I'd like to all call to order tonight's meeting of the gardener zoning board of appeals. Today is uh June 16th, Tuesday. Before we begin before we begin tonight's hearing, I'll quickly go over the ground rules by which we operate
under and gardener four members out of five must be present to conduct a legal hearing. We actually have five members here tonight. >> Chairman >> applications will normally heard in a sequence in which they appeared in the public notice. We have no additional
cases. This is a continuence from a prior month. All hearings will be open to the public. No person shall be considered a hindrance to the workings of the board. And if they are, they'll be excluded. An applicant may appear in his
or her own behalf or be represented by agent or attorney. The applicant or his or her representative shall present the case to the board. Representatives of the city shall be heard. A butters to the property present shall be heard. Those in opposition to the application
shall be heard. Uh the board must render it decision regarding variance request when within 100 days after the application was duly filed in the office of the city clerk. The board regarding special permits must
conduct the public hearing within 65 days after the application was duly filed in the office of the city clerk. The board must render a decision regarding special permits within 90 days after the closing of the public hearing.
All four members out of five must vote in favor of the variance of special permit for it to be granted and approved. The right to appeal the decision is provided for in the chapter 4A in the zoning act.
Information is available in the office of the city clerk. No variance, special permit, extension, modification, or renewal thereof shall take effect until notification from the city clerk that 20 days have elapsed
after the decision has been filed in that office and no appeals have been filed and is recorded in the registry of deeds for the county or district. The board requests that each person identifying himself or herself as to
name and address before addressing the board. Sitting on tonight's hearing at my far left, uh, Jim Bilo. Next to me, Mel Cornet. To my far right, Lori Widow.
Next to me, Mr. Dick Hanks. And in the back is Mr. Bob Rice. Okay. So, why don't we begin tonight's hearing? Who's going to speak first? >> Your name and address, please.
>> Absolutely. My name's uh Shazad Mummud. Uh I I live at 16569 Northwest 15th Street in Peenrook Pines, Florida. Um thank you board members for meeting with us tonight. Um, just to introduce myself again, I work
with Kimley Horn. Kimley Horn is an architect engineering firm that was hired by SBA Communications. SBA Communications is a cell tower owner and developer um trying to develop a tower at the existing Walmart that we had previously discussed. Um, based off of
our last conversation, our last hearing, the um the item that we wanted to get more clarification on specifically was the tower and the tower fall. We completed a a sitewalk with the board a few weeks back and um the tower
manufacturer uh the designer manufacturer and engineer uh was kind enough to join us today for this hearing to explain more exactly about the design the specific fall and they've put together a presentation to present uh in front of you all today. Um so with that
uh I'll I'll let um Chris who is a licensed engineer come here and speak uh associated with the tower unless you have any questions for me right now. >> All right. There we go. So, um, name's Chris Lawson. Um, live at 3201 Dodge Court,
Omaha, Nebraska, 68131. And, uh, uh, I'm here for Valmont Industries to kind of talk about the fall zone for this uh, proposed cell tower. Uh, I my title is a sales application engineer. I'm basically a technical sales support um
as well as kind of helping you know with these kind of things. Um specifically I deal with our telecommunications groups or macro structures and concealments. So sounds like you guys have kind of seen some of this obviously and you have it
in front of you. So, I'll try to go through some of the boring stuff as quickly as I can, but just kind of want to give you an overview of who Valmont Industries is. We are mainly a steel products manufacturer. Um, but we're entering our 80th year of business this year. Um, and we're publicly traded. Um,
last year we did 4.1 billion sales. We have over 11,000 employees, do business in 100 countries, uh, have 250 engineers on staff. We have 31 brands with our Larsson concealment group being the brand that this product would come from
being a fake pine tree that's a telecommunication tower. And we have 84 um manufacturing facilities worldwide. Um including one of those being our Tucson, Arizona facility where this tree
would come from. So we basically make two our business is basically split up in two different you know kind of segments. We have our agriculture business which is mostly just sand pivot irrigation products and then our infrastructure business which
is where the telecom group sits but we make a number of other products. Um so we sell a lot of transmission distribution substation steel for utilities. um telecom obviously we make structures but we also sell components um for those structures that mount all
the equipment lighting transportation we do kind of um lighting poles um like traffic lights sports lighting um we also do big shrine structures you see across the interstate that is made out of tube have a solar division that does the uh steel support structure for uh
