tower shall exceed 199 feet in total height, including antennas and supporting antenna structures.
      (2)   All towers shall be designed to the maximum height of 199 feet, but shall be constructed only to the minimum height needed to accommodate six carriers.
      (3)   Noncommercial telecommunications towers that are for the exclusive use of the state or county’s emergency management or law enforcement may exceed the maximum commercial height limitation with increased setbacks that meet the requirements in § 156.023.
   (C)   No wireless facility constructed after the effective date of this chapter, including allowing for all attachments, shall exceed that height which shall permit operation without required artificial lighting of any kind in accordance with municipal, county, state, and/or any federal statute, law, local law, county ordinance, code, rule, or regulation.
(1996 Code, § 156.14) (Ord. passed 10-7-2002; Ord. passed 12-4-2006; Ord. passed 12-3-2007) Penalty, see § 156.999
Loading...