solar fields and then all those products we typically will coat them or galvanize them for corrosion resistance. So, we have um you own our own galvanizers all across the world. So, we galvanize our own product as well as other steel products. But the main reason why I
wanted to bring all that together up front is to say that there's more than likely Valmont products already here in this community that have been standing for years that are serving people in this community already. So like I mentioned um this particular
um fake pine tree we come from our Larsson group and um the Larsson group is about 50 years old. Um it was acquired by Valmont in 2018 but before that they really specialize in like innovative creative environments. So one of their most famous projects is the
tree of life at um animal kingdom at Disney World. That was a Larsson project as well kind of on the bottom right there. That's a uh kind of Trojan horse that's in Caesar Palace in Vegas. Um but in 1992, Valmont, who was making uh communication
towers at the time, reached out to Larsson to make the first um mono pine tree, fake pine tree, basically provide Valmont would do the design, the engineering, make the pole. Larsson would make the branches. And so really the first one ever in the industry came
from the Larsson brand. And then all the way in 2018, Valmont decided to acquire Larson and that's where um basically Larson only did telecommunication products since then. But since that first mile pie trees in 1992, you know,
Larson sold hundreds of them. Uh a year a couple years ago, we sold 87. last year 45 this year probably in the middle around 60 or 50. So these are just some pictures of Larsson monopine trees, various
different kind of concealment options that are available. Um you know different kind of foliage densities um painted um poles or faux bark. So there's a lot of different kind of looks
that these could look like. So getting into what we're here to really talk about is the fall letter. So what a fall zone letter is is a stamp letter from our engineering team that basically outlines how a tower may fall if it were to fall and what the
theoretical fall zone radius would be. Um the main portions that are the main kind of topics that are listed in there are going to be the building code we use which uh this one I believe is telecom uh industry association 222 rev
um kind of structure specific design criteria like the design wind speed and some other stuff and then also the location of a theoretical fail point if a specific fall zone is requested. So
getting into the wind speed which is one of the uh the main structure specific loading criteria. Basically wind speed is going to be the design load for the structure. That's going to be the governing load. It's it's going to be the the load that could potentially
cause failure compared to snow or ice or something like that. That's going to be wind. So the wind that this structure will be designed to is 118 miles per hour and that's uh comes straight from the American Society of Civil Engineers or the ASCE. Um and they presid provide
a wind zone map across the US based on site location stuff. And that number of 118 miles per hour is a 3se secondond wind gust at um 33 feet which then we interpolate to the tire tower height of 128 ft.
Um, so what that number actually represents is a 7% probability exceedence of 50 years. That's basically what the ACD is saying is that that wind speed is only has a 7% chance in 50
years. Um, that works out to an annual pro probability of about.14% or in 1700. Um, I kind of looked up then in Google what the record wind speed here is in Garner. And basically what I was able to find is that the highest
wind speed I was able to find in Google Quake was a category F-Zero tornado that was in 1990, which was about didn't give an actual wind speed, but 65 to 85 miles per hour um is what typically an F-Zero
tornado is. And then another data point I was able to get was a strong wind score in couple years ago that had 60 mph gust. So um much both of those values are much lower than the 118 that this structure is designed to based on
the code. Um obviously if this structure was closer to you know Boston or the coast then hurricanes could be an issue and so the AC would give a wind speed of like 130 miles per hour above. But uh based on this, this is what American
Society of Civil Engineers believe is a reasonable design speed that is very rarely would ever happen. So the final point of the fall layer, the kind of the meme and potatoes of today is going to be the um kind of theoretical fair point and how we make
sure that this thing doesn't completely just topple over like that. So, starting off, we'll kind of go over common failure modes. Um, there's kind of three main ways that this tower could theoretically fall over. The one that
you might see pictures online of a lot would be that base plate or the place plate weld failure where kind of right at that joint, it falls over. So what we're basically going to do to prevent that is we're going to overdesign that base plate so that there's the weakest
part is the tower. So explain that in a little bit. Um next would be a foundation failure which just foundation goes. So again what we're going to try to do is overdesign so that the tower itself could be what bends.
And then we have uh the pole failure to collapse. So, we're going to redesign it, but we're also going to put in a theoretical fail failure point. Basically, a weakest link in the system where if it's going to fail somewhere, it's going to fail at that weakest link. And so, that way the whole tower doesn't
go like this, but only a small part goes like that. So, that's the point of the fall zone there. That's what we're trying to address with it. Um, another thing I want to quickly know on this slide is I asked colleagues, I asked, you know, kind of um, you know,
people I know that are kind of in the construction side of the telecommunication industry in terms of like actual pictures of like a cell tower, you know, bending over or falling due to kind of a fall zone is very hard to find. So the pictures I put in here,
the one on the left is a finite element analysis. Basically, it's a CAD program. they can load the structure um and kind of give you a heat map of where the stresses are, you know, the most concentrated or the worst. And so the red area is where we overstress this
member. And so it's starting to deform. So that's kind of what the initial failure would look like. It would just be kind of buckling on itself. Um in the middle we have a picture of the Larsson tree that's actually healed. And then I
had, you know, AI basically generate what we believe a failure would look like since we don't have any actual pictures that really kind of match what we think would happen. So hopefully not getting too deep into the
weeds in the engineering side, but basically in a calculation report from the stamped engineering um it's going to list out the capacities of the overall tower and all the sections of the tower. So in here basically if a section is at
100% capacity or the overall tower is 100% capacity that means that it can hold the absolute max load it was designed to safe support. So that's all the dead load from all the antennas all the equipment all the branches all that plus the self and the max wind speed and
any other loads that could potentially be subjected to this tower. So if a calc report indicates that a certain section is at 85%. That means there's a 15% safety buffer in that section. So theoretically beyond that 100% if there
was a load that would be greater than the 118 mph subjected to the tower. Then what would happen is what we call yielding or deformation which basically just means the tower will not hold its regular shape. Basically it's going to
bend a little bit. It's not necessarily going to completely fall. We just at 100% means that it's going to deform to the point it won't automatically go back to the original position. So, so what is BMA going to do to ensure
that zero foot fall zone for the tower? Basically, first off, we're going to design all the sections of the actual tower so that they um are under that 100% capacity limit. So, there is safety buffer in them. The second thing we're going to do is we're going to make sure
those anchor rods that connect the base plate which connect the tower to the foundation are greater than the capacity of the actual tower so that they're stronger and prevent the kind of full failure that we're talking about.
Final thing we're going to do which we haven't done yet is when we design the tower foundation we're going to make sure that that's the strongest of the three. And the whole idea is just you know what Isaac Newton said where you have to have equal opposite reactions. So all the reaction forces from this
tower has got to go somewhere and be counteracted by some other forces which in this case is going to be earth or the ground. So we want to make sure the connection from the tower to the earth is the strongest. And if there's a place where this tower is going to fall it or
fail, it's going to be somewhere along that pole instead of completely on the ground where it can completely topple over. >> When you talk about it collapsing in on itself, >> yeah, >> roughly what's the size of the field
down below the litter, the area that it's going to fall within. >> Okay. So when you say it's a zero foot fall zone, that means we have to keep it within wherever the closure is. So whatever the enclosure is for the site
where the fence is, >> okay, >> that's where we got to make sure to keep it with it. Um, now we believe, and I'll kind of mention, show demonstration, we don't believe it's actually going to fall to the ground. We believe it's going to just hang if anything or bend.
But when you say zero for the fall zone, that means the enclosure. It can't get outside the enclosure. >> In the enclosure, what size? What size is the enclosure? >> I believe it's I can tell you exactly. No, >> she's
a 50 by 50 >> 50. >> And that 50 ft, how far does it drift into that >> parking area that's over there now? Mallerie, >> I could hear. >> So, how far does that does that extend
into that parking area this time? >> It's on >> It's all in that wooded area. >> Yes. >> So, I'll just ask for clarification. >> You said 50 by 50. >> Y >> when we looked at it, the post that was
in the wood line, in my opinion, was not 50 ft from the parking area. >> It was 25. So the tower is at the center of the compound and it's a 50 by 50. So it's 25 ft away from the park here. >> So our radius would be 25 then what we
need to >> So wait a minute. 50 by 50 is what again? >> So 50 by 50 is the square the tower is at the center of >> so the radius is 25. >> 25usole. these. >> So, how we incorporated a theoretical
failure point into the pole? Basically, we look at the capacities of each section. This was just a kind of this was the preliminary design we have right now for the tower. Um, there's four sections of the pole that stack on top of each other in a slip fit. Um, the
first section L1 is at 80 uh or 68% capacity. So it's about 31% over design. L2 is at 98%. L3 is at 78 and L4 the bottom's at 91. So kind of like what I
was mentioning before, most likely mode of tower induced pole failure would be the buckling kind of what's shown in that kind of picture the the heat map of the pole. Um but the most likely location that's obviously going to be the weakest
member. So the member that's closest to 100% in this case that is the L2 section at that 98% capacity or about 2% um over design. So that's the most likely location for the
failure. Let's see if I can do this show. So basically steel's very duct tile. It's very kind of hard to make it just snap. It's going to want to bend and maybe even bend repeatedly. So what we think is going to
happen is there's a wind load just kind of that's going to happen and that's all basically what happened. It's not going to completely snap off. In order to make it or what we believe is the worst case, so do that basically. But in order for
this thing to snap off, I'd have to really push it or we're going to have to go back and forth a bunch to make it then snap. So obviously a wind event would be very quick sun burst and just cause that one initial push instead of
the full, you know, basically completely snap off and fall into the parking lot. So, um, we believe that at the 118 miles per hour, it's just going to tilt a little bit. That' be probably what's going to happen. It's going to tilt, relieve the stress, stay
there. Worst case, really high wind, it could fold over on itself. But, um, basically, we do not believe that it's going to completely snap off and fall into the parking lot. So, are you saying that tower is a solid piece of steel all the way up or is it
>> No, no, it's going to be all but >> so the failure points is generally where they meet >> where they meet. Correct. And it's going to be the weakest member of where they meet. Correct. >> Y >> and let me ask where they meet being the
weakest but your I'll call your crumble zone. >> Yeah. is that probably be weaker than where they meet when the the sections come together. The crumble zone would be the weakest part.
So it could take the wind and bend it. >> Correct. Yeah. Yeah. Yep. But also these are held together by the self-weight of each section above it. So there's going to be a friction connection that's very strong. you know, trying to pull these apart a lot of times are not even
possible. When they deconstruct these things that are slip fit, a lot of times they just got to weld through them, you know, just torch them because >> are they welded bolted? >> No bolts, just friction, just weight sitting on top of each other. It's a
tapered structure, so the weight sitting on it is what holds it together. Now, if it was bolted, that would actually be more of a concern for failure >> because those bolts would be the weak point where you could have resonance from the wind basically affect them and
that's where you see the shearing force in >> come apart. So, if you're really obviously you guys are really concerned about this fall zone and this tower failing so we'd obviously not recommend at all a flange connection on the pole.
You know, we typically we have done some of those poles. Those also um we see a lot for tower extension. So, we want to add another carrier on top of the tower. Um so, we'll put a plate at our top. Um that would obviously put this kind of
hole what we're talking about in jeopardy because those bolts could be the failure. Um, the last thing I just want to mention on this slide is that the bottom two sections are designed to hold this structure, you know, hold the weight if there even is some sort of buckling that
happens. So, those bottom two sections are already designed to hold the loads of the top two sections. So, the the bottom two sections are not expected to fall if there is some type of failure that happens.
Last general slide I have here is just what if the what the tower still fails? No. Couple ways that this tower could still fail. First one is a weather event that's beyond what the code value is. So that would be extreme wind speeds,
hurricanes, tornadoes that are over that 118 mph limit. Again, likelihood that that happens only about 1.4% or 0.14% any given year. Um, also again, highest performance speed here in town, about 85 miles per hour from that
tornado. Much lower than that number. Um, extreme seismic event. If the earth just falls right out under that tower, the tower's going to fall. It just not a whole lot our foundation can do. But basically what I want to get across is
if those events happen, this tower being down is probably the least of, you know, the general community's worries. You know, there's going to be homes and businesses that are destroyed and um obviously getting power back and getting
the community up and running is going to be much more important than just this cell tower. So um basically I think I heard our engineer when I was kind of talking to him about this someone basically asked him why I don't want someone some board basically
asked him um what I don't want is to be driving down the road and see this tower on the ground someday and his respon my our engineers response was basically like well I don't think you're going to be if this tower falls I don't think you're going to be driving down the street to see it that day something else
is going to happen. So, um, another thing we don't consider for is deliberate action destructions or attack. Um, we can't really account for someone driving a car into this thing at 100 miles per hour. Just it's really impossible to quantify what load does
that happen to the structure. And the possibility of that happen is my opinion much less than if you know a wind speed above 118 miles per hour hits this area. Um,
in general, just accounting for all weather events of deliberate destruction, it would be really costly. We probably would not be in business and be able to sell a tower. Um, and uh, you know, just it just wouldn't work, you know, kind of in the market we sit in.
Um, we just came out a plan for all eventualities. State of Massachusetts basically says we need to follow a building code which is based off an international building code, American society engineer code and telecom industry code and basically those codes
are set as a sufficient limit that conserves most potential eventualities. Um so and makes it a very rare occurrence. Overall, the code allows for what we believe as a manufacturer is a competitive industry where we can make
money and have a business, but also making the chance of tower father failure really extreme rarity that's only will happen in very very you know specific events that are very rare. So that's the presentation I have for you.
So any further questions at this time? >> Members, any questions at this point? I have a question on um inspections after installation. It seems that what I've seen of any kind of tower um more
predominantly it's the foundation feeling in a event. Um so we'll have a nice foundation put in. Uh but if it doesn't get inspected timely, could that be 20 years down the road, 30 years down the road an issue?
>> Correct. So, um, SBA Communications, uh, has regional site managers located all throughout the United States that have, uh, footprint of the towers that they are in charge of because these towers require maintenance. Um, the carriers that go on them, similar to an apartment
or a shopping center, when you have a client that goes into that shopping center, you need to ensure that the shopping cent's AC is working. You need to ensure that it has power, it has water. So all those specific items, these regional site managers are going
out on a quarterly basis to check to make sure that there are no issues with the site. So grass, weeds, um any type of any type of corrosion, right? That that could happen at sites. Any type of issues that they see, they're quarterly going out to these sites. So they'll
visit this site four times a year at minimum. And if a carrier is installing, they'll always go out there. They have to check that what they installed was accurate. Right? If someone's going to, you know, go into a shopping center and they're saying, "Hey, I'm going to build
in a 10x10 footprint," they need to make sure that they're building within that 10 x 10 footprint. They don't go outside of it because that's what they're legally held to. So, this is also something that SBA does on a regular basis to ensure that what they've allowed AT&T and T-Mobile and and Verizon to lease out is actually being
done. >> Okay. It's inspected periodically. >> Yes. >> Reports are generated at that inspection. >> Absolutely. >> Where does the report go? >> Uh SBA has a database. They have a uh
what they call their knock um which number one is is monitoring all of their sites. So they monitor them from theft is a big issue that they've had. Um they have lock boxes on them that are uh that are monitored to make sure that no one is trying to go in and out monitored
wirelessly. Um so all of that is kept in a database at SBA. >> Okay. Is that information available to the city? >> It's that's been done before. Yeah. they call they want, you know, either a history of the inspections or certain
ones, they just call and get those inspection reports. >> Absolutely. I've been So, I used to work at SBA for 12 years. We've had other jurisdictions ask very similar type of questions and SBA would formulate a report for them on a quarterly basis or
by annually basis showing them we went to this site. This is what we found because there's a whole log that SBA's RSMs fill out whenever they go to that site. Everything that they checked off and checked, they take pictures and they upload it into the system and and they
can generate that report and provide it to the city. >> Okay. Have you had any towers fall? During in my tenure at SBA, there was uh
a Katrina went through um Louisiana and SBA had a tower on one of the islands and the tower actually didn't fall. The entire foundation came up out of the ground and turned on itself and that is
how the tower fell. So it didn't break. Uh the foundation came up out of the ground. >> Okay. Okay. Any of your towers have any of your towers fallen? >> Um, monopole structures. I do not have any knowledge of what has.
>> Okay. Do you maintain insurance? >> Yes. >> You know, for if for some reason it does fall and either injures a person or say vehicles, equipment, you have insurance.
SBA 100% has >> you could provide a copy of that to the city. >> Absolutely. >> Okay. >> Absolutely. >> Um, >> so the city would annually get a an updated plan >> if if that's what they needed. Yes,
we've we have done uh COIs which uh call out specific amounts that may be requirements from the city getting letters from the insurance agency which which have the city's name on it
as insured as duly insured through SBA. So usually there's in other cities there's uh like there's minimums that they'll tell us like hey we want you to ensure this to x amount. Um so if you
had that they'd be open to doing that as well. We've done that in the past. >> So now what about uh sooner or later this technology is going to go away going to be replaced with something. What's what about abandonment removal of the tower 10 years 20 years 50 years
down the road. What? What's >> So I believe in the code if the tower is no longer in use then there is a Sorry. Go ahead. >> No, just you continue. >> Yeah. Uh so I believe within the code there's a a time specification which
states that if the tower is abandoned over x amount of months then SBA is required to take it down. >> Yes. I believe this is no activity with it for a year. >> Yeah. It's going to go when the cost is borne by the the company, not the city
or the town. >> Correct. >> Okay. >> And let me just add SBA has provided removal bonds to different to jurisdictions as well if needed. So it's basically a bond which in the amount that that you guys set forth usually runs about $30 to $40,000. If that was a
requirement, SBA would be open to providing a bond for removal as well. >> Yep. So, getting back to the tower itself, as you pointed out, there's three potential things that could go wrong with it. Could be um a soil issue, it could be a
base issue, or it could be the pole itself. >> Chris, >> so you addressed that the tower itself, the model pole would theoretically bend, collapse on itself. So you you just
really dealt with one element of the three potential. >> Yep. >> But we dealt with all three because we made model the weakest link the whole system. So we overdesign all the other portions. So that if there is a point that's going to fail is that weakest
link which will be the tower. That's our plan. >> So I think the issue that we probably going to still have is the ordinance says that the fall zone still is the size of the tower. That is true. Yes. >> Can I just bring up >> I I I don't have an issue with the design. I don't have an issue with the
concept, but we have an ordinance that says you still need that fall zone. >> So, so that fall zone, which let's say, okay, the fall zone definition is that it has to be the height of the tower 130 ft. Correct? So the property where the
tower is located has a clear fall zone or is is not encumbering another property line within that 130 ft. It's not encumbering another public road within that 130 ft. It's not encumbering a business or a habitat or any areas of
public recreation which are the items that that have to be clear within a fall zone according to my understanding of the code. So, so is Walmart going to discontinue that that parking lot? >> Well, they're but that parking lot is
not a habitable business. It's not a place of public recreation. It's not um and see I know we all are are because my understanding of the code is that these items have to be clear of the fall zone.
Property lines check. Public roads check. Habitable dwellings, check. Businesses and other institutions, the fall zone is clear of that as well. Public recreation areas, the parking lot is not a public recreation area.
Our fall zone is clear of all those five items, which is what I understand from the code as the items that need to be clear of the fall zone. >> Yeah, I think I guess it comes down to interpretation. >> Yeah.
>> Because Walmart does have customers that park right there. >> Uh they store some of their believe they rent it or they store some of their snow removal equipment there. >> You know, I'm not so worried about the snow removal equipment cuz that's pretty
big and pretty heavy. But if you got a bunch of cars parking in that area that could have children, whatever, you know, that could be an issue. Now, I'm just going to make this statement is because
you're exactly right. The Mel is right. It's in the code. I would like to approach our city uh solicitor because the code is old. You know what I mean? You could have that statement and it would be 25 years
old. Technology has changed dramatically since that code was written. So, I would like to have him take a look at this. take what you just said what the conditions are that come under the fall zone where we are and your report of
what you're reporting about that fall zone on the and I would like to get a legal opinion from him because I don't want to just flat out go in and go against the code because that's our job is to enforce the code.
So, I would like to have a a legal look at at that. And that request, I mean, can go in tomorrow. I'm not saying he's going to work on it tomorrow, but we will make the request tomorrow. >> Okay. >> I don't know. I'll take your comment to
that. Just I my only question would be the client's going to wonder what the timeline of course of something like that because they're very anxious to you know the amount of time and effort that they're putting into the project >> and and I can tell you know we got to
move as quick as we can but it's out of my hands at that point. So, you know, to to your comment, you listed off all other things that you know, so it I'll read what it says. Communication facilities to any property line said
check road, habitable dwellings, business or industrial use. It's it's a business use. >> Yeah, but we're more than the the business. >> It doesn't talk about the building. It says business or industrial use. The property the use of the property is a business, is it not?
>> Okay. I I I see what you're saying. >> Back to Ray's point, you know, you know, you're trying to get a towel. We're trying to make sure that we cover our bases so that if something does happen, we're not >> in jail cell with you. You know, >> no, we're not. >> I don't know you enough yet to
>> It'll be fun though. We'll have a good time there. >> I think what we're looking at is trying to protect all parties. you know, protect the city, protect anybody who uses that lot and protect you. And I
know you have insurance, but I don't want to rely on it. >> Well, and not not not not that I not that I'm not disagreeing with you or anything, but you know, Walmart, I can go camp camp at Walmart. I can leave park my trailer there. So, if I can go in that back remote lot and I'm going to
with my RV and hang stay there for the night and then continue on. So, you know, we we're just trying to protect the unexpected. >> I I understand just the the one thing about the business use, right? Telecommunications towers are allowed in
that use. >> We're not going for a variance for >> But but you were you were saying that you meet all the requirements outside of that that it didn't apply, >> but the code says that we're allowed to place a tower on that use. >> Sure. But now a fall zone from the same
use that we're allowed to be on. >> Everyone says you need a fall zone to hide the towel. >> And you're saying >> but we do if you're allowed to be on a property that has a business as a business use, right? The code states that we can be on a commercial lot which
is a business use. >> Sure. >> Then how can those two things that you just mentioned? So you you just said you can have a tower on a business use and I'm saying that this is a business use >> and a fall zone applies to a business use. >> I know. But then those two things
disagree with each other. Then you can't Yeah. Because >> All right. Then I >> No, we're talking about the fall zone only. We're not talking about the the the sighting of the use of your tower. >> Your tower is allowed in that use in in a business use group. But but our ordinance says that if you meet any of those requirements, you need to fall
zone. >> Correct. If the if there's a fall zone on a business use, then then I'm not allowed to have a tower there. >> No, this says you you need the fall zone equal to the height of the tower. >> It does. That's what's happening right now. It it maybe I'm not you said your
fall zone is 50 by 50. >> Yeah, >> it's within that enclosure. So your fall zone is 25 ft. >> Correct. It is. >> Our ordinance says it has to be the height of the tower, which is 130 ft. >> Correct. And I'm saying even with that definition, we still meet it where 130 ft the 130 ft
of the tower radius does not touch the Walmart. It stays within the wooded area and it stays within that parking spot which we staked out. >> Well, it's not touched Walmart in terms of the >> the actual facility. >> The facility it doesn't say correct away
from a building, a commercial or business building. as a the use >> a business use >> the use of the property that >> but that's why I'm saying that if >> so I see you can see it comes down to interpretation and I'm sure there's legal
interpretation part and that's why I want to move towards the city solicitor >> and I I would just simply add on the city solicitor because there's a requirement um and let's say that we
agree with the applicant and and uh want to grant it. Do we need a variance? >> And that's where the opinion would come in. >> That's where the opinion comes in. So that's the thing I've been struggling with is realistically
all the things you've been discussing, but also technically do we have to have variance on this um to deviate >> from the ordinance >> from the ordinance. Okay, >> Mr. Rice, do you have any comments or
questions? >> Uh, no. Uh, when we were at the site visit uh a couple of weeks ago, we asked representatives from the company for technical information, I think they provided tonight everything
that we asked them to provide. >> They did. >> Yes. And we all asked the young lady, she measured out 130 ft or whatever the exact number is for us. And it actually no matter where she measured it, if
there were cars parked there, it would hit every one of them. So I think that's why at least in my opinion I'll ask my members if they concur or if not I'll listen to a objecting argument
but I just want to I feel the safest route for everybody is go legally through our city solicitor let him interpret it let him look and he may come back say you know you have an issue
but it's a variance that gets us around circumventing the actual ordinance as it's written is going with a variance but such permit etc. you know we're going to go with what there is. So I would I will pen a letter tomorrow to
the city solicitor and ask for I won't say urgency but expediency on getting us a solution. >> Understood. Actually, what we excuse me what we'll have to do is continue continue to July. Hopefully I get an
answer in a couple of weeks >> and because they we're requesting it, we will not charge you for the extension to July. So now I'm going to poll my members. Do you agree with them suggesting to go
to a solicitor or do you have another alternative? >> I think it's fine. I think that's the right approach. >> I agree with that solicitor. >> Yeah, there's not many authorities. >> No, because if you end up with a variance, what's the hardship?
>> So, I think that's >> I I think a question to the city solicitor. I would suggest though that he be copied in case the solicitor has other questions or needs backup documentation. Richard,
>> couple things. One, I do want to disclosure. I I was not at the initial meeting the presentation. I did watch the videos. I So I will sign the form that I saw the first presentation. Um good job on presentation. Don't want to take you task on it. It's just that we
do have an ordinance and as we're pointing out that in order for us to approve something beyond that, you may need a variance. Um, yes, the design probably it's probably it's not probably it's definitely going to be fine because
right you get a whole team of engineers doing it but we got kind of cough because our ordinance gives us gives us what and it's like very point out it's probably very integrated it's probably 30 years old for all we know I would feel comfortable with a legal opinion as
to what route do you need to go to get there because you number one you don't want us to prove something that we legally couldn't And then you get challenged. That doesn't get you anything. >> Mhm. >> Right. You know, there's nobody coming to the meeting, but you never know. All
of a sudden, the tower starts going up and all of a sudden someone's like, "That's ugly or whatever." And how do they pass that? You don't have the fall zone that's in our ordinance. So again, it may be a variance, but again, you you really want to do all the legal proceedings the way you really
need to do so that you don't get challenged when you're putting the branches on the thing. I understand that you know that that that's again I support the tower. I don't have any issues with the tower. I don't have any issue with the design. The only issues are what our ordinance says.
>> Yeah. >> So so again I just want to make sure that again when you get finally break ground. You have all the legal reasons to be to be doing it without all of a sudden someone comes crawling out of the woodwork. >> Yeah. >> It's happened. I know. >> I know. >> Yes. It happens. Y
>> yeah. And I've sat on a couple of tower requests in this city, but they were probably 20 years ago. You had to have a fall zone at that point. Technology is not what it is today, >> right?
>> It was nothing about a crumble zone in the pole or anything like that. It was 130 ft. 130 ft. That's where it is. And we actually had a fence so nobody could get in the fall zone. But things have changed. You know, technologies changed
dramatically. >> Yeah. >> Uh so if my members are in agreement, I will pen a letter tomorrow. >> I'd say yes. >> Vote in person tonight. So >> we're going to have to vote it to extend
it. >> Um any other questions to the applicant? >> I think and I agree with Mr. Rice. We made a request at the visit. You've come through with the request of all the the data we've had.
>> So at least it's not like I think this is what it is. I mean you have validated the construction how it goes uh and everything else. So I think I would prefer the board would prefer >> but I I'm 100% getting a legal opinion
on it but not but for time for this gentleman who's eager to go if it is a variance if you if you do require a variance that's another filing is not. So just talking out loud is is is it too
premature or is it out of line if he files for the variance and then withdraws if he doesn't need it. so that that timeline gets moving now so that when we come to July, if everything's good to go on the legal side or whatever the case may be, we can vote for potentially vote for a variance at the
same time. >> We'd be open to that. I have to look into what, >> you know, because you don't want you don't want to wait. You come to July >> and and the legal opinion is you need a variance. So now you file for a variance and there's a posting timeline. Now you got pushed off to August. Yeah.
>> So what if what if what if he was to file for variance and he could withdraw if he doesn't need it? >> I think that's the smartest route because you said August. I was thinking September. >> Well, I was >> so I think it would be best in all your party is actually file an
application for variance for the monopole. >> Yeah. For for that fall for that the height of that fall zone >> and the fall zone. >> And simple enough to say I withdraw without prejudice. Can we hold off on the fee until we know what's happening? >> Can we what? The filing fee.
>> The filing fee. Can we hold off on the filing fee until you get your answer from? >> Yeah. >> Okay. >> Does that make sense to you? >> Yeah, it does. Let me just look at if I don't know if there are different requirements for that filing. I just have to look at what the checklist is for a variance compared to what we did.
>> Also, be careful of the timing. We only have about two weeks. >> Yeah, I know. >> Because you because of posting. >> What's the date Marielola for July? to have a filing in >> a filing in that would be the second
Friday of July. I believe it's the 9th if I'm not mistaken. Um I don't have a calendar in front of me but I believe that July 9th is the Thursday. So the 10th July 10th
>> last day for ver filing >> last day for filing for the month of August. No, no, >> no, no. For July, for July. Wait, what? >> So, if we go into July, today is the 16th. So, the second uh Friday would
have been the 12th. We're way overdue. >> We right now the deadline has passed for the month of July. >> And that's for the statutory requirements of >> two weeks. >> The second Friday of each month is the
deadline for the next month. I would suggest consider filing. Speak with Mariela and our new employee who's only been here a week or a little over a week. >> Get the exact date
and you can decide what you want to do. You say if you want to roll the dice and say, "I'm going to wait for the attorney." >> Mhm. >> Up to you. Or take the safer way out, file it. I'd rather lose a couple of weeks than start in August.
>> August. Yeah. And then have to do it again. >> The process. >> We'll we'll start looking I'll work with them. We'll start looking at what the requirements are for the submitt. >> Yeah. >> And um >> you can speak with Beth. She'll take care of you, you know, or whatever. Tomorrow, the next day,
>> we'll do. >> Don't throw away your material. I'm sure we'll be looking at it again. >> Yeah. >> And so >> it's in the portal. Save. Is there any flavor for two meetings in July? >> Sorry, I tried. >> There is enough time.
>> No confronting. >> No confronting. >> Okay, let's see. There's nobody else here. Yours is the only case. So, I want to just mention two things because I sort of missed it at the beginning. I was Ray Leon's
chair. I introduced to everybody but myself and the case number we looked at tonight was 2026 0302. So this is anybody looking on YouTube etc. Now they have all the names of the people who are here and they have the
case number. So other than that many members have any comments, questions? None. And there's no I got the signatures so we're all set. So I'm going to move for adjournment. >> So move.
>> Second. Okay. Any questions or comments? None. Meeting adjourned.